Assessing Measures of Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching: A Validity Argument Approach

Autor/inn/en	Schilling, Stephen G.; Hill, Heather C.
Titel	Assessing Measures of Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching: A Validity Argument Approach
Quelle	In: Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 5 (2007) 2-3, S.70-80 (11 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1536-6367
Schlagwörter	Mathematics Education; Test Validity; Mathematics Instruction; Test Construction; Educational Assessment; Evidence; Evaluation Methods; Measures (Individuals); Mathematics Tests; Teacher Evaluation; Pedagogical Content Knowledge + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Mathematische Bildung; Testvalidität; Mathematics lessons; Mathematikunterricht; Testaufbau; Education; assessment; Bewertungssystem; Evidenz; Messdaten; Teacher appraisal; Lehrerbeurteilung; Pädagogische Kompetenz
Abstract	In assessing the utility of a test, two issues stand out: whether it provides information of interest to test consumers, and whether scores generated by the test assist in making good decisions. Validity addresses these two issues, making an assessment of test validity the single most important product provided by test developers. Unfortunately, despite its importance, test validation is almost universally viewed as the most unsatisfactory aspect of test development. As Messick (1988) noted, there has been a consistent disjunction between validity conceptualization and validation practice. To start, the proliferation of many different kinds of validity evidence without clear prioritization presents test consumers with an enormous task, that of sifting through various methods, approaches, and empirical work to determine the usability of a test. At the same time, some test developers use evidence (and methods) selectively, choosing convenient means for test validation, and convenient results for reporting. Kane (2001, 2004a) developed an argument-based approach to validity as a means of addressing these difficulties. His approach consists of two stages: the formative stage and the summative stage. In this framework, the interpretive argument provides both the basis for organizing and prioritizing validity evidence and a means for gauging the progress of the validation effort. This paper consists of four major sections. The first section engages in a detailed critical examination of the validity argument approach, with an eye towards the generalizability of interpretative and validity arguments. The next two sections detail the motivation, conceptualization, and development of the mathematical knowledge for teaching Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching Measures (MKT measures). The final section details the interpretive argument and outlines the remaining papers to follow in the series. (ERIC).
Anmerkungen	Psychology Press. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10