Literature DB >> 27696103

Validity: one word with a plurality of meanings.

Christina St-Onge1, Meredith Young2, Kevin W Eva3, Brian Hodges4.   

Abstract

Validity is one of the most debated constructs in our field; debates abound about what is legitimate and what is not, and the word continues to be used in ways that are explicitly disavowed by current practice guidelines. The resultant tensions have not been well characterized, yet their existence suggests that different uses may maintain some value for the user that needs to be better understood. We conducted an empirical form of Discourse Analysis to document the multiple ways in which validity is described, understood, and used in the health professions education field. We created and analyzed an archive of texts identified from multiple sources, including formal databases such as PubMED, ERIC and PsycINFO as well as the authors' personal assessment libraries. An iterative analytic process was used to identify, discuss, and characterize emerging discourses about validity. Three discourses of validity were identified. Validity as a test characteristic is underpinned by the notion that validity is an intrinsic property of a tool and could, therefore, be seen as content and context independent. Validity as an argument-based evidentiary-chain emphasizes the importance of supporting the interpretation of assessment results with ongoing analysis such that validity does not belong to the tool/instrument itself. The emphasis is on process-based validation (emphasizing the journey instead of the goal). Validity as a social imperative foregrounds the consequences of assessment at the individual and societal levels, be they positive or negative. The existence of different discourses may explain-in part-results observed in recent systematic reviews that highlighted discrepancies and tensions between recommendations for practice and the validation practices that are actually adopted and reported. Some of these practices, despite contravening accepted validation 'guidelines', may nevertheless respond to different and somewhat unarticulated needs within health professional education.

Keywords:  Assessment; Discourse analysis; Health profession education; Validation; Validity

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27696103     DOI: 10.1007/s10459-016-9716-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract        ISSN: 1382-4996            Impact factor:   3.853


  4 in total

1.  Validity as a social imperative: users' and leaders' perceptions.

Authors:  Mélanie Marceau; Christina St-Onge; Frances Gallagher; Meredith Young
Journal:  Can Med Educ J       Date:  2022-07-06

Review 2.  Characterizing the literature on validity and assessment in medical education: a bibliometric study.

Authors:  Meredith Young; Christina St-Onge; Jing Xiao; Elise Vachon Lachiver; Nazi Torabi
Journal:  Perspect Med Educ       Date:  2018-06

3.  Development and pilot testing of a tool to assess evidence-based practice skills among French general practitioners.

Authors:  Nicolas Rousselot; Thomas Tombrey; Drissa Zongo; Evelyne Mouillet; Jean-Philippe Joseph; Bernard Gay; Louis Rachid Salmi
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2018-11-09       Impact factor: 2.463

Review 4.  Advancing the assessment of clinical reasoning across the health professions: Definitional and methodologic recommendations.

Authors:  David Gordon; Joseph J Rencic; Valerie J Lang; Aliki Thomas; Meredith Young; Steven J Durning
Journal:  Perspect Med Educ       Date:  2022-03-07
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.