Haertel's argument is that one must "expand the scope of test validation to include indirect testing effects" because these effects are often the "rationale for the entire testing program." The author strongly agrees that this is essential. However, he maintains that Haertel's argument does not go far enough and that there are two additional reasons why this is essential. The first is that regardless of the rationale for testing programs, research has shown that current testing programs have powerful effects on schooling, and one has an ethical responsibility to evaluate these effects, particularly as they affect children. The second, which is the focus of this commentary, is that failing to evaluate the effects of testing can undermine the narrower core of validation, that is, determining the extent to which inferences based on scores are accurate and justified.