The Effect of Linguistic Factors on Assessment of English Language Learners’ Mathematical Ability: A Differential Item Functioning Analysis

IF 2.1 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Educational Assessment Pub Date : 2020-12-17 DOI:10.1080/10627197.2020.1858783

Stephanie Buono, E. Jang

{"title":"The Effect of Linguistic Factors on Assessment of English Language Learners’ Mathematical Ability: A Differential Item Functioning Analysis","authors":"Stephanie Buono, E. Jang","doi":"10.1080/10627197.2020.1858783","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Increasing linguistic diversity in classrooms has led researchers to examine the validity and fairness of standardized achievement tests, specifically concerning whether test score interpretations are free of bias and score use is fair for all students. This study examined whether mathematics achievement test items that contain complex language function differently between two language subgroups: native English speakers (EL1, n= 1 000), and English language learners (ELL, n= 1 000). Confirmatory Differential Item Functioning (DIF) analyses using a SIBTEST were performed on 28 mathematics assessment items. Eleven items were identified to have complex language features, and DIF analyses revealed that seven of these items (63%) favored EL1s over ELLs. Effect sizes were moderate (0.05 ≤ <0.10) for six items, and marginal ( <0.05) for one item. This paper discusses validity issues with math achievement test items assessing ELLs and calls for careful test development and instructional accommodation in the classroom.","PeriodicalId":46209,"journal":{"name":"Educational Assessment","volume":"26 1","pages":"125 - 144"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10627197.2020.1858783","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2020.1858783","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT Increasing linguistic diversity in classrooms has led researchers to examine the validity and fairness of standardized achievement tests, specifically concerning whether test score interpretations are free of bias and score use is fair for all students. This study examined whether mathematics achievement test items that contain complex language function differently between two language subgroups: native English speakers (EL1, n= 1 000), and English language learners (ELL, n= 1 000). Confirmatory Differential Item Functioning (DIF) analyses using a SIBTEST were performed on 28 mathematics assessment items. Eleven items were identified to have complex language features, and DIF analyses revealed that seven of these items (63%) favored EL1s over ELLs. Effect sizes were moderate (0.05 ≤ <0.10) for six items, and marginal ( <0.05) for one item. This paper discusses validity issues with math achievement test items assessing ELLs and calls for careful test development and instructional accommodation in the classroom.

查看原文本刊更多论文

语言因素对英语学习者数学能力评价的影响——差异项功能分析

摘要随着课堂语言多样性的增加，研究人员开始检验标准化成绩测试的有效性和公平性，特别是测试成绩的解释是否没有偏见，成绩的使用是否对所有学生都公平。本研究考察了包含复杂语言的数学成绩测试项目在两个语言亚组之间的功能是否不同：母语为英语的人（EL1，n=1000）和英语学习者（ELL，n=1000）。使用SIBTEST对28个数学评估项目进行了验证性差异项目功能分析。11个项目被确定具有复杂的语言特征，DIF分析显示，其中7个项目（63%）更喜欢EL1而不是ELL。六个项目的效果大小为中等（0.05≤<0.10），一个项目的影响大小为边际（<0.05）。本文讨论了评估ELLs的数学成绩测试项目的有效性问题，并呼吁在课堂上仔细进行测试开发和教学调整。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Educational Assessment EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-

CiteScore

3.20

自引率

6.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： Educational Assessment publishes original research and scholarship on the assessment of individuals, groups, and programs in educational settings. It includes theory, methodological approaches and empirical research in the appraisal of the learning and achievement of students and teachers, young children and adults, and novices and experts. The journal reports on current large-scale testing practices, discusses alternative approaches, presents scholarship on classroom assessment practices and includes assessment topics debated at the national level. It welcomes both conceptual and empirical pieces and encourages articles that provide a strong bridge between theory and/or empirical research and the implications for educational policy and/or practice.