Experts(in this case, math teachers), would have to evaluate the content validity by comparing the test to the learning objectives. Results: No major demographic or alcohol use characteristics were found between the 166 subjects who completed the H-AUDIT and the 166 individuals who completed the S. of each question, analyzing whether each one covers the aspects that the test was designed to cover.Ī 4th grade math test would have high content validity if it covered all the skills taught in that grade. Methods: The reliability and validity of the self-administered AUDIT were compared between the H-AUDIT and the AUDIT used as a single scale (S-AUDIT) in 332 primary care patients. Assessing content validity is more systematic and relies on expert evaluation. On the other hand, content validity evaluates how well a test represents all the aspects of a topic. When a test has strong face validity, anyone would agree that the test’s questions appear to measure what they are intended to measure.įor example, looking at a 4th grade math test consisting of problems in which students have to add and multiply, most people would agree that it has strong face validity (i.e., it looks like a math test). The difference is that face validity is subjective, and assesses content at surface level. Face validity and content validity are similar in that they both evaluate how suitable the content of a test is.
0 kommentar(er)
