Technical Report - International Military Testing Association

-
Preoentation to MTA Panel ConaLdering
Non-EmpF;ical Velidatfan of Teet Items
The fact that validity ia many-faced and difficult to determine
does not lessen the importance of the problem. The test produced by
all services here are of tremendous faport. (The results of theoe tears
determine which enlisted personne? get additional pay for isuparior performence,
and help determine which get promoted to the newt higher pay
grade.) Thus, tha ccoaomic and leadership status and quality of the
enlisted personnel of our Armed Forcer are effected etrongly by 0;1r te8tm.
As e result, the morals and quality of our fighting forces ere directly
Affected by the military testing program--our teeto.
It ie our duty to aek ourselves, “How valid are our tertr? Do our
teat identify the best informed and mst nkilled personnel in the euma
compet~t~va occupa~el area? Do thcytruly FdentFfy the least lnfowed
end lee8 rkilled?” Becauee these evaiuatfon testa do affect tha letdership
and morale of the enlleted structure of our nation’s ff.ghttng forcec,
we are interested fn determtnfng and fmprovfng the validity of our itema,
and thus of our testa.
The California Te8t Bureau has cotegorited the two bAsliC spproachrs
to the detcrmlnAtion of validity according to the chr.;t on page 201.
Thorndike end Hsgen (1961) list tha specific considerationa entering
into evaluationa of test8 as (1) validity, (2) rellabFLlty, and (3) practfciality.
Validity refers to the extent to which t test meaeuree what it
18 intended to meascru. Reliability has to do with the accuracy and precision
of a measurement procedure --conoirtency and reproducibility. Practicelity
in concerned with Marty factora, ruch AP economy, convenience,
and interpretabilfty--whfch determine vhether a teixt is practical for
widespread use.
A reading achievement tert requires people to select certain answer@
to quertlonr. Penci.1 marka on enrwer rheeta determlqs each peraon’r
more. Thio Gcore ir called their reading comprehenrlve #core, but the
Icore fs NOT the compreheneion. It io A rfecord of 8ample~behavior.
Any judgment regarding compreheorion ir an inference from thfc number
of allegedly correct anowers. Its vs:fdity in not self-evident but rnuet
be astsblfshed on the basis of BdequAta evidence.
Thorndike and Hagen (1961) #Late, “A teet may be thought of ao cxraapondlng
to some aspect of human bahavior In three sensea.” To identify
these categories they use the terms (1) “reprerent,” (2) “predict,” and
(3) “sfgnify.” Of these three type6 of evidences of validity, our topic
ir prfnci+lly concerned with the fLrst type, KO wit: How well do our
tests reprerment the standard8 (the practical derfred level of performance)
.
162
_ _ .--