Week+7

October 24: Internal Validity

 * **CLASSWORK** || **HOMEWORK:** ||
 * UPDATED SLIDESHOW:

Catchup with Instrument Validity from Last Week

Want more practice identifying psychometric properties of instruments? Try these two validation studies:
 * [[file:Aukes et al 2007 Developing Personal Reflection Scale in Medicine.pdf]]
 * [[file:Developing a Measure of Sense of Belonging.pdf]]

[|A Tangent: Norm-Based Tests:]
 * Test items answered correctly by 80 percent or more of the test takers don’t make it past the final cut [into the final test]” writes Popham (1999).
 * No group of students can achieve at higher levels without others achieving at lower levels. Norm-referenced tests make it mathematically impossible for “all the children to be above average” (ERS; Burley, 2002).
 * [|Norms vs. Standards]: "Using the SAT or the PARCC as a graduation exam is nuts-- because that absolutely guarantees that a certain number of high school seniors will not get diplomas, because these are norm-referenced tests and somebody has to land on the bottom. And that means that some bureaucrats and testocrats are going to sit in a room and decide how many students don't get to graduate this year.
 * [|Pennsylvania Graduation Requirement] (Diane Ravitch) and [|New York State]

2. Review ways of providing evidence of instrument validity and reliability
 * [|More about construct validity]
 * [|A few more ideas about construct validity]


 * Awesome summary**: Psychometric Toolbox for Assessing Reliability and Validity

3. Discuss 4 components of trustworthiness in qualitative research. [|Transferability vs. Generalizibility]

4. Discuss homework on threats to internal validity

4. Consider threats to the internal validity of your own work

Meltzoff's book
 * EXTRA SUPPORT FOR** Threats to Validity, Experimental Design, and Examples of Critiques:





|| **HOLD UP!! No additional homework this week**; Catch up on past assignments and begin thinking about research critique due Nov. 14.

Ask Julie to review the study you selected for your critique before you leave today
 * Could be a "strong" study where you test your ability to deconstruct key elements and highlight what increases your confidence in the study findings
 * Could be a "weak" study where you test your ability to identify weaknesses that decrease your confidence in findings and make suggestions for how to improve
 * Either way, comment on the quality of writing too.
 * See Critique Assignment Materials And Samples here
 * See also end of each Fraenkel chapter from Ch. 13-24 for sample critiques of studies employing each method

||
 * Here's an advanced organizer to begin building the drafty pieces of your proposal thus far...**