ABSTRACT
This chapter focuses on constructing validity arguments for instruments that measure mathematics teaching practices by comparing the process for two different measurement types, an observational protocol and an instructional log. We overlay two primary frameworks: Kane’s argument-based approach to validation (2013) and the sources of validity evidence from the Standards (AERA, APA, & NCME, 2014). Specifically, we highlight the similarities and differences in the proposed interpretations/uses of resulting data from the Mathematics Scan (M-Scan) versus the Instructional Practices Log in Mathematics (IPL-M). We also compare and contrast the types of validity evidence for the two instruments to test propositions for data interpretation/use.
