The concept of validity in theory and practice

Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 117-132

  Wolming, Simon ^a   Wikström, Christina ^a  

^a UMEÅ UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79959948974     PISSN: 0969594X     EISSN: 1465329X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09695941003693856     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Allergren, B. 1995. Testprestation vid början och slutet av högskoleutbildning. En tvärsnittsstudie med studerande vid två utbildningslinjer [Test performance at the start, the middle and at the end of higher education. A cross-sectional study featuring students of two study-programmes]. Licentiate diss., Umeå University.
2. American Psychological Association. 1954. Technical recommendations for psychological tests and diagnostic techniques. Psychological Bulletin 51: 201-238.
3. American Psychological Association. 1966. Standards for educational and psychological tests and manuals. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
4. American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. 1974. Standards for educational and psychological tests. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
5. American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. 1985. Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
6. American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. 1999. Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
7. Andersson, E. 2003. Who is a successful student from the perspective of university teachers in two departments? Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 47, no. 5: 543-559.
8. Andersson, E. 2005. Högskolestudenters syn på högskoleprovet och strategier för att antas till högre utbildning [University students' views on the Swedish Scholastic Assessment Test (SweSAT) and strategies for admission to higher education]. Pedagogisk Forskning I Sverige 10, no. 2: 81-98.
9. Andersson, E., and T. Grysell. 1992. Studenters syn på studieframgång. En pilotstudie inför studier av studieframgångskriteriet inom ramen för prognosprojektet vid Högskoleprovet [Students' opinions on the concept of academic success] (PM Nr 67). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
10. Andersson, E., and T. Grysell. 1995. En beskrivning av fem utbildningar vid Umeå universitet. En genomgång av ekonomlinjen, sociala linjen, teknisk fysik, läkarlinjen samt ämneslärarlinjen med avseende på organisation och utformning [A description of five study-programmes at Umeå University] (PM Nr 104). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
11. Borsboom, D., G.J. Mellenberg, and J. van Herden. 2004. The concept of validity. Psychological Review 111, no. 4: 1061-1071.
12. Brennan, R.L., ed. 2006. Educational measurement, vol. 4. Westport, CT: ACE/Praeger.
13. Carlstedt, B., and J.-E. Gustafsson. 2005. Construct validation of the Swedish Scholastic Aptitude Test by means of the Swedish Enlistment Battery. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 46, no. 1: 31-42.
14. Cliffordson, C. 2004a. Betygsinflation i de målrelaterade gymnasiebetygen [Inflation in goal-related grades from upper-secondary school]. Pedagogisk Forskning i Sverige 9, no. 1: 1-14.
15. Cliffordson, C. 2004b. Effects of practice and intellectual growth on performance on the Swedish Scholastic Aptitude Test (SweSAT). European Journal of Psychological Assessment 20, no. 3: 192-204.
16. Cliffordson, C. 2004c. De målrelaterade gymnasiebetygens prognosförmåga. [The predictive validity of goal-related grades from upper secondary school]. Pedagogisk Forskning I Sverige 9, no. 2: 129-140.
17. Cliffordson, C. 2006. Selection effects on applications and admissions to medical education with regular and step-wise admission procedures. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 50, no. 4: 463-482.
18. Cliffordson, C., and B. Askling. 2006. Different grounds for admission: Its effects on recruitment and achievement in medical education. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 50, no. 1: 45-62.
19. Crooks, T.J., K.T. Kane, and A.S. Cohen. 1996. Threats to the valid use of assessments. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 3, no. 3: 265-285.
20. Cronbach, L.J. 1971. Test validation. In Educational measurement, vol. 2, ed. R. Thorndike, 443-507. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
21. Cronbach, L.J. 1988. Five perspectives on the validity argument. In Test Validity, ed. H. Wainer and H. Braun, 3-17. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
22. Cronbach, L.J., and P.E. Meehl. 1955. Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin 52, no. 4: 281-302.
23. Gersten, R., and S. Baker. 2002. The relevance of Messick's four faces for understanding the validity of high-stakes assessments. In Large-scale assessment for all students, ed. G. Tondal and T.M. Haladyna, 49-66. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
24. Guilford, J.P. 1946. New standards for test evaluation. Educational and Psychological Measurement 6, no. 5: 427-439.
25. Henriksson, W., and S. Wolming. 1998. Academic performance in four study programmes: A comparison of students admitted on the basis of GPA and SweSAT scores, with and without credits for work experience. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 42, no. 2: 135-150.
26. Henriksson, W., and B. Törnkvist. 2002. The effects of repeated test taking in relation to the test taker and the rules for selection to higher education in Sweden (EM No. 41). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
27. Henrysson, S. 1984a. Prognos av framgång i högre studier, metoder och problem [Prediction of success in higher education. Methods and problems] (Arbetsrapport Nr 12). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
28. Henrysson, S. 1984b. Studenterna och antagningen till högskolan. Intervjuer med lärare inom grundutbildningen [Admission to higher education - teachers' views on the admission] (Arbetsrapport Nr 13). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Education.
29. Henrysson, S., and S. Henrysson. 1984. Poängsättning av relevant arbetslivserfarenhet [Work experience as merits in admission to higher education] (Arbetsrapport Nr 18). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
30. Henrysson, S., M. Kriström, and A. Lexelius. 1984. Meritvärdering och studieprognos. Några undersökningar om antagningssystemets effekter [Evaluation of merits and academic performance. Studies of the effects of selection regulations] (Arbetsrapport Nr 21). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Education.
31. Kane, M.T. 1992. An argument-based approach to validity. Psychological Bulletin 112, no. 3: 527-535.
32. Kane, M.T. 2006. Validation. In Educational measurement, vol. 4, ed. R.L. Brennan, 17-64. Westport, CT: ACE/Praeger.
33. Lexelius, A., and S. Wolming. 1995. Högskoleprovets prediktiva förmåga. En studie av fyra utbildningslinjer i högskolan [The predictive valididty of the SweSAT] (unpublished manuscript). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Education.
34. Löfgren, K. 2003. Enskild prövning och komplettering av gymnasiebetyg [Individual testing and supplementing upper secondary school marks] (PM No. 182). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
35. Löfgren, K. 2005. Validation of the Swedish university entrance system. Selected results from the VALUTA-project 2001-2004 (EM No. 53). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
36. Löfgren, K., and B. Törnkvist. 2004a. Jämförelser mellan studeranden i olika antagningsgrupper som har registrerats på socionomprogrammet [Comparisons between social work-students from different admission groups] (PM No. 191). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
37. Löfgren, K., and B. Törnkvist. 2004b. Jämförelser mellan studeranden i olika antagningsgrupper som har registrerats på ekonomprogram [Comparisons between business administration-students from different admission groups] (PM No. 198). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
38. Mehrens, W. 1997. The consequences of consequential validity. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 16, no. 2: 16-18.
39. Messick, S. 1989. Validity. In Educational Measurement, vol. 3, ed. R.L. Linn, 13-103. New York: American Council on Education, MacMillan.
40. Moss, P.A. 1998. The role of consequences in validity theory. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 17, no. 2: 6-12.
41. Popham, W.J. 1997. Consequential validity: Right concern - wrong concept. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 16, no. 2: 9-13.
42. Reuterberg, S.-E. 2003. Vilken betydelse har utländsk bakgrund för resultatet påHögskoleprovet: Del II [What meaning has national background on the SweSAT scores: Part II] (2003:23R). Högskoleverket: Stockholm.
43. Reuterberg, S.-E., and M. Hansen. 2001. Vilken betydelse har utländsk bakgrund för resultatet på Högskoleprovet: Del I [What meaning has national background on the SweSAT scores? Part I] (2001:3R). Högskoleverket: Stockholm.
44. Shepard, L.A. 1993. Evaluating test validity. Review of Research in Education 19: 405-450.
45. Shepard, L.A. 1997. The centrality of test use and consequences for test validity. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 16, no. 2: 13-24.
46. Stage, C. 2004a. Gruppskillnader i resultat på Högskoleprovet [Group differences in results on the higher education test] (PM No. 192). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
47. Stage, C. 2004b. Socialgruppskillnader i resultat på Högskoleprovet [Social-group differences in SweSAT-scores] (BVM Nr 11). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
48. Stobart, G. 2001. The validity of national curriculum assessment. British Journal of Educational Studies 49, no. 1: 26-39.
49. Svensson, A. 2004. Gymnasiebetyg eller högskoleprov som urvalsinstrument? Fallet civilingenjörsutbildningarna [Grades or achievement test for selection to civil engineer education? The master of engineering case]. Pedagogisk Forskning i Sverige 9, no. 1: 15-36.
50. Svensson, A., and B. Nielsen. 2005. Vilka kommer in på juristutbildningen och hur klarar man studierna? [Law education in Sweden: Who is admitted and who is successful?]. Pedagogisk Forskning i Sverige 10, no. 1: 1-23.
51. Törnkvist, B., and W. Henriksson. 2004a. SweSAT repeat (EM No. 46). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
52. Törnkvist, B., and W. Henriksson. 2004b. Repeated test taking. Differences between social groups (EM No. 47). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
53. Törnkvist, B., and W. Henriksson. 2006. Validity issues concerning repeated test taking of the SweSAT (EM No. 56). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
54. Wester, A. 1995. Ambitions and attitudes toward studies and study results. Interviews with students of the Business Administration study program in Umeå (EM No. 14). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
55. Wikström, C. 2005a. Criterion-referenced measurement for educational evaluation and selection. PhD diss., Umeå University.
56. Wikström, C. 2005b. Grade stability in a criterion referenced grading system: The Swedish example. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice 12, no. 2: 125-144.
57. Wikström, C. 2006. Classroom assessment and grading - validity issues in the process of selection to higher education. Paper presented at the NCME-conference, April 8-10, in San Francisco.
58. Wikström, C., and M. Wikström. 2005. Grade inflation and school competition: An empirical analysis based on the Swedish upper secondary schools. Economics of Education Review 24, no. 3: 309-322.
59. Wolming, S. 1995. Prediktion av studieframgång. Reflektioner utifrån en litteraturgranskning [Prediction of academic success - a review] (PM No. 101). Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Educational Measurement.
60. Wolming, S. 1998. Validitet. Ett traditionellt begrepp i modern tillämpning [Validity: A modern approach to a traditional concept]. Pedagogisk Forskning i Sverige 3, no. 2: 81-103.
61. Wolming, S. 1999. Validity issues in higher education selection: A Swedish example. Studies in Educational Evaluation 25, no. 4: 335-351.
62. Wolming, S. 2001. Att värdera urvalsinstrument: Några reflektioner over begränsningar och möjligheter [To evaluate selection instruments: Some reflections over restrictions and possibilities]. Pedagogisk Forskning i Sverige 6, no. 2: 122-130.
63. Åberg-Bengtsson, L. 2005. Separating quantitative and analytic dimensions in the Swedish Scholastic Aptitude Test (SweSAT). Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 49, no. 4: 359-383.