15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Checking Equity: Why Differential Item Functioning Analysis Should Be a Routine Part of Developing Conceptual Assessments

      other

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          A test may be unfair when students with the same knowledge but from different demographic groups perform differently on its items. Identifying and addressing this differential item functioning (DIF) helps ensure a fair, unbiased test. This Research Methods paper will help biology education researchers identify DIF items in their assessments.

          Abstract

          We provide a tutorial on differential item functioning (DIF) analysis, an analytic method useful for identifying potentially biased items in assessments. After explaining a number of methodological approaches, we test for gender bias in two scenarios that demonstrate why DIF analysis is crucial for developing assessments, particularly because simply comparing two groups’ total scores can lead to incorrect conclusions about test fairness. First, a significant difference between groups on total scores can exist even when items are not biased, as we illustrate with data collected during the validation of the Homeostasis Concept Inventory. Second, item bias can exist even when the two groups have exactly the same distribution of total scores, as we illustrate with a simulated data set. We also present a brief overview of how DIF analysis has been used in the biology education literature to illustrate the way DIF items need to be reevaluated by content experts to determine whether they should be revised or removed from the assessment. Finally, we conclude by arguing that DIF analysis should be used routinely to evaluate items in developing conceptual assessments. These steps will ensure more equitable—and therefore more valid—scores from conceptual assessments.

          Related collections

          Most cited references69

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Standards for educational and psychological testing

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Book: not found

              Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Monitoring Editor
                Journal
                CBE Life Sci Educ
                CBE-LSE
                CBE-LSE
                CBE-LSE
                CBE Life Sciences Education
                American Society for Cell Biology
                1931-7913
                Summer 2017
                : 16
                : 2
                : rm2
                Affiliations
                [1] Institute of Computer Science, Czech Academy of Sciences, Praha 182 07, Czech Republic
                [2] Department of Probability and Mathematical Statistics, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha 186 75, Czech Republic
                [3] §Center for Educational Measurement, University of Oslo, Oslo 0318, Norway
                [4] ||College of Education, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195
                [5] Biology Department, Edmonds Community College, Lynnwood, WA 98036
                [6] #School of Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences, University of Washington, Bothell, Bothell, WA 98011
                Author notes
                *Address correspondence to: Patrícia Martinková ( martinkova@ 123456cs.cas.cz ).
                Article
                CBE.16-10-0307
                10.1187/cbe.16-10-0307
                5459266
                28572182
                3bfb89f3-3f89-445d-83f5-218eadb99854
                © 2017 P. Martinková et al. CBE—Life Sciences Education © 2017 The American Society for Cell Biology. This article is distributed by The American Society for Cell Biology under license from the author(s). It is available to the public under an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 3.0 Unported Creative Commons License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0).

                “ASCB®” and “The American Society for Cell Biology®” are registered trademarks of The American Society for Cell Biology.

                History
                : 24 October 2016
                : 21 February 2017
                : 15 March 2017
                Categories
                Research Methods
                Custom metadata
                June 1, 2017

                Education
                Education

                Comments

                Comment on this article