Construct validity as an overarching concept


In some cases, attempts to explain the concept of validity could be considered overly complex due to descriptions of a range of sub-overlapping forms, such as content validity, criterion validity or face validity, rather than the arguably more unified and overarching description of construct validity, as supported by a number of experts (Henning, 1988; Hughes, 2003; Messick, 1989).


Task 6


• As mentioned, within construct validity, other sub-forms of validity are often discussed, such as criterion validity, content validity or face validity. Before looking at Figure 4, consider what you understand by these terms and how they differ and/or overlap.


Figure 4 highlights some of the complex concepts and considerations involved within validity in the context of EAP. In Stiggins’ terms (1995), construct validity can be seen to assist in the process of assessment as it provides a fuller knowledge of what is actually being assessed. With the broader reach of construct validity in mind, McNamara (1996, p. 18) also warns of the dangers associated with restricted views of validity in EAP assessment which do not embrace the fuller breadth of construct validity.


EAP criterion validity


The degree to which an EAP test accurately


represents the EAP abilities or skills which it intends to measure. For example, how does the test‘s interpretation of academic writing compare with academic writing as it is manifested in students’ future courses of study?


Examples of validity in EAP testing EAP content validity


The estimate of how much a measure accurately represents the different aspects of a construct in the authentic EAP subject domain or context on which the students’ EAP teaching, learning and assessment is focused.


EAP face validity


The level to which stakeholders agree or accept that a particular EAP test is a representative or useful measure of the EAP skills or abilities which it claims to measure.


In EAP, construct validity is the extent to which an EAP test achieves what it claims to. For instance, an EAP assessment designed to measure academic vocabulary should only measure that particular construct.


Figure 4: Examples of validity in EAP testing Task 7


• Consider your own EAP testing context and identify examples of criterion validity, content validity or face validity.


• Do you agree that focus on individual forms of validity could restrict a broader focus on construct validity, which subsumes other forms?


Chapter 2: Understanding construct validity in EAP assessment 17


Construct validity


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192  |  Page 193  |  Page 194  |  Page 195  |  Page 196  |  Page 197  |  Page 198  |  Page 199  |  Page 200  |  Page 201  |  Page 202  |  Page 203  |  Page 204  |  Page 205  |  Page 206  |  Page 207  |  Page 208  |  Page 209  |  Page 210