The target paper, "Rethinking Traditional Methods of Survey Validation" (Andrew Maul), raises some interesting critical ideas, both old and new, about the validation of self-report surveys. As indicated by Dr. Maul, recent policy initiatives in the United States (e.g., ESSA) have led to a demand for assessments of "non-academic" skills that are suitable for applied educational contexts. It seems inevitable that self-report surveys will play a role in meeting this demand, because of their ubiquity and the relatively low bar that has been established for their validation in social science research. It is therefore a good time to take a hard look at self-reports and their validation methodology. The author personally found the empirical studies to be the most interesting part of the paper. Although the examples were contrived, the results were nonetheless surprising and were successful in casting doubt (even more doubt) upon standard research practices associated with self-report surveys. However, the author does not agree with Dr. Maul's interpretation of the implications of the empirical studies. In this commentary, the author shares his opinion on Dr. Maul's article. [For "Rethinking Traditional Methods of Survey Validation," see EJ1156001.]