Need help? We are here

# reply to the next 2 discussions make sure to include at least a question to your peers 15 hours

eply to the next 2 discussions (make sure to include at least a question to your peers)
15 hours agoCarrie Langston ValidityCOLLAPSE
In our reading this week I learned about the Trinitarian model of validity which includes the criterion related validity, content validity, and construct validity. We can use these to forecast and measure what the end result of a test will be. We must examine what the total purpose and response will be for a test. What the subject matter is, what is required and what we wish to accomplish when the test is complete. The reading also states that we use this to compare test measurements that are identical to a set of goals, and the quality of an instruments used, and the construct of interest (Guion, 1980). The difference in the unitary model is that there are not three separate areas as in the Trinitarian model. Messick states that the unitary models stands on the appropriateness, meaningfulness, and usefulness of score-based inferences and are inseparable” (Messick, 1995). It would seem that the unitary model is a better fit because you can accomplish more and find more accurate results. In both cases the goal is a valid and reliable testing procedure. This is what I understand the Trinitarian and unitary model to be.
1 day agoDianna Spence U4D1COLLAPSE

A Trinitarian view of validity focuses on three aspects of validity, criterion-related, content, and construct. Guion examined each from a dual perspective aiding in the understanding of construct and establishing a basis for comparison between evaluations of the validity of measurement and evaluations of the validity of a hypothesis (Guion, 1980). Trinitarian approaches to validity assessment are not mutually exclusive, as each of the three conceptions of validity provides evidence that, with other evidence, contributes to a judgment concerning the validity of a test (Cohen & Swerdlik, 2018). Disadvantage of this theory is having to choose which tests to apply this concept. Tests in math and sciences are applicable but those in social sciences may have difficulty (Guion, 1980).
Messick’s approach to validity is critical of and differs from Guion’s approach. Messick provides validity measurements for all tests on the basis of six aspects of construct validity: “content, substantive, structural, generalizability, external, and consequential aspects of construct validity” (Messick, 1995). The new unified concept of validity interrelates these issues as fundamental aspects of a more comprehensive theory of construct validity that addresses both scores meaning and social values in test interpretation and test use (Messick, 1995). In his critic of the Trinitarians view of validity, Messick called for a unitary view of validity, one that takes into account everything from the implications of test scores in terms of societal values to the consequences of test use (Cohen & Swerdlik, 2018).
Messick’s approach is more valid for determining the validity of a test as it has multiple aspects of construct validity to apply. Test users can run into difficultly when determining test validity of test measure based on one certain criterion.