Résumés
Résumé
Nous proposons d’examiner le concept de validité selon les Normes de pratique du testing en éducation et en psychologie (American Educational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological Association (APA) & National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME), 2014) à travers ses cinq grandes sources d’évidences (contenu, processus de réponses des répondant·es, structure interne, relation avec d’autres variables et les conséquences). Ainsi, nous désirons contribuer à déconstruire certains préjugés existants autour du concept de validité. Nous proposerons aussi des recommandations afin de mieux valider les interprétations issues des scores en fonction d’un objectif particulier. En nous appuyant sur les travaux de Randall et collègues (2022, 2023, 2024), nous intègrerons aussi une perspective de justice sociale et antiraciste qui place les élèves, les étudiant·es et les autres personnes évaluées comme parties prenantes centrales du processus de validation. Cette approche vise à examiner les biais systémiques potentiels, à favoriser la réceptivité culturelle et linguistique des instruments, et à veiller à ce que les conséquences des évaluations contribuent à réduire les inégalités plutôt qu’à les renforcer.
Mots-clés :
- validité,
- validation,
- instrument de mesure,
- test
Parties annexes
Bibliographie
- American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association.
- Anderson, D., Irvin, S., Alonzo, J., & Tindal, G. A. (2015). Gauging item alignment through online systems while controlling for rater effects: Online alignment designs and rater effects. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 34(1), 22–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12038
- Bhola, D. S., Impara, J. C., & Buckendahl, C. W. (2003). Aligning tests with states' content standards: Methods and issues. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(3), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2003.tb00134.x
- Buckingham, B. R. (1921). Intelligence and its measurement: A symposium. Journal of Educational Psychology, 12(5), 271–275. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0066019
- Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046016
- Chapelle, C. A. (2021). Argument-based validation in testing and assessment. SAGE Publications.
- Cronbach, L. J. (1988). Five perspectives on validity argument. Dans H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Dirs.), Test validity (p. 3–17). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Downing, S. M. (2003). Validity: On the meaningful interpretation of assessment data. Medical Education, 37(9), 830–837. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2003.01594.x
- Kane, M. T. (2006). Validation. Dans R. Brennan (Dir.), Educational measurement (4e éd., p. 17–64). American Council on Education and Praeger.
- Leighton, J. P. (2004). Avoiding misconception, misuse, and missed opportunities: The collection of verbal reports in educational achievement testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 23(4), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2004.tb00164.x
- Li, Z., Banerjee, J., & Zumbo, B. D. (2017). Response time data as validity evidence: Has it lived up to its promise and, if not, what would it take to do so. Dans B. D. Zumbo & A. M. Hubley (Dirs.), Understanding and investigating response processes in validation research (p. 159–177). Springer International Publishing.
- Loye, N. (2018). Et si la validation était plus qu’une suite de procédures techniques? Mesure et évaluation en éducation, 41(1), 97–123. https://doi.org/10.7202/1055898ar
- Messick, S. (1989). Validity. Dans R. L. Linn (Dir.), Educational measurement (3e éd., p. 13–103). American Council on Education and Macmillan.
- Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L. S., & Almond, R. G. (2003). On the structure of educational assessments. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 1(1), 3–62. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15366359MEA0101_02
- Newton, P. E., & Shaw, S. D. (2014). Validity in educational and psychological assessment. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446288856
- Padilla, J., & Benítez, I. (2014). Validity evidence based on response processes. Psicothema, 26(1), 136–144. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2013.259
- Randall, J., Poe, M., Slomp, D., & Oliveri, M. E. (2023). Our validity looks like justice. Does yours? Language Testing, 41(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322231202947
- Randall, J., Poe, M., Oliveri, M. E., & Slomp, D. (2024). Justice-oriented, antiracist validation: Continuing to disrupt White supremacy in assessment practices. Educational Assessment, 29(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2023.2285047
- Randall, J., Slomp, D., Poe, M., & Oliveri, M. E. (2022). Disrupting White supremacy in assessment: Toward a justice-oriented, antiracist validity framework. Educational Assessment, 27(2), 170–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2022.2042682
- Sireci, S. G. (1998). Gathering and analyzing content validity data. Educational Assessment, 5(4), 299–321. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326977ea0504_2
- St-Onge, C., Young, M., Eva, K. W., & Hodges, B. (2017). Validity: One word with a plurality of meanings. Advances in Health Sciences Education: Theory and Practice, 22(4), 853–867. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-016-9716-3
- Zumbo, B. D., & Hubley, A. M. (2017). Understanding and investigating response processes in validation research. Springer Press
10.7202/1055898ar