GENDER EQUITY IN TESTING AND ASSESSMENT

Handbook for Achieving Gender Equity through Education, Second Edition

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 155-169

  Reed, Dianne ^a   Fox, Lynn H ^b   Andrews, Mary Lou ^c   Betz, Nancy ^d   Evenstad, Jan Perry ^e   Harris, Anthony ^a   Hightower Parker, Carol ^a   Johnson, Judy A ^f   Johnson, Shirley ^a   Polnick, Barbara ^a   Rosser, Phyllis ^g  

^a SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b AMERICAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON   (United States)

^d OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e Department of Environmental Radiological Health Sciences   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT LITTLE ROCK   (United States)

^g The Equality in Testing Project   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77953229935     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781315759586-18     Document Type: Chapter

References (78)

1. Alaimo, K. (2004). New SAT could shrink test’s gender gap. WeNews. Retrieved March 21, 2005, from http://www.womensnews.org
2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC.
3. Aronson, J., Lustina, M. J., Good, C., Keough, K., Steele, C. M., and Brown, J. (1999). When White men can’t do mathematics: Necessary and sufficient factors in stereotype threat. Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 35, 29-46.
4. Begley, S. (2000). The stereotype trap. Newsweek, 66-68.
5. Belcher, T., Coates, G. D., Franco, J., and Mayfield-Ingram, K. (1997). Assessment and equity. In Multicultural and gender equity in mathematics classrooms: The gift of diversity NCTM yearbook (pp. 195-200). Reston VA: NCTM.
6. Benjamin-Kelly, K. (2000). The young women’s guide to better SAT scores: Fighting the gender gap. New York, NY: Bantam Books.
7. Betz, N. (1993). Women’s career development. In F. L. Denmark and M. A. Paludi (Eds.), Psychology of women: A handbook of issues and theories (pp. 625-684). Westport, CT: Greenwood.
8. Betz, N. E. (2005). Measuring confidence for basic domains of vocational activity in high school students. Journal of Career Assessment, 13(3), 251-270.
9. Betz, N. E., and Fitzgerald, L. (1987). Career psychology of women. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
10. Betz, N. E., and Hackett, G. (1983). The relationship of mathematics selfefficacy expectations to the selection of science-based college majors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 23, 329-345.
11. Bickel, R., and Maynard, A. S. (2004). Group and interaction effects with No Child Left Behind: Gender and reading in a poor, Appalachian district. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(4). Retrieved March 21, 2005, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v12n4/
12. Bradford, W., Noble, C., and Wragg, T. (2000). Getting it right for boys- and girls. London: Routledge.
13. Black, P., and Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and Classroom Learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7-71.
14. Bridgeman, B., and Schmitt, A. (1997). Fairness issues in test development and administration. In W. W. Willingham and N. S. Cole (Eds.), Gender and fair assessment (pp. 185-226). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15. Buck, G., Kostin, I., and Morgan, R. (2002). Examining the relationship of content to gender based performance differences in advanced placement exams. NY: College Entrance Examination Board.
16. Campbell, D. P. (2000). Campbell interest and skills survey. NCS Pearson, Inc.
17. Campbell, D. P., and Hansen, J. C. (1981). Manual for the SVIB-SCII (3rd ed.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
18. Carlton, S. T., and Harris, A. M. (1992). Characteristics associated with differential item functioning on the Scholastic Aptitude Test: Gender and majority/minority group comparisons. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
19. Chilisa, B. (2000). Towards equity in assessment: Crafting gender-fair assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, and Practice, 7(l), 61-81.
20. Code of fair testing practices in education. (2004). Washington DC:Joint Committee on Testing Practices. Retrieved May 21, 2006, from http://www.apa.org/science/jctpweb.html
21. College Board. (1985). Taking the SAT: The official guide to the scholastic aptitude test and test of standard written English. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
22. College Board. (2004). College Bound Seniors. Retrieved March 30, 2005, from http://www.collegeboard.org
23. College Board. (2006). College Board Announces Scores for New SAT® with writing section (Press Release 08/29/06). Retrieved October 1, 2006, from http://www.collegeboard.com/press/releases/150054.html
24. Connell, R. W. (1993). Disruptions: Improper masculinities and schooling. In L. Weis and M. Fine (Eds.), Beyond silenced voices: Class, race, and gender in United States school (pp. 191-209). New York: State University of New York Press.
25. Croizet, J. C., and Claire, T. (1998). Extending the concept of stereotype threat to social class: The intellectual underperformance of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 588-594.
26. Dawis, R. V. (1996). The theory of work adjustment and personenvironment correspondence counseling. In D. Brown and L. Brooks (Eds.), Career choice and development (3rd ed., pp. 75-120). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
27. deNuys, M., and Wolfe, L. R. (1985). Learning her place-Sex bias in the elementary school classroom. Washington, DC: Project on Equal Education Rights.
28. Diamond, E., and Tittle, C. K. (1985). Sex equity in testing. In S. S. Klein (Ed.), Handbook for achieving sex equity through education. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.
29. Donlon, T. (1973). Content factors in sex differences on test questions. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
30. Dorans, N., and Kulick, E. (1983). Demonstrating unexpected differential item performance of female candidates on SAT and TSWE forms administered in December 1977: An application of the standardization approach (Research Report No. RR-83-9). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
31. Dorans, N., and Kulick, E. (1986). Demonstrating the utility of the standardization approach to assessing unexpected differential item performance on the Scholastic Aptitude Test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 23, 355-368.
32. Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia: Taylor and Francis/Psychology Press.
33. Dweck, C. S. (2002). Messages that motivate: How praise molds students’ beliefs, motivation, and performance (in surprising ways). In J. Aronson (Ed.), Improving academic achievement: Classic and contemporary lessons from psychology. New York: Academic Press.
34. Elgar, F. J., Curtis, L. J., McGrath, P. J., Waschbusch, D. A., and Stewart, S. H. (2003). Antecedent-consequence conditions in maternal mood and child behavioural problems: A four-year cross-lagged study. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescen Psychology, 32, 362-374.
35. Faigel, H. C. (1991). The effect of beta blockade on stress-induced cognitive dysfunction in adolescents. Clinical Pediatrics, 30, 441-445.
36. Gilligan, C., and Attanucci, J. (1988). Two moral orientations: Gender differences and similarities. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 34, 223-237.
37. Gipps, C. (1994). Beyond testing: Towards a new theory of educational assessment. London: The Fulmer Press.
38. Gottfredson, G. D., and Holland, J. L. (1978). Toward beneficial resolution of the interest inventory controversy. In C. K. Tittle and D. G. Zytowski (Eds.), Sex-fair interest measurement: Research and implications (pp. 43-51). Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.
39. Grandy, J. (1999). Trends and profiles: Statistics about GRE general test examinees by gender, age, and ethnicity (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ:Educational Testing Service.
40. Hansen, J. C. (1984). The measurement of vocational interests: Issues and future directions. S. D. Brown and R. L. Lent (Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (pp. 99-136). New York, NY: Wiley.
41. Harmon, L., Hansen, J. I., Borgen, F., and Hammer, A. (1994). Strong interest inventory: Applications and technical manual. Palo Alto, CA:Consulting Psychologists Press.
42. Hartung, C. M., and Widiger, T. A. (1998). Gender differences in the diagnosis of mental disorders: Conclusions and controversies of the DSM-IV. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 260-278.
43. Hunter, J., and Schmidt, F. L. (2000). Racial and gender bias in ability and achievement tests: Resolving the apparent paradox. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6(1), 151-158.
44. Koontz, T. (1997). Know thyself: The evolution of an intervention gender- equity program. In Multicultural and gender equity in the mathematics classroom: The gift of diversity yearbook (pp. 186-194). Reston VA: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Inc.
45. Koretz, D., Stecher, B., Klein, S., and McCaffrey. (1994). The Vermont portfolio assessment program: Findings and implications. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 13(3), 5-16.
46. Kuder, F., and Zytowski, D. G. (1991). Kuder occupational interest survey, general manual (3rd ed.). Adel, IA: National Career Assessment Services, Inc.
47. Lamb, R. R., and Prediger, D. J. (1981). Technical report for the unisex edition of the ACT interest inventory (UNIACT). Iowa City, IA: American College Testing Program.
48. Lahey, B. B., Miller, T. I., Gordon, R. A., and Riley, A. W. (1999). Developmental epidemiology of the disruptive behavior disorders. In H. C. Quay and A. E. Hogan (Eds.), Handbook of disruptive behavior disorders (pp. 23-48). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
49. Lee, J. (2006). Title IX infractions: Individuals’ legal options and winning cases. Paper prepared for the Education Equality web page of the Feminist Majority Foundation www.feminist.org/education.
50. Leo, J. (1992). Sexism in the schoolhouse. U.S. News and World Report, 112(9), 22-26.
51. Linn, M. C., and Kessel, C. (1996). Success in mathematics: Increasing talent and gender diversity among college majors. CBMS Issues in Mathematics Education, 6, 101-144.
52. Lunnenborg, P. W. (1980). Reducing sex bias in interest measurement at the item level. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 16, 226-234.
53. Merriam-Webster’s collegiate dictionary (10th ed., pp. 33 and 112). (2001). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.
54. Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13-103). New York: Macmillan.
55. Mortenson, T. (2005, February). What’s still wrong with the guys? Postsecondary Education Opportunity, 152(whole issue).
56. Nandakumar, R., Glutting, J., and Oakland, T. (1993). Mantel-Haenszel methodology for detecting item bias: An introduction and example using the guide to the assessment of test session behavior. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 11(2), 108-119.
57. National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). The nation’s report card: Mathematics highlights 2003. Retrieved March 21, 2005, from http://www.nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/mathematics/results2003/natscalescore.asp
58. National Center for Fair and Open Testing. (2004). New SAT: High anxiety, little change. Fair Test Examiner, 18(1and2; Spring-Summer).
59. Perry Evenstad, J. (2003). Disaggregating Colorado student assessment program data: Implications for predicting educational equity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Denver, Denver, CO.
60. Prediger, D. J. (1980). The marriage between tests and career counseling. Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 28(6), 217-305.
61. Public Law 107-110, 115 U.S.C. § 1425 (2002).
62. Rosser, P. (1989a). The SAT gender gap: Identifying the causes. Washington, DC: Center for Women Policy Studies.
63. Rosser, P. (1989b). Gender and testing. Boston, MA: National Center for Testing and Public Policy.
64. Rosser, P. and Staff of the National Center for Fair and Open Testing. (1989c). Sex bias in college admissions tests: Why women lose out (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: National Center for Fair and Open Testing.
65. Sadker, M., and Sadker, D. (1985, March). Sexism in the schoolroom of the '80s. Psychology Today, 54-57.
66. Sadker, M., and Sadker, D. (1994). Failing at fairness: How America’s schools cheat girls. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 951-961.
67. Spencer, R., Porche, M., and Tolman, D. (2003). We’ve come a long way- maybe: New challenges for gender equity in education. Teachers College Record, 105(9), 1774-1807.
68. Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., and Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s mathematics performance. Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 35, 4-28.
69. Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613-629.
70. Steele, C. M. (2004). Not just a test. The Nation, 1-4.
71. Steele, C. M., and Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797-811.
72. Thompson, A., and Gitlin, A. (1993, April). The reconstruction of knowledge in feminist praxis and action research. Presentation at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.
73. Tolman, D. L., and Porche, M. V. (2000). The adolescent femininity ideology scale: Development and validation of a new measure for girls. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24(4), 365-376.
74. Walton, C. D. (1996). The effect of gender on school psychologists’ diagnosis of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and social Sciences, 57(3-A), 1036.
75. Wendler, C. L. W., and Carlton, S. T. (1987). An examination of SAT verbal items for differential performance by women and men: An exploratory study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.
76. Wilder, G. Z., and Powell, K. (1989). Sex differences in test performance: A survey of the literature. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
77. Willingham, W. W., Cole, N. S., Lewis, C., and Leung, S. W. (1997). Test performance. In W. W. Willingham and N. S. Cole (Eds.), Gender and fair assessment (pp. 55-126). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
78. Zenisky, A., Hambleton, R., and Robin, F. (2003-2004). DIF detection and interpretation in large scale science assessments: Informing item writing practices. Educational Assessment, 9(1and2), 61-78.