A contemporary approach to validity arguments: a practical guide to Kane's framework. Issue 6 (June 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Cook, David A; Brydges, Ryan; Ginsburg, Shiphra; Hatala, Rose
• Is Part Of: Medical education. Volume 49:Issue 6(2015)
• Page Start: 560
• Page End: 575
• Publication Date: 2015-06
• Subjects: Medical education -- Periodicals; Medical education -- Great Britain -- Periodicals; 610.7
• DOI: 10.1111/medu.12678
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0308-0110

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main" id="medu12678-abs-0001"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <sec id="medu12678-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>Context</title> <p>Assessment is central to medical education and the validation of assessments is vital to their use. Earlier validity frameworks suffer from a multiplicity of types of validity or failure to prioritise among sources of validity evidence. Kane's framework addresses both concerns by emphasising key inferences as the assessment progresses from a single observation to a final decision. Evidence evaluating these inferences is planned and presented as a validity argument.</p> </sec> <sec id="medu12678-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Objectives</title> <p>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.</p> </sec> <sec id="medu12678-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p>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: <italic>Scoring</italic> (translating an observation into one or more scores); <italic>Generalisation</italic> (using the score[s] as a reflection of performance in a test setting); <italic>Extrapolation</italic> (using the score[s] as a reflection of real‐world performance), and <italic>Implications</italic> (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.</p> </sec> <sec id="medu12678-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>Conclusions</title> <p>Validation focuses on evaluating the key claims, assumptions and inferences that link assessment scores with their intended interpretations and uses. The <italic>Implications</italic> and associated decisions are the most important inferences in the validity argument.</p> </sec> </abstract>