Construct maps are tools that display how the underlying achievement construct upon which one is trying to set cut-scores is related to other information used in the process of standard setting. This article reviews what construct maps are, uses construct maps to provide a conceptual framework to view commonly used standard-setting procedures (the…

The construct map is a promising tool for organizing the data standard-setting panelists interpret. The challenge in applying construct maps to standard-setting procedures will be the judicious selection of data to include within this organizing framework. Therefore, this commentary focuses on decisions about what to include in the construct map.…

Haertel's argument is that one must "expand the scope of test validation to include indirect testing effects" because these effects are often the "rationale for the entire testing program." The author strongly agrees that this is essential. However, he maintains that Haertel's argument does not go far enough and that there are two additional…

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…

Insofar as the title of this piece might call for a straightforward answer, it seems obvious that EPMA professionals are servants. Viewed in this perspective, Paul E. Newton's analysis is carefully balanced, in that it respects the complex history of the concerns of the professionals, whilst moving towards conclusions that place the needs of the…

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…

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's article on the consensus definition of validity tackles a number of big issues and makes a number of strong claims. I agreed with much of what he said, and I disagreed with a number of his claims, but I found his article to be consistently interesting and thought provoking (whether I agreed or not). I will focus on three general…

Considering consequences in the evaluation of validity is not new although it is still debated by Paul E. Newton and others. The argument-based approach to validity entails an interpretative argument that explicitly identifies the proposed interpretations and uses of test scores and a validity argument that provides a structure for evaluating the…

The traditional way of equating the scores on a new test form X to those on an old form Y is equipercentile equating for a population of examinees. Because the population is likely to change between the two administrations, a popular approach is to equate for a "synthetic population." The authors of the articles in this issue of the journal try…

Mroch, Suh, Kane, & Ripkey (2009); Suh, Mroch, Kane, & Ripkey (2009); and Kane, Mroch, Suh, & Ripkey (2009) provided elucidating discussions on critical properties of linear equating methods under the nonequivalent groups with anchor test (NEAT) design. In this popular equating design, two test forms are administered to different groups of…

Despite over a century of aligning test and examination scales, the theory of linking has received relatively little attention. Recently, though, frameworks for classifying linking relationships have proliferated, both in England and the United States. Limitations of U.S. frameworks, particularly the idea that linking relationships ought to be…

Test equating under the NEAT design is, at best, a necessary evil. At bottom, the procedure aims to reach a conclusion on what a tested person would have done, if he or she were administered a set of items that were in fact never administered. It is not possible to infer such a conclusion from the data, because one simply has not made the required…