The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing identify several strands of validity evidence that may be needed as support for particular interpretations and uses of assessments. Yet assessment validation often does not seem guided by these Standards, with validations lacking a particular strand even when it appears relevant to an assessment. Consequently, the degree to which validity evidence supports the proposed interpretation and use of the assessment may be compromised. Guided by the Standards, this article presents an independent validation of OECD's PISA assessment of mathematical self‐efficacy (MSE) as an instructive example of this issue. OECD identifies MSE as one of a number of “factors” explaining student performance in mathematics, thereby serving the “policy orientation” of PISA. However, this independent validation identifies significant shortcomings in the strands of validity evidence available to support this interpretation and use of the assessment. The article therefore demonstrates how the Standards can guide the planning of a validation to ensure it generates the validity evidence relevant to an interpretive argument, particularly for an international large‐scale assessment such as PISA. The implication is that assessment validation could yet benefit from the Standards as what Zumbo calls “a global force for testing”.

中文翻译：

---

当评估验证忽略了任何有效证据时：PISA的指导性示例

《教育和心理测试标准》确定了几条有效性证据，可能需要这些证据来支持特定的解释和评估的使用。然而，评估验证似乎通常不受这些标准的指导，即使缺少验证，其验证也没有特定的范畴。因此，有效性证据支持提议的解释和评估使用的程度可能会受到影响。在标准的指导下，本文介绍了对经合组织的PISA数学自我效能感（MSE）评估的独立验证，作为该问题的说明性示例。经合组织将MSE视为解释学生数学成绩的众多“因素”之一，从而为PISA的“政策导向”服务。然而，这种独立的验证发现了可用于支持这种解释和评估使用的有效性证据链中的重大缺陷。因此，本文将说明标准如何指导验证计划，以确保它生成与解释性论点相关的有效性证据，尤其是对于国际大规模评估（如PISA）而言。这意味着评估验证仍可以从标准中受益，因为Zumbo称之为“全球测试力量”。特别是对于PISA等国际大规模评估。这意味着评估验证仍可以从标准中受益，因为Zumbo称之为“全球测试力量”。特别是对于PISA等国际大规模评估。这意味着评估验证仍可以从标准中受益，因为Zumbo称之为“全球测试力量”。