Detection of Gender-Related Differential Item Functioning in a Mathematics Performance Assessment

Applied Measurement in Education

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 175-199

  Wang, Ning ^a,b   Lane, Suzanne ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^b Lrng R and D Center   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030539896     PISSN: 08957347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15324818ame0902_6     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Angoff, W. H. (1993). Perspectives on differential item functioning. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 3-23). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
2. Cai, J., Magone, M. E., Wang, N., & Lane, S. (in press). A cognitive analysis of QUASAR'S performance assessments and their sensitivity to measuring changes in middle school students' thinking. Research in Middle Level Education Quarterly.
3. Chang, H., Mazzeo, J., & Roussos, L. (1993, April). Extension of Shealy-Stout's DIF procedures to polytomously scored items. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Atlanta, GA.
4. Doolittle, A. E., & Cleary, T. A. (1987). Gender-based differential item performance in mathematics achievement items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 157-166.
5. 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. 35-66). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
6. Gallagher, A. M., & Lisi, R. D. (1992, April). Gender differences in mathematics problem solving strategies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
7. Harris, A. M, & Carlton, S. T. (1993). Patterns of gender differences on mathematics items on the Scholastic Aptitude Test. Applied Measurement in Education, 6, 137-151.
8. Holland, P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1988). Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In H. Wainer & H. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 129-145). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
9. Hosmer, D. W., & Lemeshow, S. (1989). Applied logistic regression. New York: Wiley.
10. Jackson, C. A. (1992, April). An analysis of factors related to male/female differential item functioning on percent questions on the SAT. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
11. Lane, S. (1993). The conceptual framework for the development of a mathematics performance assessment instrument. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 12(2), 16-23.
12. Lane, S., Liu, M., Ankenmann, R. D., & Stone, C. A. (1996). Generalizability and validity of a mathematics performance assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 1-22.
13. Lane, S., Lui, M., Stone, C. A., & Ankenmann, R. D. (1993, April). Validity evidence for QUASAR'S mathematics performance assessment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.
14. Lane, S., Stone, C. A., Ankenmann, R. D., & Liu, M. (1994). Reliability and validity of a mathematics performance assessment. International Journal of Educational Research, 21, 247-266.
15. Lane, S., Stone, C. A., Ankenmann, R. D., & Liu, M. (1995). Examination of the assumptions and properties of the graded item response model: An example using a mathematics performance assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 8, 313-340.
16. Linn, R. L., Baker, E., & Dunbar, S. B. (1991). Complex performance-based assessment: Expectations and validation criteria. Educational Researcher, 20(8), 15-21.
17. Magone, M. E., Cai, J., Silver, E. A., & Wang, N. (1994). Validating the cognitive complexity and content quality of a mathematics performance assessment. International Journal of Educational Research, 21, 317-340.
18. Mellenbergh, G. J. (1982). Contingency table models for assessing item bias. Journal of Educational Statistics, 7, 105-108.
19. Miller, T. R., & Spray, J. A. (1993). Logistic discriminant function analysis for DIF identification of polytomously scored items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 107-122.
20. Miller, T. R., Spray, J. A., & Wilson, A. (1992, April). A comparison of three methods for identifying nonuniform DIF in polytomously scored test items. Paper presented at the meeting of the Psychometric Society, Columbus, OH.
21. Miller, T. R., & Welch, C. J. (1993, April). Issues and problems in assessing differential item functioning in performance assessments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.
22. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
23. O'Neil, 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: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
24. Silver, E. A. (1993). Quantitative understanding: Amplifying student achievement and reasoning. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh, Learning Research and Development Center.
25. Silver, E. A., & Cai, J. (1993, April). Mathematical problem-posing and problem-solving by middle school students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.
26. Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1990). Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 361-370.
27. Welch, C. J., & Hoover, H. D. (1993). Procedures for extending item bias detection techniques to polytomously scored items. Applied Measurement in Education, 6, 1-19.
28. Wilson, A., Spray, J. A., & Miller, T. R. (1993, April). Logistic regression and its use in detecting nonuniform differential item functioning in polytomous items. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, G A.
29. Zwick, R. (1990) When do item response function and Mantel-Haenszel definitions of differential item functioning coincide? Journal of Educational Statistics, 15, 185-191.
30. Zwick, R. (1994, April). Differential item functioning in new modes of assessment: Opportunities for experimental and methodological research. In A. J. Nitko (Chair), Research directions in educational measurement: The dissertation and beyond. Invited symposium conducted at the meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans, LA.