Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Mixed Methods Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
1558689809335079v1
3/3/242    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Morell, L.
Right arrow Articles by Tan, R. J. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Article

Validating for Use and Interpretation: A Mixed Methods Contribution Illustrated

Linda Morell* and Rachael Jin Bee Tan

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: lindatmorell{at}gmail.com.


  Abstract
Researchers in the areas of psychology and education strive to understand the intersections among validity, educational measurement, and cognitive theory. Guided by a mixed model conceptual framework, this study investigates how respondents’ opinions inform the validation argument. Validity evidence for a science assessment was collected through traditional paper-and-pencil tests, surveys, and think-aloud and exit interviews of fifth-and sixth-grade students. Item response theory analyses supplied technical descriptions of evidence investigating the internal structure. Surveys provided information regarding perceived item difficulty and fairness. Think-aloud and exit interviews provided context and response processes information to clarify and explain issues. This research demonstrates how quantitative and qualitative data can be used in concert to inform the validation process and highlights the use of think-aloud interviews as an explanatory tool.

First published on May 8, 2009, doi:10.1177/1558689809335079

Journal of Mixed Methods Research 2009;3:242.

A more recent version of this article appeared on July 1, 2009

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?