A psychometric analysis of the student version of the perceptions of inclusion questionnaire (piq)

European Journal of Psychological Assessment

Volumn 35, Issue 5, 2019, Pages 641-649

  Zurbriggen, Carmen L A ^a,e   Venetz, Martin ^b   Schwab, Susanne ^c   Hessels, Marco G P ^d  

^a BIELEFELD UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b University of Applied Sciences of Special Needs Education Zurich   (Switzerland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WUPPERTAL   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

^e NORTH WEST UNIVERSITY   (South Africa)

Author keywords

Academic self concept; Differential item functioning; Graded response model; Inclusion; Learning difficulties

Indexed keywords

EID: 85047503562     PISSN: 10155759     EISSN: 21512426     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000443     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Baker, J. G., Rounds, J. B., & Zevon, M. A. (2000). A comparison of graded response and Rasch partial credit models with subjective well-being. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 25, 253-270. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986025003253.
2. Bossaert, G., de Boer, A., Frostad, P., Pijl, S. J., & Petry, K. (2015). Social participation of students with special educational needs in different educational systems. Irish Educational Studies, 34, 43-54. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2015.1010703.
3. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-offit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233-255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902-5.
4. Choi, S. W., Gibbons, L. E., & Crane, P. K. (2011). lordif: An R package for detecting differential item functioning using iterative hybrid ordinal logistic regression/item response theory and Monte Carlo simulations. Journal of Statistical Software, 39, 1-30.
5. De Ayala, R. J. (2009). The theory and practice of Item Response Theory. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
6. De Vroey, A., Struyf, E., & Petry, K. (2016). Secondary schools included: A literature review. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 20, 109-135. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2015.1075609.
7. Dunn, T. J., Baguley, T., & Brunsden, V. (2014). From alpha to omega: A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British Journal of Psychology, 105, 399-412. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12046.
8. Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Psychology Press.
9. Flora, D. B., & Curran, P. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9, 466-491. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.466.
10. Haeberlin, U., Moser, U., Bless, G., & Klaghofer, R. (1989). Integration in die Schulklasse. Fragebogen zur Erfassung von Dimensionen der Integration von Schülern FDI 4-6 [Integration in the classroom. Questionnaire for assessing dimensions of integration of students]. Bern, Switzerland: Haupt.
11. Huang, C. (2011). Self-concept and academic achievement: A meta-analysis of longitudinal relations. Journal of School Psychology, 49, 505-528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2011.07.001.
12. Kleinman, M., & Teresi, J. A. (2016). Differential item functioning magnitude and impact measures from item response theory models. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 58, 79-98.
13. Kuo, T.-C., & Sheng, Y. (2016). A comparison of estimation methods for a multi-unidimensional graded response IRT model. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00880.
14. McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2017). Mplus user's guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
16. Oh-Young, C., & Filler, J. (2015). A meta-analysis of the effects of placement on academic and social skill outcome measures of students with disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 47, 80-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2015.08.014.
17. Powell, J. J. W., Edelstein, B., & Blanck, J. M. (2016). Awarenessraising, legitimation or backlash? Effects of the UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities on education systems in Germany. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 14, 227-250. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2014.982076.
18. Rauer, W., & Schuck, K. D. (2003). FEESS 3-4. Fragebogen zur Erfassung emotionaler und sozialer Schulerfahrungen von Grundschulkindern dritter und vierter Klassen [Questionnaire for assessing emotional and social school experiences in third and fourth grades]. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
19. Rechsteiner-De Stefani, B. (2016). Schulisches Integriertsein-eine Genderfrage? [School integration- A question of gender?] (Master's thesis). Zurich, Switzerland: University of Applied Sciences in Special Needs Education.
20. Revelle, W. (2016). psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research, Version 1.6.9. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University. Retrieved from https//cran.r-project.org/web/packages/psych/index.html.
21. Rhemtulla, M., Brosseau-Liard, P. E., & Savalei, V. (2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17, 354-373. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029315.
22. Rubio, V. J., Aguado, D., Hontangas, P. M., & Hernández, J. M. (2007). Psychometric properties of an emotional adjustment measure: An application of the graded response model. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23, 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.23.1.39.
23. Ruijs, N. M., & Peetsma, T. D. (2009). Effects of inclusion on students with and without special educational needs reviewed. Educational Research Review, 4, 67-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2009.02.002.
24. Ruijs, N. M., van der Veen, I., & Peetsma, T. T. D. (2010). Inclusive education and students without special educational needs. Educational Research, 52, 351-390. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2010.524749.
25. Samejima, F. (1997). Graded response model. In W. J. van der Linden & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 85-100). New York, NY: Springer.
26. Schwab, S. (2015). Evaluation of a short version of the Illinois Loneliness and Social Satisfaction Scale in a sample of students with and without special educational needs. British Journal of Special Education, 42, 257-278. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8578.12089.
27. Schweizer, K. (2011). Some thoughts concerning the recent shift form measures with many items to measures with few items (Editorial). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27, 71-72. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000056.
28. Sheng, Y., & Wikle, C. K. (2007). Comparing multiunidimensional and unidimensional item response theory models. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 899-919. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164406296977.
29. Tay, L., Meade, A. W., & Cao, M. (2015). An overview and practical guide to IRT measurement equivalence analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 18, 3-46. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114553062.
30. Tracey, D. K., Marsh, H. W., & Craven, R. G. (2003). Self-concepts of preadolescents with mild intellectual disabilities. In H. W. Marsh, R. G. Craven, & D. M. McInerney (Eds.), International advances in self research (pp. 203-229). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
31. United Nations. (2006). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities and optional protocol. New York, NY: United Nations.
32. Venetz, M., Tarnutzer, R., Zurbriggen, C., & Sempert, W. (2012). Emotionales Erleben im Unterricht und schulbezogene Selbstbilder [Emotional experiences in education and school related self-concepts]. Bern, Switzerland: SZH/CSPS.
33. Venetz, M., Zurbriggen, C., & Eckhart, M. (2014). Entwicklung und erste Validierung einer Kurzversion des "Fragebogens zur Erfassung von Dimensionen der Integration von Schülern (FDI 4-6)" von Haeberlin, Moser, Bless und Klaghofer [Development and first validation of a short version of the Questionnaire for measuring dimensions of integration of students (FDI 4-6) by Haeberlin, Moser, Bless, and Klaghofer]. Empirische Sonderpädagogik, 6, 99-113.
34. Venetz, M., Zurbriggen, C. L. A., Eckhart, M., Schwab, S., & Hessels, M. G. P. (2015). The Perceptions of Inclusion Questionnaire (PIQ). German Version. Retrieved from http://www.piqinfo.ch.
35. Wirth, R. J., & Edwards, M. C. (2007). Item factor analysis: Current approaches and future directions. Psychological Methods, 12, 58-79. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.12.1.58.