Considering consequences in the evaluation of validity is not new although it is still debated by Paul E. Newton and others. The argument-based approach to validity entails an interpretative argument that explicitly identifies the proposed interpretations and uses of test scores and a validity argument that provides a structure for evaluating the interpretative argument (Kane, 2006). As Kane (2006) indicates, the interpretative argument "specifies the proposed interpretations and uses of test results by laying out a chain or network of inferences and assumptions leading from the observed performances to the conclusions and decisions based on the performances". The validity argument evaluates the interpretative argument's coherency, reasonableness of its inferences, and the plausibility of its assumptions. The impetus for current assessment and accountability systems is to improve the educational opportunities afforded to students to enhance their learning, and, therefore, integral to validity evaluation of these systems is the appraisal of test-based decisions in terms of their consequences. The values inherent in these systems need to be made explicit, and consequences of decisions made based on test scores must be evaluated.