a b s t r a c t For u m Dobson, Stephen: Applying a validity argument model to theree examples of the Viva. Nordisk Pedagogik, Vol. 28, pp. 332–344 Oslo. ISSN 0901-8050.
332
This paper has two goals. On the one hand, to propose and apply a validity argument model for the viva. On the other hand, to provide some empirical insights into the micro-dynamics of vivas as they actually take place in higher education. Three empirical examples from Norwegian higher education will be discussed and compared: undergraduate vivas in travel and tourism, under-graduate vivas in an advanced program in education and master in education vivas. Similarities and differences between these will be identified in order to answer the question: to what extent were the constructs, judgments and other components of the validity model different in content and complexity as the cases progressed from the introductory under-graduate level to the postgraduate level? Keywords: validity · viva · examiner judgments · validation Manuscript received: February 2008 (peer reviewed)
Stephen Dobson, Lillehammer University College, Service box 2626, NO 2601 Lillehammer, Norway. Email:
[email protected]
Applying a validity argument model to three examples of the viva STEPHEN DOBSON
In assessment theory times have changed. Validity as a fixed property (content, concurrent, criterion and predictive) in an assessment has for a number of years been challenged by the view that validity claims rest upon a validation process. Moss, Girard and Haniford (2006) have argued that this validation debate has three corners: a Messick (1989) inspired view of scientific constructs, a more pragmatic view of validity as arguments and a validity chain (Crooks, Kane & Cohen, 1996; Kane, 2006) and lastly an hermeneutic view that validation rests upon interpretations (Moss, 2007). Common to these views, inspired by Messick, is the argument that multiple forms of evidence can and should play a role in the validation process and assertions of validity. But, as Stobart (2006, p. 5) has noted, Messick’s «definition of validity is so all encompassing that it is difficult to know where to get «a hand-hold» and operationalise it. This article attempts such an operationalisation, and central to this is the proposal of a validity argument model. Research on the viva in the early 20th century considered the inter-rater reliability of examiners. The research method-
