Abstract
Abstract
Background
Truman Lee Kelley helped reorient educational assessment towards validity, with contemporary validity theories positioning validity in the interpretations and decisions made from assessment scores. Despite these advances, Indigenous principles remain largely absent from contemporary validity theory in health professions education.
Objective
We propose a new approach to assessment validation relevant to a Māori‐centred conceptualisation of validity that integrates measurement theory with tika (appropriateness), pono (integrity) and mana (consequences), underpinned by whanaungatanga (relationship), whakapapa (contextual history) and mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge).
Methods
Using a Māori‐centred qualitative narrative inquiry grounded in wānanga (collective discussion), Māori and Pacific health professions educators met to discuss how cultural identity shaped our teaching practice and approaches to assessment. These kōrero (discussions) were guided by tikanga‐based (Māori cultural practices) protocols, recorded, transcribed and thematically organised under the principles that emerged through these discussions: tika, pono and mana.
Results
Three interconnected principles emerged. Tika was concerned with the appropriateness of assessment tasks and criteria in relation to their purpose and context; pono emphasised authentic and trustworthy interpretation through collective judgement, culturally safe moderation and equitable assessment practices, and mana highlighted the dignity, authority and relational responsibility of assessment decisions for learners, whānau (family) and communities, including tensions with institutional policy.
Framework
We extend Kane's argument‐based model by embedding Māori‐centred Pou (pillars grounded in Māori values) as warrants (justifications) and incorporating relational accountability and community legitimacy as additional lenses through which validity claims are scrutinised. This conceptual framework proposes that assessment design should define constructs through Māori values and priorities, interpretation should include evidence of cultural safety and equity and governance should support Māori authority through Te Tiriti o Waitangi‐aligned co‐leadership and data sovereignty.
Conclusion
A Māori‐centred conceptualisation of validity reframes defensibility as relational, ethical and technical, recognising Māori authority, community legitimacy and accountability to learners, whānau and communities in assessment validation while aligning assessment with Te Tiriti o Waitangi and Indigenous aspirations.