Abstract
ABSTRACTThis study utilizes an argument-based approach to validation to examine the implications of reliability in order to further differentiate the concepts of score and decision consistency. In a methodological example, the framework of generalizability theory was used to estimate appropriate indices of score consistency and evaluations of the likelihood of decision errors based on the design of a performance assessment and its intended use. The study illustrates how generalizability theory can be applied to address various claims about consistency when decisions are based on two or more cut scores, and results underscore the importance of considering score and decision consistency separately.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
