conceptualization of validity, retained the importance of content domain representation.”
35
In addition, based on Hughes, there are two importance things of content validity. First,
“the grater test’s content validity, the more likely it is to be an accurate measure of what it is supposed to measure. Secondly, a test is likely to
have a harmful backwash effect. Areas which are not tested are likely become areas ignored in teaching and learning. The best content is a fair reflection of
these ”.
36
To sum up, the writer assumes that a content validity measures how well the subject matter covered in a test and it can be analyzed by using the checklist
table for measuring the conformity between the tests content with what should be measured, such as: the indicators in syllabus.
2. Criterion Validity
Criterion validity of a test is a relationship or a correlation between the test scores and scores on some measures which represent an identified criterion.
37
Similarly, Gronlund says “Criterion validity may be defined as the extent to which the performance is related to some other valued measure of
performance”.
38
Besides, whenever the test scores are to be used to predict future performance or to estimate current performance on some valued measure
other than the test itself, it is called criterion validity. There are two kinds of criterion validity, such as: Concurrent validity it
applies if data on the two measures- test and criterion are collected at or about the same time and if the test scores can estimate a specified present
performance
39
and Predictive validity it applies if there is an intervention
35
Ibid., p. 100.
36
Hughes, op.cit., p. 27.
37
Wiersma and Jurs, op.cit., p. 189.
38
Gronlund, op.cit., p. 72.
39
Wiersma and Jurs, op.cit., p. 189-190.
period between the time of testing and the collection of data on the criteria and if the test scores can predict a specified future performance.
40
Thus, criterion validity is a validity which compares a measurement with some objective standard and it has also two types, such as: concurrent validity
and predictive validity which has own meaning.
3. Face Validity
Face validity is closely related to a surface or appearance of test. As Alderson et al., says that face validity refers to the credibility or public
acceptability of the test surface.
41
Moreover, Heaton defines “If a test item looks right to other testers, teachers, moderators, and testers, it can be
described as having at least face validit y”.
42
From the definition above, the writers assumes that face validity means the test appearance which is readable, acceptable, and appropriate with what
supposed to test.
4. Construct Validity
Hopkins and Antes says “Construct validity is an indication of the relationship between what a theory predicts and what test scores how”.
43
As Heaton also states, “If the test has construct validity it is capable of measuring
certain specific characteristics in accordance with a theory of language and behavior and lea
rning”.
44
This type of validity assumes the existence of certain learning theories or constructs underlying the acquisition of abilities and skills.
40
Ibid.,
41
J. Charles Alderson, Caroline Clapham, and Diane Wall, Language Test Construction and Evaluation, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995, p. 172.
42
J. B Heaton, Writing English Language Tests, New York: Longman Group UK Limited, 1988, New Edition
,
p. 159.
43
Charles D. Hopkins and Richard L. Antes, Classroom Measurement and Evaluation, Illinois: F.E. Peacock Publishers, Inc, 1990, 3
rd
Edition, p.331.
44
Heaton, op.cit., p. 161.
