The effect of language background on "Foreign" language test performance: The case of Chinese, Italian, and modern Greek

Language Learning

Volumn 46, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 233-282

  Elder, Catherine ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030507911     PISSN: 00238333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01236.x     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Adams, R., & Khoo, S. (1994). Quest: The interactive test analysis system. Hawthorn, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.
2. Alderman, D. W., & Holland, P. W. (1981). Item performance across native language groups on the Test of English as a Foreign Language (Research Report No. 81-16). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
3. Baker, C. (1993). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.
4. Baker, C., & Hinde, J. (1984). Language background, classification. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 5, 43-56.
5. Brown, A., Elder, C., Lumley, T., McNamara, T., & McQueen, J. (1992). Mapping abilities and skill levels using Rasch techniques. Melbourne Papers in Language Testing, 1, 28-52
6. Brown, A., & Iwashita, N. (in press). Language background and item difficulty: The development of a computer-adaptive test of Japanese. System, 12.
7. Camilli, G. (1993). The case against item bias detection techniques based on internal criteria: Do item bias procedures obscure test fairness issues? In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 389-397) Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Chen, Z., & Henning, G. (1985). Linguistic and cultural bias in language proficiency tests. Language Testing, 2, 155-163
9. Clarke, J. L. (1987). Curriculum renewal in school foreign language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10. Cole, N. S., & Moss, P. A. (1993). Bias in test use. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 201-219) New York: Macmillan.
11. Davies, A. (1991). The native speaker in applied linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
12. Di Biase, B., Andreoni, G., Andreoni, H., & Dyson, B. (1993). Unlocking Australia's language potential: Profiles of 9 key languages in Australia: Vol. 6. Italian. Parkville, Victoria: National Languages and Literacy Institute of Australia.
13. Dorans, N. J., & Holland, P. W. (1993). DIF detection and description: Mantel-Haenszel and standardization. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 33-66) New Jersey: Erlbaum.
14. Dorans, N. J., Schmitt, A. P., & Curley, W. E. (1988, April). Some items have DIF because of where they are, not what they are. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans, LA.
15. Elder, C. (1994). Classifying VCE LOTE candidates according to language background and learning history: The LOTE information form (Unpublished report to the Victorian Tertiary Admissions Centre). Parkville, Victoria: National Languages and Literacy Institute of Australia, Language Testing Research Centre.
16. Elder, C., & Zammit, S. (1992). Assessing performance in languages other than English: The contribution of the Australian Language Certificates. Vox: The Journal of the Australian Advisory Council on Languages and Multicultural Education, 6, 14-20.
17. Filipi, A. (1994). Interview or interrogation? An analysis of spoken interaction on the Italian V.C.E. oral examination. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
18. Ginther, A. J. (1994). The internal construct validity of the Advanced Placement Spanish Language Examination for groups differing in ethnic and language background. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
19. Holland, P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1985). An alternative definition of the ETS delta scale of item difficulty (Research Rep. No. 85-43). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
20. Holland, P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1988). Differential item functioning and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 129-145) Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
21. Kirkpatrick, A. (1995). Learning Asian languages in Australia: Which languages and when? Babel, 30, 4-11, 26-29.
22. Kok, F. (1992). Differential item functioning. In L. Verhoeven & J. H. A. L. de Jong (Eds.), The construct of language proficiency: Applications of psychological models to language assessment (pp. 115-125). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
23. Kunnan, A. J. (1990). DIF in native language and gender groups in an ESL placement test. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 741-744.
24. McClain, L., & Huang, J. Y. (1982). Speed of simple arithmetic in bilinguals. Memory & Cognition, 10, 591-596.
25. Messick, S. (1993). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd.ed., pp. 13-103). Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.
26. Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. New York: Newbury House.
27. Oltman, P. K., Stricker, L. J., & Barrows, T. (1988). Native language, English proficiency, and the structure of the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL Research Rep. No. 27). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
28. O'Neill, K. A., & McPeek, W. M. (1993). Item and test characteristics that are associated with differential item functioning. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 255-276). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
29. Oscarson, M. (1986). Native and non-native speaker performance on a national test of English for Swedish students: A validation study. Göteborg, Sweden: Göteborg University, Department of Educational Research.
30. Ryan, C., & Bachman, L. (1992). Differential item functioning on two tests of EFL proficiency. Language Testing, 9, 12-29.
31. Scarino, A., Vale, D., McKay, P., & Clarke, J. (1988). Australian language levels guidelines, Books 1-4. Canberra, ACT: Curriculum Development Centre.
32. Schmitt, A. P. & Dorans, N. J. (1990). Differential item functioning for minority examinees on the SAT. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 67-81.
33. Shepard, L. A. (1982). Definitions of bias. In R. A. Berk (Ed.), Handbook of methods for detecting test bias (pp. 9-30). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
34. Smith, D., Chin, N. B., Louie, K., & Mackerras, C. (1993). Unlocking Australia's language potential: Profiles of 9 key languages in Australia: Vol. 2. Chinese. Parkville, Victoria: National Languages and Literacy Institute of Australia.
35. Spurling, S., & Ilyin, D. (1985). The impact of learner variables on language test performance. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 283-301.
36. Swinton, S. S., & Powers, D. E. (1980). Factor analysis of the Test of English as a Foreign Language for several language groups (TOEFL Research Rep. No. 6) Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
37. Tamis, A. M., Gauntlett, S., & Petrou, S. (1993). Unlocking Australia's language potential: Profiles of 9 key languages in Australia: Vol. 8. Modern Greek. Parkville, Victoria: National Languages and Literacy Institute of Australia.
38. Tamamaki, K. (1993). Language dominance in bilinguals' arithmetic operations according to their language use. Language Learning, 43, 239-262.
39. Zwick, R., & Ercikan, K. (1989). Analysis of differential item functioning in the NAEP history assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 55-66.