TITLE:
Analysis of Threats to Validity in the Competitive Product Development Module: A Case Study
AUTHORS:
Moamer Gashoot, Tahani Mohamed, Bob Eves, Tim Reynolds
KEYWORDS:
Assessment, Validity, Design, Engineering, Higher Education
JOURNAL NAME:
Art and Design Review,
Vol.13 No.4,
October
30,
2025
ABSTRACT: This study, conducted as part of the University of Cambridge MEd program at the College of Education, examines threats to validity in assessment practices within design and engineering education through a case study of the Competitive Product Development (CPD) module. Grounded in Messick’s (1996) construct validity framework and Crooks et al.’ (1996) chain model, the research identifies critical weaknesses in assessment design, communication, and scoring processes. Data derived from student feedback and module evaluation reveal that unclear task communication, misalignment between intended learning outcomes (ILOs) and marking criteria, and overly holistic scoring methods undermine assessment validity. To address these issues, the study proposes targeted strategies, including clearer task instructions, analytical scoring rubrics, transparent marking weights, and stronger alignment of assessment criteria with learning objectives. The revised assessment framework incorporates detailed rubrics and analytic marking approaches to capture essential qualities of task performance while enhancing fairness and consistency. Findings highlight that improving assessment validity not only strengthens the reliability and credibility of academic evaluation but also supports student engagement, motivation, and learning outcomes. The paper concludes with recommendations for integrating validity-focused assessment design into institutional policy and professional practice within higher education.