Gathering Validity Evidence Using the BEAR Assessment System (BAS)

2019 ◽  
pp. 63-89
Author(s):  
Mark Wilson ◽  
Diane B. Wilmot
Keyword(s):  
Assessment System ◽  
Validity Evidence

Constructing and Evaluating a Validation Argument for a Next-Generation Alternate Assessment

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy K. Clark ◽  
Meagan Karvonen
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Alternate Assessment ◽  
Theory Of Action ◽  
Validity Evidence ◽  
Dynamic Learning ◽  
Alternate Assessments ◽  
Overall Evaluation ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
Achievement Standards

Alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) have historically lacked broad validity evidence and an overall evaluation of the extent to which evidence supports intended uses of results. An expanding body of validation literature, the funding of two AA-AAS consortia, and advances in computer-based assessment have supported improvements in AA-AAS validation. This paper describes the validation approach used with the Dynamic Learning Maps® alternate assessment system, including development of the theory of action, claims, and interpretive argument; examples of evidence collected; and evaluation of the evidence in light of the maturity of the assessment system. We focus especially on claims and sources of evidence unique to AA-AAS and especially the Dynamic Learning Maps system design. We synthesize the evidence to evaluate the degree to which it supports the intended uses of assessment results for the targeted population. Considerations are presented for subsequent data collection efforts.

Assessing hope at the end of life: Validation of an experience of hope scale in advanced cancer patients

2004 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 243-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
CHERYL L. NEKOLAICHUK ◽  
EDUARDO BRUERA
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Symptom Assessment ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Validity Evidence ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Factor I ◽  
Factor Ii

Objective:The purpose of this study was to gather validity evidence for an innovative experience of hope scale, theHope Differential-Short (HDS), and evaluate its clinical utility for assessing hope in advanced cancer patients.Methods:A consecutive sampling approach was used to recruit 96 patients from an inpatient tertiary palliative care unit and three hospice settings. Each participant completed an in-person survey interview, consisting of the following measures: HDS (nine items), Herth Hope Index (HHI), hope visual analog scale (Hope-VAS) and Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS).Results:Using factor analytic procedures, a two-factor structure for the HDS was identified, consisting ofauthentic spirit(Factor I) andcomfort(Factor II). The HDS factors had good overall internal consistency (α = 0.83), with Factor I (α = 0.83) being higher than Factor II (α = 0.69). The two factors positively correlated with the HHI, Hope-VAS, and one of the ESAS visual analog scales, well-being (range: 0.38 to 0.64) and negatively correlated with depression and anxiety, as measured by the ESAS (range: −0.25 to −0.42).Significance of results:This is the first validation study of the HDS in advanced cancer patients. Its promising psychometric properties and brief patient-oriented nature provide a solid initial foundation for its future use as a clinical assessment measure in oncology and palliative care. Additional studies are warranted to gather further validity evidence for the HDS before its routine use in clinical practice.

Examining Subtypes of Behavioral/Emotional Risk Using Cluster Analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 628-632
Author(s):  
Bridget V. Dever ◽  
Emily K. Gallagher ◽  
Craig D. Hochbein ◽  
Austin Loukas ◽  
Chenchen Dai
Keyword(s):  
Cluster Analysis ◽  
Externalizing Problems ◽  
Behavioral Assessment ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Validity Evidence ◽  
Final Solution ◽  
Adjustment Problems ◽  
Cluster Membership ◽  
Emotional Risk ◽  
Behavioral And Emotional Risk

Behavioral and emotional problems among children and adolescents can lead to numerous negative outcomes without intervention. From a prevention standpoint, screening for behavioral and emotional risk is an important step toward identifying such problems before the point of diagnosis or referral. The present study conducted a k-means cluster analysis to determine the subtypes of risk captured by one such screening instrument, the Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (BESS). The final solution produced four clusters: Well-Adapted, Internalizing/Adjustment Problems, Mild Externalizing Problems, and General Problems-Severe; these results were similar to those found with the full Behavioral Assessment System for Children, Second Edition (BASC-2), suggesting that the BESS assesses similar constructs. Predictive validity evidence suggested that cluster membership was associated with standard achievement scores and in-school disciplinary incidents.

Bridging the Gap: Classroom Strategies Assessment System–Observer Form

2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 120-122
Author(s):  
Ryan J. Kettler ◽  
Linda A. Reddy ◽  
Todd A. Glover ◽  
Alexander Kurz
Keyword(s):  
Management Practices ◽  
Rating Scales ◽  
Classroom Practices ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Validity Evidence ◽  
Behavioral Management ◽  
Classroom Strategies ◽  
Direct Observations ◽  
Development Interventions

The Classroom Strategies Assessment System–Observer Form (CSAS-O) is a classroom observational system that combines direct observations and rating scales to assess teacher instructional and behavioral management practices, inform goals, plan professional development interventions, and monitor progress. CSAS-O Strategy Rating Scales yield scores indicating the discrepancy between the frequency with which observed teachers use evidence-based strategies and the recommended frequency with which they should use strategies during specific lessons. An illustrative example is provided along with a summary of reliability and validity evidence. Dudek, Reddy, Lekwa, & Hua write about Improving Universal Classroom Practices through Teacher Formative Assessment and Coaching using the CSAS-O in the current issue.

The value of an assessment system in a preclinical amalgam exercise

1985 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 312-315
Author(s):  
JE Wiegman ◽  
FC van de Poel ◽  
D Purdell-Lewis
Keyword(s):  
Assessment System

Three Conceptual Impediments to Developing Scale Theory for Formative Scales

Methodology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 156-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith A. Markus
Keyword(s):  
Scale Development ◽  
Item Analysis ◽  
Model Fitting ◽  
Item Bias ◽  
Validity Evidence ◽  
Scale Theory ◽  
Underlying Theory ◽  
Standard Scale ◽  
Item Scores

Abstract. Bollen and colleagues have advocated the use of formative scales despite the fact that formative scales lack an adequate underlying theory to guide development or validation such as that which underlies reflective scales. Three conceptual impediments impede the development of such theory: the redefinition of measurement restricted to the context of model fitting, the inscrutable notion of conceptual unity, and a systematic conflation of item scores with attributes. Setting aside these impediments opens the door to progress in developing the needed theory to support formative scale use. A broader perspective facilitates consideration of standard scale development concerns as applied to formative scales including scale development, item analysis, reliability, and item bias. While formative scales require a different pattern of emphasis, all five of the traditional sources of validity evidence apply to formative scales. Responsible use of formative scales requires greater attention to developing the requisite underlying theory.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document