[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-596087-105":59,"doc-detail-596087-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","investigating-the-alignment-between-the-celpip-general-reading-test-and-the-canadian-language-benchmarks-a-content-validation-study-596087","Investigating the Alignment Between the CELPIP-General Reading Test and the Canadian Language Benchmarks - A Content Validation Study","","Seeking evidence to support content validity is essential to test validation, particularly when scores are interpreted against external proficiency standards and when test content is continually updated for administration and security. The paper presents a modified scale-anchoring approach to evaluate alignment between CELPIP-General and the CLB proficiency framework. It explains how proficiency frameworks can underpin content validation for large-scale standardized tests and discusses benefits and challenges of using the CLB in high-stakes language assessment.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/investigating-the-alignment-between-the-celpip-general-reading-test-and-the-canadian-language-benchmarks-a-content-validation-study-596087/596087/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/investigating-the-alignment-between-the-celpip-general-reading-test-and-the-canadian-language-benchmarks-a-content-validation-study-596087/596087.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Anna Hans","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-29","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":19},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"Why is content validity evidence important in language test validation?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"Content validity evidence is essential when scores are interpreted using external proficiency standards and when test content is continually updated. It supports trustworthy interpretations of what the test measures.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How does the study evaluate alignment between CELPIP-General and CLB?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The study uses a modified scale-anchoring approach combining quantitative anchor item selection with qualitative expert judgments. Anchor items are mapped to CLB levels to assess alignment with performance standards.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What challenges arise when using the CLB in high-stakes validation projects?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"The paper discusses challenges related to relying on expert judgment when mapping test content to CLB levels. It also highlights practical considerations in sustaining validity evidence across large-scale contexts.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},596087,1792419858,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":19,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":56,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},5909892332657,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_994ba38a5ba835b3df7d355c54d3ed8d","Investigating the Alignment Between the CELPIP-General Reading Test and the Canadian Language Benchmarks: A Content Validation  \nStudy  \nMichelle Y. Chen  \nParagon Testing Enterprises  \nJennifer J. Flasko  \nParagon Testing Enterprises  \nAbstract  \nSeeking evidence to support content validity is essential to test validation. This is especially the case in contexts where test scores are interpreted in relation to external proficiency standards and where new test content is constantly being produced to meet test administration and security demands. In this paper, we describe a modified scaleanchoring approach to assessing the alignment between the Canadian English Language Proficiency Index Program (CELPIP) test and the Canadian Language Benchmarks (CLB), the proficiency framework to which the test scores are linked. We discuss how proficiency frameworks such as the CLB can be used to support the content validation of large-scale standardized tests through an evaluation of the alignment between the test content and the performance standards. By sharing both the positive implications and challenges of working with the CLB in high-stakes language test validation, we hope to help raise the profile of this national language framework among scholars and practitioners.  \nRésumé  \nLa recherche sur la validité du contenu est essentielle à la validation des tests. Cette recherche est encore plus importante dans les contextes où les résultats des tests sont interprétés par rapport à des normes de compétence externes et dont le contenu du test est constamment révisé pour répondre aux exigences de l'administration et de la sécurité du test. Dans cet article, nous décrivons une approche d'ancrage d'échelle modifiée pour évaluer l’alignement entre le test du Canadian English Language Proficiency Index Program (CELPIP) et les Canadian Lagunage Benchmarks (CLB), le cadre decompétence linguistique auquel les résultats du test sont liés. Nous discutons comment les cadres de compétence tels que le CLB peuvent être utilisés pour soutenir la validation du contenu des tests standardisés à grandes échelles grâce à l’évaluation de l'alignement entre le contenu du test et les normes de performance. Nous évaluons les forces et les défis de l’utilisation du CLB comme outil de validation des tests linguistiques à enjeux élevés et ce faisant nous espérons contribuer à relever le profil de ce cadre linguistique national auprès des universitaires et des praticiens.  \nCanadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, Special Issue: 23, 2 (2020): 1-19  \nCJAL * RCLA Chen & Flasko 2  \nInvestigating the Alignment Between the CELIPIP-General Reading Test and the Canadian Language Benchmarks: A Content Validation Study  \nTest scores alone are insufficient in supporting test users to make meaningful decisions about test takers. They can also leave test takers insufficiently informed of their own proficiency levels and abilities. Aligning a test to an external proficiency framework links the test scores to a set of language criteria, lending greater meaning to the scores (Kane, 2012) and allowing scores from different tests to be indirectly compared. As a result, the past decade has seen an emerging interest in test alignment (Brunfaut & Harding, 2014; Papageorgiou et al., 2015; Tannenbaum & Wylie, 2004, 2008) . Importantly, the relationship between the test and the proficiency framework isnot an observable fact, but an assertion for which we, as test developers and researchers, must continuously provide evidence.  \nThe present study uses a variation of the scale anchoring method to evaluate the content validity of the high-stakes, large-scale test, the Canadian English Language Proficiency Index Program (CELPIP)-General, the scores of which are linked to the Canadian Language Benchmarks (CLB) . This approach uses a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods in which the former selects anchor items that are most discriminating between adjacent score bands and the latte","cbCait73glTgYTan","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCait73glTgYTan","pdf",387134,"English","# Abstract\n# Test scores and the need for alignment\n# Method: modified scale anchoring\n# The CELPIP-General test\n# The Canadian Language Benchmarks (CLB)","[{\"question\":\"Why is content validity evidence important in language test validation?\",\"answer\":\"Content validity evidence is essential when scores are interpreted using external proficiency standards and when test content is continually updated. It supports trustworthy interpretations of what the test measures.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the study evaluate alignment between CELPIP-General and CLB?\",\"answer\":\"The study uses a modified scale-anchoring approach combining quantitative anchor item selection with qualitative expert judgments. Anchor items are mapped to CLB levels to assess alignment with performance standards.\"},{\"question\":\"What challenges arise when using the CLB in high-stakes validation projects?\",\"answer\":\"The paper discusses challenges related to relying on expert judgment when mapping test content to CLB levels. It also highlights practical considerations in sustaining validity evidence across large-scale contexts.\"}]","Investigating the Alignment Between the CELPIP-General Reading Test and the Canadian Language Benchmarks - A Content Validation Study | PDF",1792082415,48]