Interpretation and Use Statements for Instruments in Mathematics Education

View More View Less
  • 1 Boise State University, ID
  • | 2 Bowling Green State University, OH
  • | 3 North Carolina State University
  • | 4 University of Nevada–Las Vegas

This Research Commentary addresses the need for an instrument abstract—termed an Interpretation and Use Statement (IUS)—to be included when mathematics educators present instruments for use by others in journal articles and other communication venues (e.g., websites and administration manuals). We begin with presenting the need for IUSs, including the importance of a focus on interpretation and use. We then propose a set of elements—identified by a group of mathematics education researchers, instrument developers, and psychometricians—to be included in the IUS. We describe the development process, the recommended elements for inclusion, and two example IUSs. Last, we present why IUSs have the potential to benefit end users and the field of mathematics education.

Notes

This work was supported by Grants No. 1644314, 1644321, 1920619, and 1920621 from the National Science Foundation. Any opinions expressed in this manuscript are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. The second through fourth authors contributed to this work equally and are listed in alphabetical order.

Contributor Notes

Michele B. Carney, Department of Curriculum, Instruction, and Foundational Studies, Boise State University, 1910 University Dr., Boise, ID 83725; michelecarney@boisestate.edu

Jonathan Bostic, School of Teaching and Learning, Bowling Green State University, 529 Education Building, Bowling Green, OH 43403; bosticj@bgsu.edu

Erin Krupa, Department of STEM Education, North Carolina State University, Campus Box 7801, Raleigh, NC 27695; eekrupa@ncsu.edu

Jeff Shih, Department of Teaching and Learning, University of Nevada–Las Vegas, CEB 358, Las Vegas, NV 89154; jshih@unlv.nevada.edu

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education
  • American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. https://www.testingstandards.net/uploads/7/6/6/4/76643089/ standards_2014edition.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Barker, B. S., & Ansorge, J. (2007). Robotics as means to increase achievement scores in an informal learning environment. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(3), 229243. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2007.10782481

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bostic, J. D., Krupa, E. E., Carney, M. B., & Shih, J. C. (2019). Reflecting on the past and looking ahead at opportunities in quantitative measurement of K–12 students’ content knowledge. In J. D. Bostic, E. E. Krupa, & J. C. Shih (Eds.), Quantitative measures of mathematical knowledge: Researching instruments and perspectives (pp. 205229). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429486197-9

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bostic, J., Lesseig, K., Sherman, M., & Boston, M. (2021). Classroom observation and mathematics education research. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 24(1), 531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-019-09445-0

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bostic, J. D., & Matney, G. (2016). Leveraging modeling with mathematics-focused instruction to promote other Standards for Mathematical Practice. Journal of Mathematics Education Leadership, 17(2), 2133.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bostic, J., Matney, G., & Sondergeld, T. (2017). (Re)considering teachers’ promotion of the Standards for Mathematical Practice. In T. A. Olson & L. Venenciano (Eds.), Proceedings for the 44th annual meeting of the Research Council on Mathematics Learning (pp. 18). Research Council on Mathematics Learning.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bostic, J. D., Matney, G. T., & Sondergeld, T. A. (2019). A validation process for observation protocols: Using the Revised SMPs Look-for Protocol as a lens on teachers’ promotion of the standards. Investigations in Mathematics Learning, 11(1), 6982. https://doi.org/10.1080/19477503.2017.1379894

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Carlson, J. F., Geisinger, K. F., & Jonson, J. L. (Eds.). (2017). The twentieth mental measurements yearbook. University of Nebraska Press.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Carney, M., Crawford, A., Siebert, C., Osguthorpe, R., & Thiede, K. (2019). Comparison of two approaches to interpretive use arguments. Applied Measurement in Education, 32(1), 1022. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2018.1544138

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Carney, M. B., & Smith, E. (2017, September 12–14). Using instrument development processes to iteratively improve construct maps: An example in proportional reasoning [Paper presentation]. National Council on Measurement in Education first special conference on classroom assessment, Lawrence, KS, United States.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cizek, G. J., Bowen, D., & Church, K. (2010). Sources of validity evidence for educational and psychological tests: A follow-up study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70(5), 732743. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164410379323

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cizek, G. J., Rosenberg, S. L., & Koons, H. H. (2008). Sources of validity evidence for educational and psychological tests. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68(3), 397412. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164407310130

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Fennell, F., Wray, J., & Kobett, B. M. (2013, January 24–26). Using look for’s to consider the Common Core content standards and Standards for Mathematical Practice [Paper presentation]. Seventeenth annual meeting of the Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators, Orlando, FL, United States.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hill, H. C., & Shih, J. C. (2009). Examining the quality of statistical mathematics education research. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40(3), 241250. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.40.3.0241

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kane, M. T. (2013). Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50(1), 173. https://doi.org/10.1111/jedm.12000

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lobato, J., & Ellis, A. B. (2010). Developing essential understanding of ratios, proportions, and proportional reasoning for teaching mathematics: Grades 6–8. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Minner, D., Erickson, E., Wu, S., & Martinez, A. (2013). Compendium of research instruments for STEM education: Part 2. Measuring students’ content knowledge, reasoning skills, and psychological attributes. Community for Advancing Discovery Research in Education. http://www.cadrek12.org/sites/default/files/Student%20Compendium%20of%20STEM%20instruments%20Part%202%20with%20Addendum_May%202013.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. http://www.corestandards.org.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Plake, B. S., & Wise, L. L. (2014). What is the role and importance of the revised AERA, APA, NCME Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing? Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 33(4), 412. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12045

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Shepard, L. A. (2018). Learning progressions as tools for assessment and learning. Applied Measurement in Education, 31(2), 165174. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2017.1408628

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sztajn, P. (2011). Standards for reporting mathematics professional development in research studies. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42(3), 220236. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.42.3.0220

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Validity Evidence for Measurement in Mathematics Education. (n.d.). February 2020 Las Vegas V-M2ED Conference. https://sites.ced.ncsu.edu/mathedmeasures/conference/february-2020-las-vegas-conference/

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wolming, S., & Wikström, C. (2010). The concept of validity in theory and practice. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17(2), 117132. https://doi.org/10.1080/09695941003693856

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 3 3 0
Full Text Views 10 10 0
PDF Downloads 11 11 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0