Though the concept of validity is rooted in positivism, recent scholars have expanded the definition of validity to reflect more progressive paradigms, opening the door to consideration of validity in qualitative education research. Despite this evolution, to date a review of validity evidence in qualitative research has yet to be undertaken even though products offering recommendations for using validity or validity analogs (e.g., trustworthiness) in qualitative work has accelerated. In this chapter, I provide an overview of the history of validity in qualitative research and give an assessment of the use of validity evidence as presented in qualitative articles published in a high-impact journal. I use the results of this assessment to highlight validity practices that are well-represented in the research as well as those that are underrepresented, offering recommendations for how researchers can support the presentation of their work through reflection on these underrepresented elements. Additionally, I forward suggestions as to how qualitative researchers may approach using validity frameworks in planning their studies. Implications for qualitative and quantitative researchers are also discussed, along with suggestions for future work in exploring the use of validity in qualitative education research.

尽管有效性的概念扎根于实证主义，但最近学者们扩大了有效性的定义，以反映更多的进步范式，从而为定性教育研究中考虑有效性打开了大门。尽管有这种发展，但迄今为止，尽管提供有关在定性工作中使用有效性或有效性类似物（例如，可信赖性）的建议的产品仍未进行定性研究中的有效性证据审查。在本章中，我概述了定性研究中有效性的历史，并评估了有效性证据的使用，如在高影响力期刊上发表的定性文章中所述。我使用评估的结果来突出显示在研究中以及在代表性不足的有效性实践中，为研究人员如何通过对这些代表性不足的要素进行反思提供支持，以提供建议。另外，我提出了有关定性研究人员在计划研究中如何使用有效性框架的建议。还讨论了对定性和定量研究人员的影响，以及对今后探索在定性教育研究中使用效度的建议。我提出有关定性研究人员在计划研究中如何使用有效性框架的建议。还讨论了对定性和定量研究人员的影响，以及对今后探索在定性教育研究中使用效度的建议。我提出有关定性研究人员在计划研究中如何使用有效性框架的建议。还讨论了对定性和定量研究人员的影响，以及对今后探索在定性教育研究中使用效度的建议。