Investigating Linguistic Sources of Differential Item Functioning Using Expert Think-Aloud Protocols in Science Achievement Tests

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 35, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 546-576

  Roth, Wolff Michael ^a   Oliveri, Maria Elena ^b   Sandilands, Debra Dallie ^b   Lyons Thomas, Juliette ^b   Ercikan, Kadriye ^b  

^a GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Experts; Item language differences; Performance differences; Think aloud protocols; Translation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84873996035     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2012.721572     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Arffman, I. 2010. Equivalence of translations in international reading literacy studies. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 54: 37-59. (doi:10.1080/00313830903488460)
2. Artelt, C. and Baumert, J. 2004. Zur Vergleichbarkeit von Schülerleistungen bei Leseaufgaben unterschiedlichen sprachlichen Ursprungs [On the comparability of student performance in reading tasks of different language origins]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 18: 171-185. (doi:10.1024/1010-0652.18.34.171)
3. Benjamin, W. (1972). Die Aufgabe des Übersetzers [The task of the translator]. In W. Benjamin (Ed.), Gesammelte Schriften (Bd. IV) [Collected works vol. 4] (pp. 9-21). Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp-Verlag.
4. Bond, L., Moss, P. and Carr, P. 1996. "Fairness in large-scale performance assessment G". In Technical issues in large-scale performance assessment, Edited by: Phillips, W. 117-140. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
5. Bybee, R., Fensham, P. J. and Laurie, R. 2009. Scientific literacy and contexts in PISA 2006 science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46: 862-864. (doi:10.1002/tea.20332)
6. DeBoer, G. E. 2011. The globalization of science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48: 567-591. (doi:10.1002/tea.20421)
7. Derrida, J. (1996). Le monolinguisme de l'autre ou la prothèse d'origine [Monolingualism of the Other; or, The prosthesis of origin]. Paris: Galilée.
8. Eco, U. 1984. Semiotics and the philosophy of language, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
9. Ercikan, K. 2002. Disentangling sources of differential item functioning in multi-language assessments. International Journal of Testing, 2: 199-215.
10. Ercikan, K., Arim, R. G., Law, D. M., Lacroix, S., Gagnon, F. and Domene, J. F. 2010. Application of think-aloud protocols in examining sources of differential item functioning. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 29: 24-35. (doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.2010.00173.x)
11. Ercikan, K., Gierl, M. J., McCreith, T., Puhan, G. and Koh, K. 2004. Comparability of bilingual versions of assessments: Sources of incomparability of English and French versions of Canada's national achievement tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 17: 301-321. (doi:10.1207/s15324818ame1703_4)
12. Ercikan, K. and Roth, W.-M. 2006. What good is polarizing research into qualitative and quantitative?. Educational Researcher, 35(5): 14-23. (doi:10.3102/0013189X035005014)
13. Ericsson, K.A. and Simon, H. A. 1993. Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14. Geisinger, K. F. 1994. Cross-cultural normative-assessment: Translation and adaptation issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 6: 304-312. (doi:10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.304)
15. Grisay, A. and Monseur, C. 2007. Measuring the equivalence of item difficulty in the various versions of an international test. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 33: 69-86. (doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2007.01.006)
16. Hambleton, R. K., Merenda, P. F. and Spielberger, C. D. 2005. Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H. and Rogers, J. 1991. Fundamentals of item response theory, Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
18. Krippendorff, K. 2012. Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology, Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
19. Lee, J. F. 1986. On the use of the recall task to measure L2 reading comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 8: 201-212. (doi:10.1017/S0272263100006082)
20. Olsen, R. V., Prenzel, M. and Martin, R. 2011. Interest in science: A many-faced picture painted by data from the OECD PISA study. International Journal of Science Education, 33: 1-6. (doi:10.1080/09500693.2010.518639)
21. Rankin, J. M. 1988. Designing thinking-aloud studies in ESL reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 4: 119-132.
22. Rey, A. (2012). Le grand Robert de la langue française (version électronique) [The grand Robert of the French language, electronic version]. Retrieved February 21, 2012, from http://gr.bvdep.com/
23. Ricœur, P. (2004). Sur la traduction [On translation]. Paris: Bayard.
24. Roth, W.-M. 2005a. Doing qualitative research: Praxis of method, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
25. Roth, W.-M. 2005b. "Telling in purposeful activity and the emergence of scientific language". In Establishing scientific classroom discourse communities: Multiple voices of research on teaching and learning, Edited by: Yerrick, R. and Roth, W.-M. 45-71. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26. Roth, W.-M. (2008). Bricolage, métissage, hybridity, heterogeneity, diaspora: Concepts for thinking science education in the 21st century. Cultural Studies in Science Education, 3, 891-916.
27. Roth, W.-M. 2009. "Limits to general expertise: A study of in- and out-of-field graph interpretation". In Cognitive psychology research developments, Edited by: Weingarten, S. P. and Penat, H. O. 1-38. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.
28. Roth, W.-M. and Hsu, P.-L. 2010. Analyzing communication: Praxis of method, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
29. Roth, W.-M. and Radford, L. 2011. A cultural-historical perspective on mathematics teaching and learning, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
30. Schoenfeld, A. 1985. Mathematical problem solving, Orlando, FL: Academic Press.