Your search found 3407 results.

Descriptors:
Effect Size; Test Bias; Item Analysis; Statistical Analysis; Sample Size; Research Design; Decision Making; Graphs; Scores

Abstract:
There are numerous statistical procedures for detecting items that function differently across subgroups of examinees that take a test or survey. However, in endeavouring to detect items that may function differentially, selection of the statistical method is only one of many important decisions. In this article, we discuss the important decisions that affect investigations of differential item functioning (DIF) such as choice of method, sample size, effect size criteria, conditioning variable, purification, DIF amplification, DIF cancellation, and research designs for evaluating DIF. Our review highlights the necessity of matching the DIF procedure to the nature of the data analysed, the need to include effect size criteria, the need to consider the direction and balance of items flagged for DIF, and the need to use replication to reduce Type I errors whenever possible. Directions for future research and practice in using DIF to enhance the validity of test scores are provided. (Contains 2 tables, 3 figures, and 1 note.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Academic Achievement; Item Analysis; Undergraduate Students; Goal Orientation; Prediction; Futures (of Society); Pretests Posttests; Scores; Reading Tests; Correlation; Statistical Analysis; Profiles

Abstract:
In this study, undergraduate students provided confidence ratings to predict future performance in answering questions drawn from the text before reading the text, after reading the text and after rereading the text. Self-reports of achievement goal orientations during reading and posttest scores were also collected. Student's calibration index was the comparison between their predicted posttest performance and actual performance in the posttest. Correlational analyses did not reveal any statistically detectable relationships between self-reported goal orientations and monitoring accuracy, except that bias scores were marginally related to goal orientations. Further cluster analyses and analyses of variance (ANOVA) also showed that student's multiple goal profiles failed to clearly differentiate the groups in terms of their calibration accuracy, yet performance-approach goals did distinguish overconfident from underconfident students. Plausible reasons for the finding were provided and implications for future research were also discussed. (Contains 3 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Test Format; Test Items; Item Analysis; Goodness of Fit; Statistics; Item Response Theory; Sample Size; Test Length

Abstract:
Empirical information regarding performance of model-fit procedures has been a persistent need in measurement practice. Statistical procedures for evaluating item fit were applied to real test examples that consist of both dichotomously and polytomously scored items. The item fit statistics used in this study included the PARSCALE's G[squared], Orlando and Thissen's (2000) S - [chi][squared] and S - G[squared], and Stone's (2000) [chi][squared*] and G[squared*]. The results of this study indicated that the fit of an individual item was affected by the choice of model-fit analyses. The performance of fit indices appeared to vary depending on item response theory (IRT) model mixtures used for calibration, sample size, and test length. In terms of consistency among the fit indices, the statistics based on the same approach (e.g., S - [chi][squared] and S - G[squared] ) showed considerably higher agreement in detecting misfitting items than the statistics based on different approaches (e.g., S - [chi][squared] and [chi][squared*]). Consistent and inconsistent findings compared to previous research are discussed along with practical implications. (Contains 3 tables and 1 figure.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Safety Education; Special Education; Special Needs Students; Food Standards; Skill Analysis; Skill Development; Testing Accommodations; Accessibility (for Disabled); Best Practices; Item Analysis; Psychometrics; Nutrition Instruction; Food Service; Performance Based Assessment; Evaluation Methods; Educational Innovation; Program Effectiveness; Curriculum Evaluation

Abstract:
This article describes an innovative assessment tool designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a food safety skills curriculum for learners receiving special education services. As schools respond to the increased demand for training students with special needs about food safety, the need for effective curricula and tools is also increasing. A "Food Safety Education for High School and Transition Special Needs Students" curriculum served as the basis upon which our assessment tool was developed. The project was a collaborative effort by food safety and education professionals in Connecticut, Rhode Island and Massachusetts. This USDA-funded initiative emerged from teacher-generated data that identified critical gaps in food safety knowledge and skills among students with disabilities (SWD) receiving special education services. As an adjunct to this curriculum, a Food Safety Practices Assessment Tool was developed to: 1) conduct observations of students as they demonstrate food safety practices, and 2) use this information to design classroom-based learning activities that are aligned with students' Individual Education Plans (IEP). Pilot data suggest that the tool is valid and reliable for use in a kitchen-based setting. This is the first known tool of its kind to test food safety skills of individuals with special needs in a real-world environment. Further testing is needed to determine the usefulness of the tool for broader audiences. (Contains 3 tables and 2 figures.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Academic Achievement; Item Analysis; Test Norms; Comparative Testing; Academic Standards; Test Score Decline; Predictor Variables; Response Style (Tests); Test Wiseness; Reading Comprehension; Educational Experiments; Cognitive Style; Learning Strategies; Psychology; Memory; Achievement Gains; Educational Psychology; Exit Examinations

Abstract:
In the context of an upper-level psychology course, even when students were given an opportunity to refer to text containing the answers and change their exam responses in order to improve their exam scores, their performance on these questions improved slightly or not at all. Four experiments evaluated competing explanations for the students' failure to correct their answers. Experiments 1-3 ruled out ceiling effects, cognitive bias from a previous response and item selection effects, respectively, as explanations of the result. Experiment 4 showed that no more than 41% of the students comprehended the paragraphs well enough to find the answer. Furthermore, even this 41% of the students did not put sufficient effort into finding the answer, regardless of the impact on their grade, when they were not coerced to do so. (Contains 2 tables, 1 figure and 1 note.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Alternative Assessment; Test Bias; Test Content; Test Format; Test Items; Test Length; Test Norms; Test Reliability; Test Validity; Testing Problems; Robustness (Statistics); Group Testing; Individual Testing; Evidence; Prediction; Item Analysis; Educational Research; Evaluation Methods; Evaluation Research; Evaluation Problems; Student Evaluation; Performance Factors; Barriers

Abstract:
In the attempt to identify or prevent unfair tests, both quantitative analyses and logical evaluation are often used. For the most part, fairness evaluation is a pragmatic attempt at determining whether procedural or substantive due process has been accorded to either a group of test takers or an individual. In both the individual and comparative approaches to test fairness, counterfactual reasoning is useful to clarify a potential charge of unfairness: Is it plausible to believe that with an alternative assessment (test or item) or under different test conditions an individual or groups of individuals may have fared better? Beyond comparative questions, fairness can also be framed by moral and ethical choices. A number of ongoing issues are evaluated with respect to these topics including accommodations, differential item functioning (DIF), differential prediction and selection, employment testing, test validation, and classroom assessment. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Factor Analysis; Validity; Measures (Individuals); Learning Strategies; Second Language Learning; English (Second Language); Construct Validity; Factor Structure; Item Analysis; Likert Scales; Language Processing; Correlation; Middle School Students; Secondary School Students; Second Language Instruction; Questionnaires

Abstract:
The present work aims to contribute to our understanding of the underlying dimensions of language learning strategies in foreign language contexts. The study analyzes alternative factor structures underlying a recently developed instrument (Tragant and Victori, 2012) and it includes the age factor in the examination of its construct validity. The target population consists of middle- and upper-grade learners of English distributed in two samples (n[subscript 1] = 550 and n[subscript 2] = 1425). Exploratory factor analysis and item analysis were initially conducted to be followed by confirmatory factor analyses and multiple-groups factor analysis. The instrument is a 55-item questionnaire based on a 6-point Likert-type scale measuring students' reported frequency of strategy use. Results support a correlated two-factor structure with a shortened scale of 17 items reflecting "skills-based deep processing strategies" and "language study strategies," offering empirical evidence for the distinction between deep and surface clusters of strategies. Multiple-groups factor analysis showed that this model held for both middle- and upper-grade students, and upper-grade students were more likely to use the more advanced skills-based deep processing strategies and less inclined to use language study strategies than middle-grade students. The brevity of the scale and parsimonious factor structure enhance the questionnaire's utility for research and classroom evaluation. (Contains 2 tables and 1 figure.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Interpersonal Relationship; Affective Behavior; Psychopathology; Measures (Individuals); Validity; Factor Analysis; Suspension; Adolescents; Antisocial Behavior; Psychometrics; Factor Structure; Item Analysis; High School Students; Correlation

Abstract:
We report the development and psychometric evaluations of a self-report instrument designed to screen for psychopathic traits among mainstream community adolescents. Tests of item functioning were initially conducted with 26 adolescents. In a second study the new instrument was administered to 150 high school adolescents, 73 of who had school records of suspension for antisocial behavior. Exploratory factor analysis yielded a 4-factor structure (Impulsivity [alpha] = 0.73, Self-Centredness [alpha] = 0.70, Callous-Unemotional [alpha] = 0.69, and Manipulativeness [alpha] = 0.83). In a third study involving 328 high school adolescents, 130 with records of suspension for antisocial behavior, competing measurement models were evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis. The superiority of a measurement model represented by four correlated factors was supported, and this model was invariant across gender and age. The findings provide researchers and clinicians with a psychometrically strong, self-report instrument and a greater understanding of psychopathic traits in mainstream adolescents. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Rating Scales; Student Evaluation of Teacher Performance; Item Analysis; Test Items; Test Theory; Global Approach; Definitions; Summative Evaluation; Evaluation Utilization; Standards; Teacher Evaluation; Evaluation Criteria; Evaluation Problems

Abstract:
One of the simplest indicators of teaching or course effectiveness is student ratings on one or more global items from the entire rating scale. That approach seems intuitively sound and easy to use. Global items have even been recommended by a few researchers to get a quick-read, at-a-glance summary for summative decisions about faculty. The purpose of this article is to clarify the rating options available to administrators for making summative decisions from student rating scale results. The global item is first defined. Then the research literature related to its use for summative decisions is described. Finally, the critical issues pertaining to technical, professional, and legal standards in using global items for summative decisions are reviewed. Specific recommendations for several alternative types of ratings are proffered which are more defensible for summative decisions about faculty. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Well Being; Measures (Individuals); Ethnicity; Foreign Countries; Validity; Group Membership; Factor Analysis; Self Concept; Qualitative Research; Interviews; Item Analysis; Religious Factors; Scoring; Pacific Islanders; Cultural Relevance

Abstract:
We describe and validate the Pacific Identity and Wellbeing Scale (PIWBS). The PIWBS is a culturally appropriate self-report measure assessing a five-factor model of Pacific identity and wellbeing. Items and construct definitions were developed through qualitative interviews, review of psychological theories, and previous research on Pacific concepts of ethnic identity and wellbeing. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses supported the model (Study 1 N = 143; Study 2 N = 443). The proposed five-factor model of Pacific identity and wellbeing includes scales assessing (1) Perceived Familial Wellbeing, (2) Perceived Societal Wellbeing, (3) Pacific Connectedness and Belonging, (4) Religious Centrality and Embeddedness, and (5) Group Membership Evaluation. The PIWBS provides a culturally appropriate valid and reliable assessment tool that can be used for within-cultural research for Pacific peoples from a Pacific perspective. A copy of the PIWBS and scoring instructions for its use are included. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website