First language of test takers and fairness assessment procedures

Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 25-35

  Sinharay, Sandip ^a   Dorans, Neil J ^a   Liang, Longjuan ^a  

^a EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

DIF; Equating; Mantel Haenszel; Score equity assessment

Indexed keywords

EID: 79959343420     PISSN: 07311745     EISSN: 17453992     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.2011.00202.x     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Abedi, J. (2002). Standardized achievement tests and English language learners: Psychometric issues. Educational Assessment, 8, 231-257.
2. Abedi, J., & Lord, C. (2001). The language factors in mathematics tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 14, 219-234.
3. Ackerman, T. A. (1992). A didactic explanation of item bias, item impact, and item validity from a multidimensional perspective. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29, 67-91.
4. Dorans, N. J. (2004). Using subpopulation invariance to assess test score equity. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41, 43-48.
5. Dorans, N. J. (2008, March). Three facets of fairness. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New York, NY .
6. Dorans, N. J., & 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.
7. Dorans, N. J., & Liu, J. (2009). Score equity assessment: Development of a prototype analysis using SAT Mathematics test data across several administrations (ETS Research Report No. RR-09-08). Princeton, NJ Educational Testing Service.
8. Hakuta, K., & Beatty, A. (Eds.) (2000). Testing English-language learners in U. S. Schools. Washington, DC National Academy Press.
9. Holland, P. W., & Wainer, H. (1993). Differential item functioning. Hillsdale, NJ Erlbaum.
10. Kirsch, I., Braun, H., Yamamoto, K., & Sum, A. (2007). America's perfect storm: Three forces changing our nation's future (ETS PIC-STORM). Princeton, NJ Educational Testing Service.
11. Kolen, M. J., & Brennan, R. L. (2004). Test equating, linking, and scaling: Methods and practices (2nd ed.). New York Springer-Verlag.
12. Laitusis, V., Camara, W., & Wang, B. (2004, April). An examination of differential item functioning (DIF) between language groups on an assessment of verbal and math reasoning. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Diego, CA.
13. Liang, L., Dorans, N. J., & Sinharay, S. (2009). First language of examinees and its relationship to equating (ETS RR-09-05). Princeton, NJ Educational Testing Service.
14. Martiniello, M. (2008). Language and the performance of English-language learners in math word problems. Harvard Educational Review, 78, 333-368.
15. Sinharay, S., Dorans, N. J., & Liang, L. (2009). First language of examinees and its relationship to differential item functioning (ETS RR-09-11). Princeton, NJ Educational Testing Service.
16. Zhang, Y., Dorans, N. J., & Matthews-Lopez, J. (2005). Using DIF dissection method to assess effects of item deletion. College Board Research Report No. 2005-10 (ETS RR-05-23). New York The College Board.
17. Zieky, M. (1993). Practical questions in the use of DIF statistics in test development. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 337-364). Hillsdale, NJ Erlbaum.