fCONTENT VALIDITY - University of Florida内容效度-佛罗里达大学.pptVIP

下载本文档

9
0
约7.75千字
约 25页
2018-06-26 发布于四川
举报
版权申诉

fCONTENT VALIDITY - University of Florida内容效度-佛罗里达大学.ppt

1、原创力文档（book118）网站文档一经付费（服务费），不意味着购买了该文档的版权，仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用，不得用于商业用途，未经授权，严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等，侵权必究。。
2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传，本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺！文档内容仅供研究参考，付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费，意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险，本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务；查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档，您可以点击这里二次下载。
3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等，请点击“版权申诉”（推荐），也可以打举报电话：400-050-0827(电话支持时间：9:00-18:30)。
4、该文档为VIP文档，如果想要下载，成为VIP会员后，下载免费。
5、成为VIP后，下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后，不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们。
6、成为VIP后，您将拥有八大权益，权益包括：VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传，每下载1次，网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等，对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档

fCONTENT VALIDITY - University of Florida内容效度-佛罗里达大学

CONTENT VALIDITY Jeffrey M. Miller November, 2003 Origins Content validity refers to the degree to which the content of the items reflects the content domain of interest (APA, 1954) Distinct or Subsumed? Guion’s (1980) Holy Trinity 1. Criterion-related (Predictive/Concurrent) 2. Construct 3. Criterion Current Definition “Validity refers to the degree to which evidence and theory support the interpretations of test scores entailed by proposed uses of tests (AERA/APA/NCME, 1999) So Does Content Matter??? Content is not a part of the score so it is not a part of validity (Messick, 1975; Tenopyr, 1977) Precursors to “Sloppy Validation”? The overarching construct validity paradigm relegates the status of content validity and justifies poor implementation The current definition of validity relegates the status of content validity and justifies poor implementation Intended or unintended, what then happens to the validation of content? Prophecy Fulfilled? “We fear that efforts to withdraw the legitimacy of content representativeness as a form of validity may, in time, substantially reduce attention to the import of content coverage (Yalow Popham, 1983).” Recent Argument “Content representation is the only aspect of validation that can be completed prior to administering the test and reporting results. If this process yields disappointing results, there is still time to recoup” (Crocker, 2003) The Standard Procedure Crocker Algina (1986) Define the performance domain of interest Select a panel of qualified experts in the content domain Provide a structured framework for the process of matching items to the performance domain Collect and summarize data from the matching process Hambleton’s (1980) 12 Steps Prepare and select objective or domain specifications Clarify test’s purposes, desirable formats, number of items, instruction for writing Write items to measure the objectives Item writers perform the initial edit Systematically assess item match to objectives to det