ABSTRACT

This chapter focuses on perhaps the most controversial aspect of modern validity theory: the role of consequences. Since the formal introduction of consequential validity, tumult surrounding the concept has persisted. Referring to the controversy about the concept of consequential validity, some validity theorists have described the situation in measured terms. Consequential validity has taken root among testing policy makers, educational researchers, some measurement specialists, and others. Including consequential validity as an aspect of validity theory contradicts the concept of validity itself. Referring back to the first point of agreement regarding validity, it is noteworthy that validity is defined in terms of accuracy of test score based inferences. The most fundamental problem with incorporating consequences as a source of validity evidence as suggested by Samuel Messick is that it requires integration of that which cannot be combined to yield a coherent result.