Validity and Reliability Matrix Essay

Content validity is achieved when the content of the assessment matches the educational objectives. Criterion validity is demonstrated by the ability of the test to relate to external requirements. Construct validity takes into account the educational variables, such as the native language of the students, to predict the test outcomes. Reliable assessments have consistent results; Reliability refers to the consistency of a measure. A test is considered reliable if we get the same result repeatedly.

According to Cohen, Swederlik and Sturman (2013) the psychometric soundness of a test is evaluated through its validity, which ensures the test is measuring what it claims to and reliability, which ensures accuracy of the measure across different times and people. While the Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACRA) presents information regarding the informed checks and balances in place for drafting and monitoring the NAPLAN, such as quality assurance, trials, expert advice, common scales, and difficulty equating (Reliability and Validity of NAPLAN, 2010), there remains a lack of data regarding testing of the specific psychometric elements of the tool.

With focus on the quality and standards of assessors to meet the learning needs of the candidates, where a lack of progress is highlighted or an inconsistency within assessments will result in further support for the assessment team, potentially in the form of further standardization

“With the dawn of the 16th century, there came together in Europe both the motivation and the means to explore and colonize territory across the seas” With respect to religion, trade, and technology this seems to be a valid quote referring to the 16th century and how Europeans were able to accomplish colonization and exploration on the other half of the globe.

Compare and contrast inter-rater, test-retest, parallel-forms, and internal consistency reliability. What are the advantages and disadvantages of each?

* Weakness: The limited size of the sample. A larger sample size would add credibility to the study.

On the objective measure (MMPI-II-RF), Mr. Cintron did not respond consistent to the tests items and therefore his protocol was invalid and uninterpretable. There was evidence of excessive inconsistency because of fixed true responding to the test item. It is possible Mr. Cintron had a difficult time comprehending the test questions as he asked for clarification from the examiner throughout the test.

Instead of wasting our time and money on further development of and dependency on standardized tests, we need to research more effective alternatives.

This is where students with disabilities take an alternate assessment where it is based on alternate achievement standards that coincide with grade-level standards, but have been reduced in complexity, depth, or breadth.

In assessment, validity and reliability are two major factors. “Validity is the soundness of your interpretations and uses of students’ assessment results” (Brookhart & Nitko, 2015, p. 38). This basically means, does the assessment measure what it was intended to measure? Validity has four principles: interpretations, uses, values, and consequences. An example of a valid assessment is the SAT. The SAT is valid, because it provides the assessor evidence to make appropriate interpretations and uses. The assessor is able to make meaningful judgments and actions based on the scores of the SAT (Brookhart & Nitko, 2015, p. 38-40). The other important factor is reliability. “Reliability is the degree to which students’ results remain consistent over replications of assessment procedure” (Brookhart & Nitko, 2015, p.67). For example, if a test is valid, the student should score consistently with no intervention. However, if a treatment or invention occurs, the score should be altered. An

The reliability of an instrument contributes to the level of usability for empirical research (Whiston, 2009). Further, it refers to the replicability andstability of a measurement and whether it will result in the same assessment in the same individuals when repeated (Frankfort-Nachmias & Nachmias, 2008). When determining the reliability of an assessment, a reliability coefficient of at least .80 indicates a trustworthy level of reliability (Trochim, 2006).

Standardized Testing has many cons compared to pros. The biggest con of all is the stress it puts on students and teachers alike. The stress it puts on teachers is that sometimes teacher’s teach according to the test because they want to

Standardized tests do not asses skills when their questions are generalized for an entire population. Most of the time, the tests are not in conjunction with classroom skills and behavior. These tests asses for general knowledge and understanding of students rather that their actual abilities. Since the questions are general in nature, it becomes very difficult for teachers to know how to improve the students understanding of a particular subject based on just general information. This leads to teachers “teaching to test” rather than educating students in a proper way based on the real needs of the classroom. Another reason these tests do more bad than good is the fact that teachers actually have a test booklet instructing them on what to do if a student vomits during a test. Students study so hard for these tests and simply cannot handle the pressure. So in the end, their final scores reflect not their abilities, but the influences of their surrounding factors instead.

With the expected growth in the allied health sector in the coming years due to increased patient care demands, healthcare organizations in the United State will need to take steps to maintain a high quality of care. These steps will include ways to ensure that well trained staff are hired, adequate new staff on the job training and orientation, continuous review of policies for improvements in safety, care, risk management and quality assurance. In addition to focusing on the integration of the incoming allied health personnel, healthcare organizations are expected to review how care is currently provided, and find new ways to provide care and meet the great increase in demand for care.

Oral Assessment instruments should have an acceptable level of reliability in terms of internal consistency, test and re-test reliability and alternative form reliability. Its content must also have the necessary validity to be a valid assessment instrument, must be predictive and concurrent.