This paper presents the author's critique to Paul E. Newton's article titled "Clarifying the consensus definition of validity." In his article, Newton not only clarifies but also redefines the consensus definition of validity. In this redefinition he omits the term "construct" and introduces the term "measurement." Both omission and introduction…

Paul E. Newton's article is valuable in many ways, especially for clarifying confusions and inconsistencies in the assessment business. Most importantly, he points out confusions that persist and where open discussion will help us understand what we say and what we mean to say. But I will focus here on the only faults I find in the article: three…

This focus article provided the author with an opportunity to unpack the consensus definition of validity and to explore its implications in the light of recent debates. He proposed an elaboration of the consensus definition, which was intended to express the spirit of the "Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing" with increased…

Paul E. Newton provides an insightful and scholarly overview of central issues in validity theory. As he notes, many of the conceptual problems in validity theory derive from the fact that the word "validity" has two meanings. First, it indicates "whether a test measures what it purports to measure." This is a factual claim about the psychometric…

There is something about the topic of validity that seems to provoke dissatisfaction in many of those who encounter it--a sense that something is not right, and that something needs to be done to sort it out. Paul E. Newton in his target essay does not attempt a radical reconstruction of the validity edifice. His position is that the "consensus…

Lee Cronbach once expressed the view that all roads lead to construct validity. In looking to clarify the consensus definition of validity, and its place in assessment, Newton is also led to the troublesome idea of construct validity. To be sure, he addresses other validity issues, but in this commentary, I will restrict my attention to construct…

In his article, Paul E. Newton has conducted a review of selected perspectives on validity theory with the goal of disambiguating the definition of validity and describing a consensus definition of validity. Newton provides a nuanced discussion of the evolution of the concept of validity over the years. His Focus article has two major goals: (1)…

Paul E. Newton argues in favor of a conception of validity, viz, "the consensus definition of validity," according to which the extension of the predicate "is valid" is a subset of "assessment-based decision-making procedure[s], which [are] underwritten by an argument that the assessment procedure can be used to measure the attribute entailed by…

This paper presents the authors' critique on "Clarifying the Consensus Definition of Validity" by Paul E. Newton (this issue). There are serious differences of opinion regarding the topic of validity. Newton is aware of these differences, as made clear by his choice of references and particularly his effort to respond to the various Borsboom…

I congratulate Paul E. Newton on a thoughtful and evenhanded contribution to test validity theory. I especially appreciate the evident care that went into interpreting the various authors whose work Newton discusses. I found many useful insights along with the few minor points with which I might quibble. I comment on three aspects of Newton's…

The 1999 "Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing" defines validity as the degree to which evidence and theory support the interpretations of test scores entailed by proposed uses of tests. Although quite explicit, there are ways in which this definition lacks precision, consistency, and clarity. The history of validity has taught us…

Coburn and Turner (this issue) present an intriguing framework for understanding how data has come to be used in the current high accountability environments in education. In this framework, they connect various processes of data use within organizational and political contexts. Data use is presented using an ecological perspective that deepens…

This article presents the author's rejoinder to thinking about linking from issue 8(1). Particularly within the more embracing linking frameworks, e.g., Holland & Dorans (2006) and Holland (2007), there appears to be a major disjunction between (1) classification discourse: the supposed basis for classification, that is, the underlying theory of…

Paul Newton (2010), with his characteristic concern about theory, has set out two different ways of thinking about the basis upon which equivalences of one sort or another are established between test score scales. His reason for doing this is a desire to establish "the defensibility of linkages lower on the continuum than concordance." His…

"Linking" is a term given to a general class of procedures by which one represents scores X on one test or measure in terms of scores Y on another test or measure. A recent taxonomy by Holland and Dorans (2006; Holland, 2007) organizes the various types of links into three broad categories: prediction, scale aligning, and equating. In his article…