Reliability Validity
Written Reflection on Reliability and Validity
July 24, 2014
Written Reflection on Reliability and Validity
Educational and psychological testing assessments are one of the most important roles therapists have. The correct use and understanding of tests can provide aid, benefit, and change the life of examinees. However, incorrect use of instrument tools and lack of knowledge pertaining to test development, interpretation and improper use of tools can also damage lives. As counselors, we must be aware of the processes regarding test development, test publishers, test administration, test scoring, interpretation of test results and decision making based on test results. The evaluation appropriateness of a test or test application depends heavily on professional judgment. Therefore testing standards to provide a frame of reference to professional test developers, sponsors, publishers, and users was and is highly needed.
Several test developments have occurred through the years. The assigned readings pertained primarily to the many changes in the meaning of reliability and validity which have occurred over the decades. Reliability does not imply a level of validity. The new term requires us to consider that a reliable measure that is measuring something consistently is not necessarily measuring what you want to be measuring. The readings described reliability as precision, while validity is a precise way of describing accuracy. Validity in the fields of educational and psychological testing refers to the degree to which evidence and theory support tests scores and score interpretations. Previous methods for establishing validity were typically based on test scores correlation with a specific criterion. In 1954, Lee Cronbach broadened the definition of validity by dividing it into: concurrent validity, predictive, validity and construct validity. Years later, predictive and concurrent validity merged to create criterion validity. The concept of
July 24, 2014
Written Reflection on Reliability and Validity
Educational and psychological testing assessments are one of the most important roles therapists have. The correct use and understanding of tests can provide aid, benefit, and change the life of examinees. However, incorrect use of instrument tools and lack of knowledge pertaining to test development, interpretation and improper use of tools can also damage lives. As counselors, we must be aware of the processes regarding test development, test publishers, test administration, test scoring, interpretation of test results and decision making based on test results. The evaluation appropriateness of a test or test application depends heavily on professional judgment. Therefore testing standards to provide a frame of reference to professional test developers, sponsors, publishers, and users was and is highly needed.
Several test developments have occurred through the years. The assigned readings pertained primarily to the many changes in the meaning of reliability and validity which have occurred over the decades. Reliability does not imply a level of validity. The new term requires us to consider that a reliable measure that is measuring something consistently is not necessarily measuring what you want to be measuring. The readings described reliability as precision, while validity is a precise way of describing accuracy. Validity in the fields of educational and psychological testing refers to the degree to which evidence and theory support tests scores and score interpretations. Previous methods for establishing validity were typically based on test scores correlation with a specific criterion. In 1954, Lee Cronbach broadened the definition of validity by dividing it into: concurrent validity, predictive, validity and construct validity. Years later, predictive and concurrent validity merged to create criterion validity. The concept of
References: American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association & National Council of Measurement in Education. (1999). Validity. Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. Balkin, R.S. & Juhnke, G.A. (2014). Current standards for validity. The theory and practice of assessment in counseling. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc. Balkin, R.S. & Juhnke, G.A. (2014). Current standards for reliability. The theory and practice of assessment in counseling. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc. Goodwin, L.D. & Leech, N.L. (2003). Assessment in action -- The meaning of validity in the new standards for educational and psychological testing: implications for measurement courses. Measurement and evaluation in counseling and development. 36, 181-191.