articleMedical EducationMay 19, 2015Closed access

A contemporary approach to validity arguments: a practical guide to K ane's framework

Mayo Clinic · WinnMed · +6 more institutions

PubMed
Indexed incrossrefpubmed

Abstract

Objectives

We aim to offer a practical introduction to the key concepts of Kane's framework that educators will find accessible and applicable to a wide range of assessment tools and activities.

Results

All assessments are ultimately intended to facilitate a defensible decision about the person being assessed. Validation is the process of collecting and interpreting evidence to support that decision. Rigorous validation involves articulating the claims and assumptions associated with the proposed decision (the interpretation/use argument), empirically testing these assumptions, and organising evidence into a coherent validity argument. Kane identifies four inferences in the validity argument: Scoring (translating an observation into one or more scores); Generalisation (using the score[s] as a reflection of performance in a test setting); Extrapolation (using the score[s] as a reflection of real-world performance), and Implications (applying the score[s] to inform a decision or action). Evidence should be collected to support each of these inferences and should focus on the most questionable assumptions in the chain of inference. Key assumptions (and needed evidence) vary depending on the assessment's intended use or associated decision. Kane's framework applies to quantitative and qualitative assessments, and to individual tests and programmes of assessment.

Citation impact

585
total citations
FWCI
32.34
Percentile
100%
References
87
Citations per year

Authors

4

Topics & keywords

Keywords
  • Argument (complex analysis)
  • External validity
  • Inference
  • Psychology
  • Management science
  • Computer science
  • Artificial intelligence
  • Social psychology
UN Sustainable Development Goals
  • Peace, Justice and strong institutions
No related works found for this paper.