The role of rasch analysis when conducting science education research utilizing multiple-choice tests

Science Education

Volumn 90, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 253-269

  Boone, William J ^a   Scantlebury, Kathryn ^b  

^a MIAMI UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645675725     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20106     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Andrich, D. (1978). Scaling attitude items constructed and scored in the Likert tradition. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 38, 665-680.
2. Atkin, (1998). The OECD study of innovations in science, mathematics and technology education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 30, 6, 647-666.
3. Australian Council for Educational Research. (1995). Learning project assessment. Author: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
4. Bond, T., & Fox, C. (2001). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
5. Boone, W. (1998). Assumptions, cautions, and solutions in the use of omitted test data to evaluate the achievement of under-represented groups in science-implications for long-term evaluation. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering,4, 183-194.
6. Boone, W., & Donnelly, L. (in review). High stakes science testing. In K. Tobin (Ed.), An encyclopedia of science education. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
7. Byrk, A., Thum, Y., Easton, J., & Luppescu, S. (1998). Academic productivity of Chicago public elementary schools. Technical Report. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
8. Clewell, B., Hannaway, J., Cosentino de Cohen, C., Merryman, A., Mitchell, A., & O'Brian, J. (1995). Systemic reform in mathematics and science education: An urban perspective. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
9. Clune, W., & Webb, N. (1997). An introduction to the papers and think piece themes. In W. Clune, S. Millar, S. Raizen, N. Webb, D. Bowcock, E. Britton, R. Gunter, & R. Mesquita (Eds.), Workshop Report No. 4, Research on systemic reform: What have we learned? What do we need to know? Synthesis of Second Annual NISE Forum Volume 1: Analysis (pp. 6-12). Madison, WI: National Institute for Science Education, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
10. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8. Retrieved on July 8, 2003 from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n1.
11. Deboer, G. (2002). Student-centered teaching in a standards-based world: Finding a sensible balance. Science & Education, 11(4), 405-417.
12. DeSouza, S., Boone, W., & Yilmaz, O. (2004). A study of science teaching self-efficacy and outcome expectancy beliefs of teachers in southern India. Science Education, 88(6), 837-854.
13. Education Week. (2000). Unmet promise: Raising minority achievement. Education Week, 19(27), 1, 18-19.
14. Education Week. (2001). Gaining ground. In Pew Charitable Trusts/ Quality Counts. A better balance: Standards, tests and the tools to succeed (pp. 33-40). Washington, DC: Author.
15. Firestone, W., & Mayrowetz, D. (2000). Rethinking "high stakes": Lesson learning from the United States, and England and Wales. Teachers College Record, 104(4), 724-749.
16. Gregory, K., & Clarke, M. (2003). High stakes assessment in England and Singapore. Theory into Practice, 42(1), 67-74.
17. Goodnough, A. (2001, June 9). School board in new dispute on test scores. New York Times.
18. Kahle, J. B. (1997). Systemic reform: Challenges and changes. Science Educator, 6, 1-6.
19. Kahle, J. B. (1999, February). Discovering about Discovery: The evaluation of Ohio's systemic initiative. Invited address, Fourth Annual NISE Forum: Evaluation of systemic reform in mathematics and science. Washington, DC: National Institute for Science Education.
20. Kahle, J. B. (in press). Systemic reform: Research, vision, and politics. In S. Abell & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21. Kahle, J. B., Meece, J., & Scantlebury, K. (2000). Urban African American middle school science students: Does standards-based teaching make a difference? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 1019-1041.
22. Keeves, J. P., & Alagumalai, S. (1998). Advances in measurement in science education. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin, International handbook of science education (Part 2) (pp. 1229-1244). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
23. Lee, J. (2002). Racial and ethnic achievement gap trends: Reversing the progress toward equity? Educational Researcher, 31(1), 3-12.
24. Linacre, J. M. (2005). Winsteps Rasch analysis software. PO Box 811322, Chicago IL 60681-1322, USA.
25. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform: A report to the Nation and the Secretary of Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
26. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
27. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
28. National Science Foundation. (1998). The National Science Foundation's Statewide Systemic Initiatives (SSI) Program: Models of reform of K-12 science and mathematics education. Washington, DC: Author.
29. O'Day, J. A., & Smith, M. S. (1993). Systemic reform and educational opportunity. In S. H. Furhman (Ed.), Designing coherent education policy (pp. 250-312). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
30. Olson, L. (2001). Overboard on testing? In Pew Charitable Trusts/Education Week Quality Counts, A better balance: Standards, tests and the tools to succeed (pp. 23-30). Washington, DC: Education Week.
31. Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Danmarks Paedagogiske Institut. (Reprinted by the University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1980).
32. Rehfeldt, T. (1990). Measurement and analysis of coatings properties. Journal of Coatings Technology, 62, 53-58.
33. Rentz, R. R., & Bashaw, W. L. (1977). The national reference scale for reading an application of the Rasch model. Journal of Educational Measurement, 14, 161-179.
34. Sadler, P. M. (1999). The relevance of multiple-choice testing in assessing science understanding. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee, & J. D. Novak (Eds.), Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view (pp. 251-278). San Diego, CA: Academic.
35. Scantlebury, K., Boone, W., Fraser, B. J.,& Kahle, J. B.(2001). Design of an evaluation tool to measure long-term, systemic reform in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 646-662.
36. Thurstone, L. L. (1928). Attitudes can be measured. American Journal of Sociology, 33, 529-554.
37. U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Deputy Secretary. (2004). No child left behind: A toolkit for teachers. Washington DC: Author.
38. Wright, B. D., & Masters, G. N. (1982). Rating scale analysis. Chicago: MESA Press/University of Chicago.
39. Wright, B. D., & Stone, M. H. (1979). Best test design. Chicago: MESA Press/University of Chicago.