Hide metadata

dc.date.accessioned2018-10-25T10:31:13Z
dc.date.available2018-10-25T10:31:13Z
dc.date.created2017-08-02T10:57:05Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.citationMartinkova, Patricia Drabinova, Adela Liaw, Yuan-Ling Sanders, Elizabeth A. McFarland, Jenny L. Price, Rebecca M. . Checking equity: Why differential item functioning analysis should be a routine part of developing conceptual assessments. CBE - Life Sciences Education. 2017, 16(2)
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10852/65284
dc.description.abstractWe 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.en_US
dc.languageEN
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
dc.titleChecking equity: Why differential item functioning analysis should be a routine part of developing conceptual assessmentsen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.creator.authorMartinkova, Patricia
dc.creator.authorDrabinova, Adela
dc.creator.authorLiaw, Yuan-Ling
dc.creator.authorSanders, Elizabeth A.
dc.creator.authorMcFarland, Jenny L.
dc.creator.authorPrice, Rebecca M.
cristin.unitcode185,18,7,0
cristin.unitnameCentre for Educational Measurement
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1
dc.identifier.cristin1483778
dc.identifier.bibliographiccitationinfo:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.jtitle=CBE - Life Sciences Education&rft.volume=16&rft.spage=&rft.date=2017
dc.identifier.jtitleCBE - Life Sciences Education
dc.identifier.volume16
dc.identifier.issue2
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-10-0307
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:no-67815
dc.type.documentTidsskriftartikkelen_US
dc.type.peerreviewedPeer reviewed
dc.source.issn1931-7913
dc.identifier.fulltextFulltext https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/65284/2/CBE%2BLife%2BSci%2BEduc-2017-Martinkov%25C3%25A1-.pdf
dc.type.versionPublishedVersion


Files in this item

Appears in the following Collection

Hide metadata

Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported
This item's license is: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported