Reconceptualizing validity for classroom assessment

Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 13-25

  Moss, Pamela A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Classroom assessment; Hermeneutics; Sociocultural theory; Validity

Indexed keywords

EID: 33846566158     PISSN: 07311745     EISSN: 17453992     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.2003.tb00140.x     Document Type: Article

References (89)

1. Airasian, P. (2001) Classroom assessment: Concepts and applications (4th ed.). Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill.
2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council of Measurement in Education. (1999) Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
3. American Federation of Teachers, National Council on Measurement in Education, & National Education Association. (1990) Standards for teacher competence. Lincoln, NB: Buros Institute. Available at: www.unl.edu/buros/article3.html.
4. Beach, K. (1999) Consequential transitions: A sociocultural expedition. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson, (Eds.), Review of research in education (Vol. 24, pp. 101–140). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
5. Bernstein, R. J. (1976) The restructuring of social and political theory. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Press.
6. Bernstein, R. J. (1985) Beyond objectivism and relativism: Science, hermeneutics, and praxis. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Press.
7. Black, P., &Wiliam, D. (1998) Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5, 7–14.
8. Bleicher, J. (1980) Contemporary hermeneutics: Hermeneutics as method, philosophy, and critique. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
9. Bohman, J. F., Hiley, D. R., &Shusterman, R. (1991) The interpretive turn. In D. Hiley, J. F. Bohman, &R. Shusterman, (Eds.), The interpretive turn (pp. 1–16). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
10. Bourdieu, P. (1990) Logic of practice (R. Nice, Trans). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
11. Bourdieu, P., &Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992) An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12. Bowker, G. C., &Star, S. L. (1999) Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13. Bransford, J. D., &Schwartz, D. L. (1999) Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24, 61–100.
14. Cazden, C. B. (2001) Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
15. Chaiklin, S., &Lave, J. (Eds.). (1993) Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
16. Clark, C. T., Moss, P. A., Goering, S., Herter, R., Lamar, B., Leonard, D., et al. (1996) Collaboration as dialogue: Teachers and researchers engaged in conversation and professional development. American Educational Research Journal, 33(1), 193–231.
17. Cochran-Smith, M., &Lytle, S. L. (1993) Inside/outside: teacher research and knowledge. New York: Teachers College Press.
18. Cole, M. (1996) Cultural psychology: A once a future discipline. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
19. Cronbach, L. J. (1988) Five perspectives on validity argument. In H. Wainer, (Ed.), Test validity. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20. Cronbach, L. J. (1989) Construct validation after thirty years. In R. L. Linn, (Ed.), Intelligence: Measurement, theory and public policy (pp. 147–171). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
21. Danziger, K. (1990) Constructing the subject: Historical origins of psychological research. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
22. Donmoyer, R. (1990) Generalizability and the single-case study. In E. W. Eisner & A. Peshkin, (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry in education: The continuing debate (pp. 175–200). New York: Teachers College Press.
23. Erickson, F. (1986) Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock, (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 119–161). New York: Macmillan.
24. Fairclough, N. (1989) Language and power. London: Longman.
25. Fairclough, N. (1995) Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman.
26. Gadamer, H. G. (19751994). Truth and method. New York: Seabury.
27. Gadamer, H. G. (1981) Reason in the age of science (F. G. Lawrence, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28. Gadamer, H. G. (1987) The Problem of historical consciousness. In P. Rabinow & W. M. Sullivan, (Eds.), Interpretive social science (pp. 82–140). Berkeley: University of California Press.
29. Gee, J. P. (1996) Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (2nd ed.). London: Taylor and Francis.
30. Gee, J. P. (1999) An introduction to discourse analysis: theory and method. London: Routledge.
31. Gee, J. P., Hull, G. & Lankshear, C. (1996) The new work order: Behind the language of the new capitalism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
32. Gipps, C. V. (1994) Beyond testing: Towards a theory of educational assessment. London: Falmer Press.
33. Gipps, C. V. (1999) Socio-cultural aspects of assessment. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson, (Eds.), Review of research in education (Vol. 24, pp. 355–392). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
34. Greeno, J. (in press). Students with competence, authority and accountability: Affording intellective identities in the classroom. The College Board.
35. Hattie, J., Jaeger, R. M., &Bond L. (1999) Methodological questions in educational testing. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson, (Eds.), Review of research in education (Vol. 24, pp. 393–446). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
36. Heritage, J. (1984) Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
37. Hoy, D. C., &McCarthy, T. (1994) Critical theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
38. Johnston, P. H. (1989) Constructive evaluation of literate activity. New York: Longman.
39. Kane, M. T. (1992) An argument-based approach to validity. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 527–535.
40. Kane, M. T. (2001) Current concerns in validity theory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38(4), 319–342.
41. Lampert, M. (2001) Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. New Haven: Yale.
42. Lather, P. A. (1991) Getting smart: feminist research and pedagogy with/in the postmodern. New York: Routledge.
43. Lather, P. A. (1999) To be of use: The work of reviewing. Review of Educational Research, 68(1), 2–7.
44. Lather, P. (2001) Validity as an incitement to discourse: Qualitative research and the crisis of legitimation. In Virginia Richardson, (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
45. Lave, J. (1988) Cognition in practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
46. Lave, J., &Wenger, E. (1991) Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
47. Lee, C. D. (2001) Is October Brown Chinese? A cultural modeling activity system for underachieving students. American Educational Research Journal, 38(1), 97–141.
48. Martin, M., &McIntyre, L. C. (1994) Introduction. In M. Martin & L. C. McIntyre, (Eds.), Readings in the philosophy of social science (pp. xv–xxii). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
49. Mehan, H. (1993) Beneath the skin and between the ears: A case study in the politics of representation. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave, (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 241–268). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
50. Mehan, H. (1998) The study of social interaction in educational settings: Accomplishments and unresolved issues. Human Development, 41, 245–269.
51. Messick, S. (1989) Validity. Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13–103). Washington, DC: The American Council on Education and the National Council on Measurement in Education.
52. Messick, S. (1994) The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments. Educational Researcher, 23(2), 13–24.
53. Messick, S. (1996) Validity of performance assessments. In G. W. Phillips, (Ed.), Technical issues in large-scale performance assessment. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.
54. Mislevy, R. J., Almond, R., &Steinberg, L. (2003) On the structure of educational assessment. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 1(1), 3–62.
55. Moss, P. A. (1992) Shifting conceptions of validity in educational measurement: Implications for performance assessment. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 229–258.
56. Moss, P. A. (1994) Can there be validity without reliability Educational Researcher, 23(2), 5–12.
57. Moss, P. A. (1995) Themes and variations in validity theory. Educational measurement: Issues and Practice, 14(2), 5–13.
58. Moss, P. A. (1996) Enlarging the dialogue in educational measurement: Voices from interpretive research traditions. Educational Researcher, 25(1), 20–28, 43.
59. Moss, P. A. (1998) The role of consequences in validity theory. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 17(2), 5–12.
60. Moss, P. A., Pullin, D. P., Gee, J. P., &Haertel, E. H. (2002) The idea of testing: Expanding the foundations of educational measurement. Unpublished manuscript, University of Michigan.
61. Moss, P. A., &Rex, L. A. (19972001.) Syllabus: qualitative methods in educational research. Unpublished syllabus, University of Michigan.
62. Moss, P. A., &Schutz, A. M. (2001) Educational standards, assessment, and the search for consensus. American Educational Research Journal, 38(1), 37–70.
63. Moss, P. A., Sutherland, L. M., Haniford, L., Miller, R., Johnston, D., Geist, P. K., et al. (2003) Interrogating the generalizability of portfolio assessments of beginning teachers: A qualitative study. Unpublished manuscript, University of Michigan.
64. National Research Council. (2001) Knowing what students know (J. W. Pellegrino, N. Chudowsky, &R. Glaser, Eds.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
65. Nitko, A. J. (2001) Educational assessment of students (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
66. Ormiston, G. L., &Schrift, A. D. (Eds.). (1990) The hermeneutic tradition: From Ast to Ricoeur. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
67. Patton, M. Q. (2001) Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
68. Pellegrino, J. W., Baxter, G. P., &Glaser, R. (1999) In A. Iran-Nejad and P. D. Pearson, (Eds.), Review of research in education (Vol. 24, pp. 307–354). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
69. Porter, T. M. (1995) Trust in numbers: The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
70. Power, B. M., &Hubbard, R. S. (1999) The art of classroom inquiry. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
71. Rabinow, P., &Sullivan, W. M. (1987) The interpretive turn: A second look. In P. Rabinow & W. M. Sullivan, (Eds.), Interpretive social science (pp. 1–32). Berkeley: University of California Press.
72. Rawls, A. W. (2001) Editor's introduction. In Ethnomethodology's Program (H. Garfinkel, Ed.) (pp. 1–64). Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield.
73. Rex, L. A. (2001) The remaking of a high school reader. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(3), 288–314.
74. Rex, L. A., &McEachen, D. (1999) “If any-thing is odd, inappropriate, confusing, or boring, it's probably important”: The emergence of inclusive academic literacy through English classroom discussion practices. Research in the Teaching of English, 34(1), 65–129.
75. Rogoff, B., &Lave, J., (Eds.) (1984) Everyday cognition: Its development in social context. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
76. Rogoff, B., Turkanis, C. G., &Bartlett, L. (2001) Learning together: Children and adults in a school community. New York: Oxford.
77. Santa Barbara Classroom Discourse Group. (1992) Constructing literacy in classrooms: Literate action as social accomplishment. In H. H. Marshall, (Ed.), Redefining student learning (pp. 119–150). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
78. Schmidt, L. K. (Ed.). (1995) The specter of relativism: Truth, dialogue, and phronesis in philosophical hermeneutics. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
79. Scott, J. C. (1998) Seeing like a state: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
80. Shepard, L. A. (1993) Evaluating test validity. Review of Research in Education, 19, 405–450.
81. Shepard, L. A. (1997) The centrality of test use and consequences for test validity. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 16(2), 5–8.
82. Shepard, L. A. (2000) The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4–14.
83. Shepard, L. A. (2001) The role of classroom assessment in teaching and learning. In V. Richardson, (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 1066–1101). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
84. Shepard, L. A. (2003) Commentary: Intermediate steps to knowing what students know. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 1(2), 171–177.
85. Taylor, C. S., &Nolen, S. B. (1996, November 11). What does the psychometrician's classroom look like? Reframing assessment concepts in the service of learning. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 4, 17. Retrieved August 7, 2003 from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v4n17/.
86. Thompson, J. B. (1990) The methodology of interpretation. In Ideology and modern culture (pp. 272–327). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
87. Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
88. Wertsch, J. V. (1998) Mind as action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
89. Wertsch, J. V., Del Rio, P., &Alverez, A. (1995) Sociocultural studies: History, action, and mediation. In J. V. Wertsch, P. Del Rio, &A. Alverez, (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 1–36). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.