Abstract
Three analytic approaches were employed within the framework of classical test theory to examine construct validity of a mathematics assessment made up of 16 ordered constructed-response tasks. The tasks focused on problem solving by identifying and explaining mathematical patterns. Descriptive analyses across four age groups suggested a developmental structure of individual tasks and subdomains that was generally consistent with the intended design of the test. Acceptable fit was obtained using structural equation modeling procedures for a five-factor, first-order structure with directional paths specified (RMSEA = .068) and for two second-order factors (RMSEA = .068). Convergent validity coefficients with standardized tests in mathematics computation, concepts of numbers, and applications indicated a modest overlap in constructs across the two assessments (r = .47) with Stanford Achievement Test (SAT) total mathematics scores. Findings are discussed with reference to intended uses of the assessment and its scores in the context of current mathematics education reforms.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.