Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning

Guzeller, Cem Oktay; YURTÇU, Meltem

Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning

Meltem YURTÇU, (1Hacettepe University, Faculty of Education, Department of Measurement and Evaluation in Education, Turkey)

Cem Oktay GÜZELLER (Akdeniz University, Faculty of Tourism, Turkey)

International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education

2 0

Yıl: 2018 Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 49 - 57 Metin Dili: İngilizce İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning

Öz:

In this study purposes to indicate the effect of the number of DIF items and the distribution of DIF items in these forms, which be equalized on equating error. Mean-mean, mean-standard deviation, Haebara and Stocking-Lord Methods used in common item design equal groups as equalization methods. The study included six different simulation conditions. The conditions were compared according to the number of DIF items and the distribution of DIF items on tests. The results illustrated that adding DIF items to tests were equated caused an increase in the errors obtained by equating methods. We may state that the change in errors is lowest in characteristic curve transformation methods, largest in moment methods depending on the situations in these conditions

Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

Angoff, W. H. (1971). Scales, norms, and equivalent scores. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational Measurement (pp. 508-600). Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education.
Béguin, A. A., Hanson, B. A. & Glas, C. A. W. (2000). Effect of unidimensionality on separate and concurrent estimation in IRT equating. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans, LA. Available from http://www.bah.com/papers/paper0002.html
Cook, L. L. & Petersen, N. S. (1987). Problems related to the use of conventional and item response theory equating methods in less than optimal circumstances. Applied Psychological Measurement, 11, 225–244
Demirus, K. B. (2015). Ortak maddelerin değişen madde fonksiyonu gösterip göstermemesi durumunda test eşitlemeye etkisinin farklı yöntemlerle incelenmesi. Doktora Tezi, Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
Dorans, N. J. & Holland, P. W. (2000). Population invariance and the equatability of tests: basic theory and the linear case. Journal of Educational Measurement, 37 (4), 281- 306.
Dorans, N. J. (2004). Using subpopulation invariance to assess test score equity. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41, 43-68.
Educational Testing Service. Guidelines for fairness review of assessment. Retrieved May 22, 2015 from http://www.ets.org/Media/About_ETS/pdf/overview.pdf
Felan, G. D. (2002). Test Equating: Mean, Linear, Equipercentile and Item Response Theory. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the South West Educational Research Association, Austin.
Hambleton, R. K. (2006). Good practices for identifying differential item functioning. Medical Care. 44(11), 182-188.
Huggins, A. C. (2014). The effect of differential item functioning in anchor items on population invariance of equating. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 74(4), 627-658.
Kilmen, S. & Demirtaslı, N (2012). Comparison of test equating methods based on item response theory according to the sample size and ability distribution. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 130-134.
Kim, S. & Hanson, B. A. (2002). Test equating under the multiple-choice model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 26(3), 255-270.
Kim, S. & Cohen, A.S. (1992). Effects of linking methods on detection of DIF. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29(1), 51-56.
Kim, S., Walker, M.E. & McHale, F. (2010). Comparisons among designs for equating mixedformat tests in large-scale assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement, 47 (1), 36- 53.
Klein, L. W. & Jarjoura, D. (1985). The importance of content representation for common item equating with non-random groups. Journal of Educational Measurement, 22, 197-206.
Kolen, M. J. (1988). Traditional equating methodology. Educational Measurement Issues and Practice, 7 (4), 29-36.
Kolen, M. J. & Brennan, R. L. (2004). Test Equating, Scaling, and Linking (2nd edition). USA: Springer.
Lai, J. S., Teresi, J. & Gerson, R. (2005). Procedures for the analysis of differential item functioning (DIF) for small sample sizes, Evaluation & The Health Professions, 28(3), 283-294.
Lord, M. F. (1980). Application of Item Response Theory to Practical Testing Problems. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Ogasawara, H. (2001). Item response theory true score equating and their standard errors. Journal of Educational Behavioral Statistics, 26(1), 31-50.
Osterlind, J. S. (1983). Test item bias. London Sage Publications.
Puhan, G. (2010). A comparison of chained linear and post stratification linear equating under different testing conditions. Journal of Educational Measurement, 47(1), 54–75.
Swaminathan, H. & Rogers, H. J. (1990). Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures, Journal of Educational Measurement, 27(4). 361-370.
Sinharay, S. & Holland, P.W. (2007). Is it necessary to make anchor tests mini-versions of the tests being equated or can some restrictions be relaxed? Journal of Educational Measurement, 44(3), 249–275.
Sireci, S.G. & Mullane, L. A. (1994). Evaluating test fairness in licensure testing: The sensitivity review process. CLEAR Exam Review. 5(2), 22-27.
Skaggs, G. (2005). Accuracy of random groups equating with very small samples. Journal of Educational Measurement, 42 (4), 309–330.
Stocking, M.L. (1988). Factors affecting the sample invariant properties of linear and curvilinear observed- and true- score equating procedures. (ETS Research Report NO. RR-88-41). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Stocking, M.L. & Lewis, C. (1998). Controlling item exposure conditional on ability in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 23, 57- 75.
Swaminathan, H. & Gifford, J.A. (1983). Estimation of parameters in the three parameter latent trait model. In D. Weiss(Ed.), New horizonsin testing. New York: Academic Press.
Zeng, L. (1991). Standard errors of linear equating for the single-group design (ACT Research Report 91-4). Iowa City, IA: American College Testing.
Zieky, M. (2002). Ensuring the fairness of Licensing Tests. CLEAR Exam Review. 12(1), 20- 26.
Zumbo, B.D. (1999). A Handbook on the Theory and Methods of Differential Item Functioning (DIF): Logistic Regression Modeling as a Unitary Framework for Binary and Likerttype (Ordinal) Item Scores. Ottawa ON: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation, Department of NationalDefense.
Way, W. D. & Tang, K.L. (1991). A comparison of four logistic model equating methods. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
Wu, M. (2010). Measurement, Sampling, and Equating Errors in Large-Scale Assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 29 (4), 15–27.

APA	YURTÇU M, Guzeller C (2018). Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning. , 49 - 57.
Chicago	YURTÇU Meltem,Guzeller Cem Oktay Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning. (2018): 49 - 57.
MLA	YURTÇU Meltem,Guzeller Cem Oktay Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning. , 2018, ss.49 - 57.
AMA	YURTÇU M,Guzeller C Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning. . 2018; 49 - 57.
Vancouver	YURTÇU M,Guzeller C Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning. . 2018; 49 - 57.
IEEE	YURTÇU M,Guzeller C "Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning." , ss.49 - 57, 2018.
ISNAD	YURTÇU, Meltem - Guzeller, Cem Oktay. "Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning". (2018), 49-57.

APA	YURTÇU M, Guzeller C (2018). Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 5(1), 49 - 57.
Chicago	YURTÇU Meltem,Guzeller Cem Oktay Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education 5, no.1 (2018): 49 - 57.
MLA	YURTÇU Meltem,Guzeller Cem Oktay Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, vol.5, no.1, 2018, ss.49 - 57.
AMA	YURTÇU M,Guzeller C Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education. 2018; 5(1): 49 - 57.
Vancouver	YURTÇU M,Guzeller C Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education. 2018; 5(1): 49 - 57.
IEEE	YURTÇU M,Guzeller C "Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning." International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 5, ss.49 - 57, 2018.
ISNAD	YURTÇU, Meltem - Guzeller, Cem Oktay. "Investigation of Equating Error in Tests with Differential Item Functioning". International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education 5/1 (2018), 49-57.