An "Educational Researcher" article by Pamela Moss (1994) asks the title question, "Can there be validity without reliability?" Yes, she answers, if by reliability one means "consistency among independent observations intended as interchangeable" (Moss, 1994, p. 7), quantified by internal consistency indices such as KR-20 coefficients and inter-rater correlations. Identifying this definition as the sine qua non of "a psychometric approach to drawing and warranting interpretations of human products or performances," Professor Moss describes a contrasting hermeneutic approach: "a holistic and integrative approach to interpretation of human phenomena that seeks to understand the whole in light of its parts, repeatedly testing interpretations against the available evidence until each of the parts can be accounted for in a coherent interpretation of the whole" (Moss, 1994, p. 7). One can thus draw valid inferences, the argument continues, from bodies of evidence that are not reliable. Are we witnessing the demise of a fundamental measurement principle, that without reliability, there is no validity?