Résumés
Résumé
En éducation, de nombreuses études portent sur la validation d’instruments de mesure, tels que des questionnaires ou des instruments d’évaluation. La revue Mesure et évaluation en éducation en publie d’ailleurs chaque année. Ces études peuvent être globalement classées en deux catégories : d’une part, celles dans lesquelles les procédures psychométriques, comme une analyse factorielle ou l’application d’un modèle de la théorie de réponses aux items (p. ex., le modèle de Rasch), constituent en elles-mêmes la démarche de validation ; d’autre part, celles dans lesquelles le recours à un panel d’experts pour concevoir l’instrument semble suffire à garantir sa validité. Cet article tente de montrer qu’il est nécessaire de faire reposer une démarche de validation sur un argumentaire basé sur des preuves de natures quantitative et qualitative, en proposant deux modèles qui, combinés, sont propres à guider la formulation des arguments pour soutenir la validation d’un instrument d’évaluation. L’idée est de contrer le fait que si l’on ne comprend pas ce qu’on essaie de montrer, le risque d’avoir des arguments peu utiles est grand.
Mots-clés :
- validation,
- conception d’épreuves évaluatives,
- mesure,
- arguments de validité
Abstract
Many studies in the field of education focus on the validation of testing instruments, such as questionnaires or assessment instruments. Indeed, such studies are published each year in the journal Mesure et évaluation en éducation. These studies can be classified in two broad categories: on the one hand, those in which psychometric procedures (e.g. factor analysis or Item Response Theory model like the Rasch model) constitute, in and of themselves, the validation process; and on the other hand, those in which relying on an expert panel to develop the instrument is seemingly enough to ensure validity. This article aims to show the necessity of using an argument-based validation process with quantitative and qualitative evidence by proposing two models which can be combined to help formulate arguments supporting the assessment instrument validation. The idea is to address the fact that if we do not understand what we are trying to demonstrate, the arguments are likely to be of little use.
Keywords:
- validation,
- test design,
- measurement,
- argument-based validation
Resumo
Em educação, muitos estudos abordam a validação de instrumentos de medição, como questionários ou instrumentos de avaliação, que, de resto, a revista Mesure et évaluation en éducation tem publicado todos os anos. Estes estudos podem ser globalmente classificados em duas categorias: por um lado, aqueles em que os procedimentos psicométricos, como a análise fatorial ou a aplicação de um modelo de teoria da resposta ao item (por exemplo, o modelo de Rasch), constituem em si o processo de validação; por outro lado, aqueles em que o recurso a um painel de especialistas para conceber o instrumento parece ser suficiente para garantir a sua validade. Este artigo tenta mostrar que é necessário basear um processo de validação sobre um argumentário sustentado em evidências de natureza quantitativa e qualitativa, propondo dois modelos que, combinados, são capazes de guiar a formulação de argumentos para apoiar a validação de um instrumento de avaliação. A ideia é contrariar o facto de que, se alguém não entende o que está a tentar mostrar, o risco de ter argumentos pouco úteis é grande.
Palavras chaves:
- validação,
- conceção de provas de avaliação,
- medição,
- argumentos de validade
Parties annexes
Références
- AERA, NCME, & APA (1974). Standards for educational and psychological tests. Washington, DC: AER.
- André, N., Loye, N. et Laurencelle, L. (2014). La validité psychométrique : un regard global sur le concept centenaire, sa genèse et ses avatars. Mesure et évaluation en éducation, 37(3), 125-148. doi: 10.7202/1036330ar
- Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
- Borsboom, D., Cramer, A. O. J., Kievit, R. A., Scholten, A. Z., & Franic, S. (2009). The end of construct validity. In R. W. Lissitz (Ed.), The concept of validity: Revision, new directions and applications (pp. 135-170). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
- Chapelle, C. A., Enright, M. K., & Jamieson, J. M. (2008/2011). Building a validity argument for the Test of English as a Foreign Language. New York, NY: Routledge.
- Chapelle, C. A. (2010). Does an argument-based approach to validity make a difference? Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 29(1), 3-13. doi: 10.1111/j. 1745-3992.2009.00165.x
- Chapelle, C. A. (2011). Validity argument for language assessment: The framework is simple... Language Testing, 29(1), 19-27. doi: 10.1177/0265532211417211
- Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 12, 1-16. doi: 10.1007/BF02310555
- Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281-302. doi: 10.1037/h0040957
- Cureton, E. E. (1951). Validity. In E. F. Lindquist (Ed.), Educational Measurement (1st ed., pp. 621-694). Washinton, DC: American Council on Education.
- Demonty, I., Fagnant, A. et Dupont, V. (2015). Analyse d’un outil d’évaluation en mathématiques : entre une logique de compétences et une logique de contenu. Mesure et évaluation en éducation, 38(2), 1-29. doi: 10.7202/1036761ar
- Educational Testing Service [ETS] (2011). Validity evidence supported the interpretation and use of TOEFLiBT Scores, TOEFLiBT Research Insight, series I, vol. 4. Princetown, NJ: ETS. Retrieved from www.ets.org/s/toefl/pdf/toefl_ibt_insight_s1v4.pdf
- Genoud, P. (2008). Validation d’un instrument mesurant le climat d’études perçu par les étudiants universitaires. Mesure et évaluation en éducation, 31(1), 31-49. doi : 10.7202/1025012ar
- Guilford, J. P. (1946). New standards for test evaluation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 6, 427-439. doi: 10.1177/001316444600600401
- Guilford, J. P. (1954). Psychometric methods (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
- Harvey, L. (2012). Évaluation des compétences dans un programme de formation en enseignement : validité de construit curriculaire. Mesure et évaluation en éducation, 35(2), 69-95. doi: 10.7202/1024721ar
- Kane, M. T. (2006). Validation. In R. Brennan (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., chap. 2). Westport, CT: American Council on Education and Praeger.
- Kane, M. (2009). Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores. In R. W. Lissitz (Ed.), The concept of validity: Revisions, new directions and applications (pp. 39-64). Charlotte, NC: IAP.
- Kane, M., Crooks, T., & Cohen, A. (1999). Validating measures of performance. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 18(2), 5-17. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.1999.tb00010.x
- LaFlair, G. T., & Staples, S. (2017). Using corpus linguistics to examine the extrapolation inference in the validity argument for a high-stakes speaking assessment. Language Testing, 34(4), 451-475. doi: 10.1177/0265532217713951
- Laveault, D. (2012). Soixante ans de bons et mauvais usages du alpha de Cronbach. Mesure et évaluation en éducation, 35(2). doi: 10.7202/1024716ar
- Lissitz, R. W., & Samuelson, K. (2007). A suggested change in terminology and emphasis regarding validity in education. Educational Researcher, 36(8), 437-448. doi: 10. 3102/0013189X07311286
- Loevinger, J. (1957). Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. Psychological Reports, Monograph supplement 9, 3, 635-694. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1957.3.3. 635
- Loye, N. et Lambert-Chan, J. (2016). Au coeur du développement d’une épreuve en mathématique dotée d’un potentiel diagnostique. Mesure et évaluation en éducation, 39(3). doi : 10.7202/1040136ar
- Markus, K. A., & Borsboom, D. (2013). Frontiers of test validity: Measurement, causation, and meaning. New York, NY: Routledge.
- McNamara, T., & Roever, C. (2006). Language testing: The social dimension. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
- Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. Linn (Ed.), Educational Measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13-104). Washington, DC: American Council on Education/Macmillan.
- Michell, J. (1999). Measurement in psychology: Critical history of a methodological concept. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Mislevy, R. J., & Heartel, G. D. (2006). Implications of Evidence-Centered Design for educational testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 25(4), 8-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.2006.00075.x
- Mislevy, R. J., Haertel, G., Wise Rutstein, D., & Ziker, C. (2017). Assessing model-based reasoning using Evidence-Centered Design: A suite of research-based design patterns. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
- Mislevy, R. J., & Riconscente, M. M. (2005). Evidence-centered assessment design: Layers, structures, and terminology. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
- Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L., & Almond, R. G. (2003). On the structure of educational assessments. Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 1(1), 3-62. doi: 10.1207/ S15366359MEA0101_02
- Newton, P. E., & Shaw, S. D. (2014). Validity in educational and psychological assessment. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
- Nichols, P. D., & Williams, N. (2009). Consequences of test score use as validity evidence: Roles and responsibilities. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 28(1), 3-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.2009.01132.x
- Plante, I. (2010). Adaptation et validation d’instruments de mesure des stéréotypes de genre en mathématiques et en français. Mesure et évaluation en éducation, 33(2), 1-34. doi: 10.7202/1024894ar
- Sireci, S. G. (2007). On validity theory and test validation. Educational Researcher, 36(8), 477-481. doi: 10.3102/0013189X07311609
- Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Vantourout, M. et Goasdoué, R. (2014). Approches et validité psycho-didactiques des évaluations. Éducation et formation, e-302. Repéré à https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01239551/document