Validity and Reliability Correction

Filed in Uncategorized by on April 9, 2015 5 Comments

I was wrong!Bart-Simpson-sorry-1

I don’t know if even this bold confession will please some people, but I made a mistake and I need to correct it.

From IDAPA page 24:

Any assessment used for federal reporting shall be independently reviewed for reliability, validity, and alignment with the Idaho Content Standards.

In February, I wrote a post questioning the legality of the SBAC test because it has had no validity or reliability reporting completed. In my zeal I missed one key phrase, “…used for federal reporting…” So, technically it is completely legal to administer this untried and unproven test to your children.

However, the test still has problems according to the above policy.  The SBAC is the test the state will be using for federal reporting. This alone means the SBAC must be proven valid and reliable.  In a previous post we have proven it is not. This is the assessment we are being required to use to meet the federal testing requirement in both No Child Left Behind and our NCBL waiver.

Even as nationally recognized experts acknowledge the test lacks reliability and validity, our State Department of Education is forcing this test on our children, and using it as a graduation requirement for high school students.

Again, I apologized that my details where a little off (yes, it is legal to administer the test), however, Idaho is still using it in a manner that is contrary to our own policy.

Tags: , , , ,

Comments (5)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. I just clicked on your link of nationally recognized experts about reliability and validity (both measurement concepts) and found only a presentation about privacy, nothing about test characteristics. I would suggest that your nationally recognized experts could care less about reliability and validity of a test. They would push the privacy issue without regard to the reliability and validity of the test under discussion. Have you identified any psychometric experts who have concerns about the reliability and validity of the SBAC assessment?

  2. Dear Mr. Bert Stonberg:

    I am “one of those experts” who claim does “not care about validity.” Nothing could be further from the truth.

    As Doctor of Clinical Psychology, in my professional role, I could care less about the public policy and/or political wranglings associated with Common Core Achievement “testing”. So much so, that I have a library of emails from activist across the country who are ticked off regarding my refusal to engage politically on the issue.

    I don’t care…I’m a Doctor, not Senator Ted Cruz. As such, my only concern was if SBAC provided sufficient data supporting the 5-8 most common forms of statistical proof which could substantiate their claims of validity.

    They did not. They have not.

    After 2.5 years of professional requests as both a Doctor, and father of public school children, to produce such (common) documentation, I assume that none are forthcoming. Until they are produced, my kids won’t take they test, whereas I won’t allow them to be used as experimental subjects for a private, non profit entity.

    My days of ethically informing the community regarding this unethical, as well as potentially dangerous, situation are over. I completed my ethical duty to inform my community in Utah (as well as Idaho). I did so professionally with no political motivations or bias.

    I would, however, be more than happy to carve out some professional time to discuss, as well as to document, multiple issues regarding validity problems with the SBAC, AIR, and PARCC produced Common Core tests. My consultation fee is $250.00 per hour. I’m booked for the next month however.

    Until then, a simple cursory “Google” quiery on the subject on your part would produce multiple resource hits from some well respected, doctoral level clinicians, researchers and Psychometricians regarding this matter of validity issues.

    Here is my email if you would like to contact me directly to engage professionally on this matter:

    Ms. Zimmerman should be applauded for her efforts at hold education bureaucrats accountable for not only valid use of our tax money, but more importantly, for looking out for the safety of our children.

    Idaho’s explotation of children in this manner is shameful.

  3. Please excuse my grammar errors above. I wrote this reply on a cell phone as a passenger in a car that my teen appears to be driving at 1,000 miles per hour.

  4. I apologize for the above errors in grammar committed while using a cell phone as a passenger in a car driven by my teen at 1000 miles per hour.

    Here is a “free” response from another expert:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.