Search for: All records

Abstract Quantitative measures in mathematics education have informed policies and practices for over a century. Thus, it is critical that such measures in mathematics education have sufficient validity evidence to improve mathematics experiences for students. This article provides a systematic review of the validity evidence related to measures used in elementary mathematics education. The review includes measures that focus on elementary students as the unit of analyses and attends to validity as defined by current conceptions of measurement. Findings suggest that one in ten measures in mathematics education include rigorous evidence to support intended uses. Recommendations are made to support mathematics education researchers to continue to take steps to improve validity evidence in the design and use of quantitative measures. 

Abstract Validity is a fundamental consideration of test development and test evaluation. The purpose of this study is to define and reify three key aspects of validity and validation, namely test‐score interpretation, test‐score use, and the claims supporting interpretation and use. This study employed a Delphi methodology to explore how experts in validity and validation conceptualize test‐score interpretation, use, and claims. Definitions were developed through multiple iterations of data collection and analysis. By clarifying the language used when conducting validation, validation may be more accessible to a broader audience, including but not limited to test developers, test users, and test consumers. 

Testing is a part of education around the world; however, there are concerns that consequences of testing is underexplored within current educational scholarship. Moreover, usability studies are rare within education. One aim of the present study was to explore the usability of a mathematics problem-solving test called the Problem Solving Measures–Computer-Adaptive Test (PSM-CAT) designed for grades six to eight students (ages 11–14). The second aim of this mixed-methods research was to unpack consequences of testing validity evidence related to the results and test interpretations, leveraging the voices of participants. A purposeful, representative sample of over 1000 students from rural, suburban, and urban districts across the USA were administered PSM-CAT followed by a survey. Approximately 100 of those students were interviewed following test administration. Findings indicated that (1) participants engaged in the PSM-CAT as desired and found it highly usable (e.g., most respondents were able to use and find the calculator and several students commented that they engaged with the test as desired) and (2) the benefits from testing largely outweighed any negative outcomes (e.g., 92% of students interviewed had positive attitudes towards the testing experiences), which in turn supports consequences from testing validity evidence for PSM-CAT. This study provides an example of a usability study for educational testing and builds upon previous calls for greater consequences of testing research. 

This Research Commentary addresses the need for an instrument abstract—termed an Interpretation and Use Statement (IUS)—to be included when mathematics educators present instruments for use by others in journal articles and other communication venues (e.g., websites and administration manuals). We begin with presenting the need for IUSs, including the importance of a focus on interpretation and use. We then propose a set of elements—identified by a group of mathematics education researchers, instrument developers, and psychometricians—to be included in the IUS. We describe the development process, the recommended elements for inclusion, and two example IUSs. Last, we present why IUSs have the potential to benefit end users and the field of mathematics education.