Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Effective assessment of students’ mathematical problem solving requires that instruments produce valid results for the uses specified. The purpose of this study was to examine validity claims and associated evidence for the vertically equated Problem-Solving Measures (PSMs) in grades 3–5 (PSM3-5; PSM3, PSM4, and PSM5). This study draws from methodological approaches used in prior validation work with the PSMs for grades 6–8 (i.e. PSM6-8; PSM6. PSM7, and PSM8). The PSM6-8 functions as a vertically equated test, which is how PSM3-5 has also been constructed and analyzed. Results from this validation study leveraging both quantitative and qualitative methods demonstrated robust validity evidence in terms of test content, internal structure, relationship to other variables, consequences from testing/bias, and reliability for the vertically equated PSM3-5. It builds upon prior research framing the response process validity evidence and claims. Ultimately, the claims that stem from validity evidence in the present study communicate that PSM3-5 assessments are well suited for the purpose of research, evaluation, and school-based needs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bostic et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: