Differential item functioning and educational risk factors in guatemalan reading assessment;Factores de riesgo educativo y funcionamiento diferencial de ítems en la evaluación de la lectura en Guatemala

Interamerican Journal of Psychology

Volumn 47, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 423-432

  Fortin Morales, Alvaro M ^a,b   van de Vijver, Fons J R ^b,c   Poortinga, Ype H ^b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD DEL VALLE DE GUATEMALA   (Guatemala)

^b TILBURG UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c NORTH WEST UNIVERSITY   (South Africa)

Author keywords

Differential item functioning; Guatemala; Multiple risk factors; Reading assessment

Indexed keywords

EID: 84907735907     PISSN: 00349690     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Álvarez, H., & Schiefelbein, E. (2007, December). Informe integrado del sector educación: Informe final [Consolidated report of the education sector: Final report]. (Report financed by the Interamerican Development Bank and the Swedish Agency for International Development as input for the strategy on Policy Harmonization and Alignment). Guatemala: Ministry of Education of Guatemala (BID/MINEDUC/ASDI).
2. Angoff, W. H. (1993). Perspectives on differential item functioning methodology. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 3-23). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Antillón Milla, J. (1997). La educación [Education]. In Asociación Amigos del País [Association of Friends of the Country] (Ed.) Historia General de Guatemala: Vol. VI. Época contemporánea, de 1945 a la actualidad (pp. 591-612). Guatemala: Asociación de Amigos del País, Fundación para la Cultura y el Desarrollo.
4. Bertrand, R., & Boiteau, N. (2003). Comparing the stability of IRTbased and non IRT-based DIF methods in different cultural context using TIMSS data. (EDRS Reports – Research -143-, ED 476 924, TM 034 975). Quebec, Canada: NA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED476924).
5. Bond, L. (1993). Comments on the O’Neill & McPeek paper. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 277-279). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. Bond, T. G., & Fox, Ch. M. (2007). Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. Camilli, G. (2006). Test fairness. In R. L. Brennan (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 221-256). Westport, CT: American Council on Education and Praeger Publishers.
8. Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical & modern test theory. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Jovanovich College Publishers.
9. de Baessa, Y. (1999). Informe de Resultados del Programa Nacional de Evaluación del Rendimiento Escolar: Año 1999 [Report of results from the National Program for School Achievement Evaluation: Year 1999]. (Report from Universidad del Valle de Guatemala of evaluation for 1999 under contract with the Ministry of Education of Guatemala) Guatemala: Universidad del Valle de Guatemala/Ministry of Education of Guatemala.
10. de Baessa, Y. (2000). Informe de Resultados del Programa Nacional de Evaluación del Rendimiento Escolar: Año 2000 [Report of results from the National Program for School Achievement Evaluation: Year 2000]. (Report from Universidad del Valle de Guatemala of evaluation for 2000 under contract with the Ministry of Education of Guatemala) Guatemala: Universidad del Valle de Guatemala/Ministry of Education of Guatemala.
11. Deater-Deckard, K., Dodge, K. A., Bates, J. E., & Pettit, G. S. (1998). Multiple risk factors in the development of externalizing behavior problems: Group and individual differences. Development and Psychopathology, 10, 469-493. doi:10.1017/ S0954579498001709
12. DIGEDUCA. (2008). Bases de datos de evaluaciones de estudiantes [Data sets of student evaluations]. Data file handed in personally. Code book retrieved from http://www.mineduc. gob.gt/digeduca/
13. Dodeen, H. (2004). Stability of differential item functioning over a single population in survey data. The Journal of Experimental Education, 72, 181-193. doi:10.3200/JEXE.72.3.181-193.
14. Dorans, N. J., & Holland, P. W. (1993). Perspectives on differential item functioning methodology. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 35-66). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Ellis, B. B. (1990). Assessing intelligence cross-nationally: A case for differential item functioning detection. Intelligence, 14, 61-78. doi:10.1016/0160-2896(90)90014-K.
16. Fidalgo, Á. M., & Madeira, J. M. (2008). Generalized Mantel- Haenszel methods for differential item functioning detection. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68, 940-958. doi:10.1177/0013164408315265.
17. Finch, W. H., & French, B. F. (2008). Anomalous Type I Error rates for identifying one type of differential item functioning in the presence of the other. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68, 742-759. doi:10.1177/0013164407313370.
18. French, W. H., & Maller, S. J. (2007). Interactive purification and effect size use with logistic regression for differential item functioning detection. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 373-393. doi:1177/0013164406294781.
19. Gerard, J. M., & Buehler, C. (1999). Multiple risk factors in the family environment and youth problem behaviors. Journal of Marriage and Family, 61, 343-361. doi:10.2307/353753
20. Hidalgo, M., & López-Pina, J. A. (2004). Differential item functioning detection and effect size: A comparison between logistic regression and Mantel-Haenszel procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 903-915. doi:10.1177/0013164403261769.
21. Holland, P. W., & Wainer, H. (1993). Differential item functioning (pp. 349-364). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
22. Jin-Shei, L., Teresi, J., & Gershon, R. (2005). Procedures for the analysis of differential item functioning (DIF) for small sample sizes. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 28, 283-294. doi:10.1177/0163278705278276.
23. Jodoin, M. G., & Gierl, M. J. (2001). Evaluating type I error and power rates using effect size measure with the logistic regression procedure for DIF detection. Applied Measurement in Education, 14, 329-349. doi:10.1207/S15324818AME1404_2.
24. Kristjansson, E., Aylesworth, R., McDowell, I., & Zumbo, B. D. (2005). A comparison of four methods for detecting differential item functioning in ordered response items. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 65, 935-953. doi:10.1177/0013164405275668.
25. Linacre, J. M. (2006). WINSTEPS (Version 3.65) [Computer software]. Chicago, IL: Winsteps.com
26. Linn, R. L. (1993). The use of differential item functioning statistics: A discussion of current practice and future implications. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 349-364). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Longford, N. T., Holland, P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1993). Stability of the MH D-DIF statistics across populations. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 171-196). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
28. Meiring, D., van de Vijver, F. J. R., Rothmann, S., & Barrick, M. R. (2005). Construct, item, and method bias of cognitive and personality tests in South Africa. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 31, 1-8.
29. Ministry of Education of Guatemala (2009). Yearly National Guatemalan educational statistics from the Ministry of Education: Year 2008. Retrieved from http://www.mineduc.gob.gt/estadistica/2008/main.html
30. Ministry of Education of Guatemala (2011). Yearly National Guatemalan educational statistics from the Ministry of Education: Year 2011 final version. Retrieved from http://www.mineduc.gob.gt/estadistica2011/
31. Moreno-Grajeda, M. R., Gálvez-Sobral, J. A., Bedregal, S., & Roldán, K. (2008, April). Informe de Resultados, Evaluación de Primaria 2006, Tercer Grado. [Report of Results, Primary Level Evaluation 2006, Third Grade]. (Report from the Unit for Statistical Analysis of DIGEDUCA of Ministry of Education of Guatemala).
32. Narayanan, P., & Swaminathan, H. (1994). Performance of the Mantel-Haenszel and simultaneous item bias procedures for detecting differential item functioning. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18, 315-328. doi:10.1177/014662169401800403.
33. O’Neill, 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: Erlbaum
34. Penfield, R. D. (2003). Applying the Breslow-Day test of trend in odds ratio heterogeneity to the analysis of non-uniform DIF. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 49, 99-112.
35. Penfield, R. D. (2007a). Differential item functioning analysis system –DIFAS 4.0-: User’s manual. Gainesville, FL. Penfield, R. D. (2007b). Differential item functioning analysis system –DIFAS 4.0- [Computer software]. Gainesville, FL.
36. Richards, M. (2003). Atlas lingüístico de Guatemala [Linguistic atlas for Guatemala]. Guatemala: SEPAZ, UVG, URL, USAID.
37. Robitzsch, A., & Rupp, A. (2009). Impact of missing data on the detection of differential item functioning. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69, 18-34.doi:10.1177/0013164408318756.
38. Rutter, M. (1979). Protective factors in children’s responses to stress and disadvantage. In M. W. Kent & J. E. Rolf (Eds.), Primary prevention of psychopathology: Social competence in children (Vol. 3, pp. 49-74). Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.
39. Rutter, M. (1988). Longitudinal data in the study of causal processes: Some uses and some pitfalls. In M. Rutter (Ed.). Studies of psychosocial risk: The power of longitudinal data. (pp. 1-28).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40. Rutter, M. (2001) Psychosocial adversity: Risk, resilience and recovery. In. J. M. Richman & M. W. Fraser (Eds.), The context of youth violence. Resilience, risk and protection (pp. 13-42). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
41. Sameroff, A. J., Bartko, W. T., Baldwin, A., Baldwin, C., & Seifer, R. (1998). Family and social influences on the development of child competence. In M. Wei & C. Fairing (Eds.), Families, risk, and competence (pp. 161-183). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
42. Scherbaum, C. A., & Goldstein, H. W. (2008). Examining the relationship between race-based differential item functioning and item difficulty. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68, 537-553. doi:10.1177/0013164407310129.
43. Scheuneman, J. D. (1987). An experimental, exploratory study of causes of bias in test items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 97-118. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1987.tb00267.x
44. Scheuneman, J. D., & Gerritz, K. (1990). Using differential item functioning procedures to explore sources of item difficulty and group performance characteristics. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 109-131. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1990. tb00737.x
45. Swanson, D. B., Clauser, B. E., Case, S. M., Nungester, R. J., & Featherman, C. (2002). Analysis of differential item functioning (DIF) using hierarchical logistic regression models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 27, 53-75. doi:10.3102/10769986027001053
46. te Nijenhuis, J., & van der Flier (2009). Bias research in the Netherlands: Review and implications. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 15, 165-175. doi:10.1027//1015-5759.15.2.165
47. Teddlie, Ch., & Reynolds, D. (2003). The international handbook of school effectiveness research. London, United Kingdom: Falmer Press.
48. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. (1993). Detection of differential item functioning using the parameters of item response models. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 67-113). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
49. Uiterwijk, H., & Vallen, T. (2003). Test bias and differential item functioning: A study on the suitability of the CITO primary education final test for second generation immigrant students in the Netherlands. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 29, 129-143. doi:10.1016/S0191-491X(03)00019-1
50. United Nations Development Programme (2011). Human development report 2011; Sustainability and equity: A better future for all. New York, NY: United Nations Development Programme.
51. van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Tanzer, N. K. (2004). Bias and equivalence in cross-cultural assessment: An overview. European Review of Applied Psychology, 54, 119-135. doi:10.1016/j.erap.2003.12.004
52. van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2011). Bias and real differences in crosscultural differences: Neither friends nor foes. In F. J. R. van de Vijver, A. Chasiotis & S. M. Breugelmans (Eds.), Fundamental questions in cross-cultural psychology (pp. 235-257). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
53. van den Noortgate, W., & De Boeck, P. (2005). Assessing and explaining differential item functioning using logistic mixed models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 30, 443-464. doi:10.3102/10769986030004443
54. Welkenhuysen-Gybels, J. (2003). The detection of differential item functioning in Likert score items. Unpublished manuscript. Leuven, Belgium: Catholic University of Leuven.
55. Wiberg, M. (2007). Measuring and detecting differential item functioning in criterion-referenced licensing test: A theoretic comparison of methods (EM No. 60, ISSN 1103-2685). Umeå, Sweden: Umeå Universitet.
56. World factbook. (2011). USA: CIA. Retrieved from https://www. cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/gt.html
57. Zenisky, A. L., Hambleton, R. K., & Robin, F. (2003). Detection of differential item functioning in large-scale state assessment: A study evaluating a two-stage approach. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 51-64. doi:10.1177/0013164402239316