Keywords
reliability
measurement instruments
psychological tests
educational tests
special educational needs.
validez
confiabilidad
instrumentos de medición
pruebas psicológicas
pruebas educativas
How to Cite
Abstract
A general look is taken around the modern concept of validity, with a special focus in psychological and educational tests, with the purpose of presenting an updated discussion and providing conceptual and methodological tools to test developers and users. Regarding validity, the important contributions of Samuel Messick are highlighted, including the notion that establishes that this is a unitary concept, referred to the degree of appropriateness of the interpretations and inferences that are drawn from test scores. The measurement models better known and used currently are mentioned, the Classical Test Theory (CTT), and Item Response Theory (IRT), including the Rasch Model. The topics of DIF (Differential Item Functioning) and equating are also introduced. Finally, some implications of this frame of reference are analyzed in terms of the accommodations that are necessary to implement for persons with special educational needs.References
AERA (American Educational Research Association), APA (American Psychological Association) & NCME (National Council on Measurement in Education). (1999). The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington: AERA (American Educational Research Association).
Angoff, W.H. (1993). Perspectives on Differential Item Function Methodology. En P.W. Holland y H. Wainer (Eds.). Differential item functioning (pp. 3-23). New Jersey, Estados Unidos de America: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Babbie, E. (2010). The Practice of Social Research. Belmont, California: Wadsworth.
Bond, T. & Fox, C. (2001). Applying the Rasch model: fundamental measurement in the human Sciences. Mahwah, New Jersey: LEA.
Brown, T.A. (2006). Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research. New York: the Guilford Press.
Dorans, N. J. & Holland, P. W. (2000). Population invariance and the equability of test: Basic theory and the linear case. Journal of Educational Measurement, 37, 281-306.
Dorans, N.J. & Kulick, E. (1986). Demonstrating the utility of the standardization approach to assessing unexpected differential item performance on the Scholastic Aptitude Test. Journal or Educational Measurement, 23(4), 355-368.
Embretson, S. E & Reise S.P. (2000). Item Response Theory for Psychologists. Lawrence Erlbaum Associatesm Mahwah, New Jersey.
Gordon, M. & Keiser, S. (Eds.) (2000). Accommodations in Higher Education under the Americans with Disabilities Act: A No-Nonsense Guide for Clinicians, Educators, Administrators, and Lawyers. New York: GSI Publications.
Hopkins K.D., Hopkins, B.R. & Glass, G.V. (1997). Estadística Básica para las Ciencias Sociales y del Comportamiento. México: Prentice-Hall Hispanoamericana.
Kaplan, D. (2009). Structural equation modeling: foundations and extensions. Segunda edición. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kolen, M.J. & Brennan, R.L. (2004). Test equating, scaling, and linking (2nd Ed.). New York: Springer.
Martínez, M. R., Hernández M.J. & Hernández, M.V. (2006). Psicometría. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
Messick, S. (1989a). Meaning and values in test validation: The science and ethics of assessment. Educational Researcher, vol. 18, # 2, 5-11.
Messick, S. (1989b). Validity. In R.L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13-103). New York: Macmillan.
Messick, Samuel (1995). Standards of validity and the validity of standards in performance assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and practice, 14 (2). pp. 5-24. Boston, Estados Unidos de América: Blackwell Publishing.
Montero, E. (2001). La teoría de respuesta a los ítems: una moderna alternativa para el análisis psicométricos de instrumentos de medición. Revista de Matemática: teoría y aplicaciones. Centro de Investigaciones en matemática pura y aplicada (CIMPA) y la Escuela de Matemática de la Universidad de Costa Rica. Vol. 7, # 1-2, págs. 217-228.
Mulaik, S.A. (2009). Linear causal modeling with structural equations. New York: CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group.
Muñiz. J. (2003). Teoría Clásica de los Tests. Madrid: Ediciones Pirámide, S.A.
Nunnally, J.C. & Bernstein, I.J. (1995). Teoría psicométrica (3ª ed). México, D.F.: Editorial McGrawHill Latinoamericana.
Padilla J.P. et al (2006). La evaluación de las consecuencias del uso de los tests en la teoría de validez. Psicothema, vol. 18, nº 2, pp 307-312.
Penfield, R. & Camilli, G. (2007). Differential Item Functioning and Item Bias. En S. Sinharay y C.R. Rao (Eds.). Handbook of Statistics. Vol. 26, Elsevier.
Prieto, G. & Delgado A.R. (2003). Análisis de un test mediante el modelo de Rasch. Psicothema, vol. 15, nº 1, pp. 94-100.
Sireci, S. G. (2004). Validity Issues in Accommodating NAEP Reading Tests. NAGB Conference on Increasing the Participation of SD and LEP Students in NAEP. Commissioned Paper. Center for Educational Assessment Research Report No. 515. Amherst, MA: School of Education, University of Massachusetts Amherst.
Wilson, M. (2005). Constructing Measures: An Item Response Modeling Approach. New Jersey, Estados Unidos de America: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Zúñiga, M. & Montero, E. (2007). Teoría G: un futuro paradigma para el análisis de pruebas psicométricas. Artículo aceptado para publicación. Revista Actualidades en Psicología. San José, Costa Rica: Universidad de Costa Rica, Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas.