研究型早期数学评价的结果效度评价

IF 1.5 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Yixiao Dong, Denis G. Dumas, D. Clements, Crystal Day-Hess, Julie Sarama
{"title":"研究型早期数学评价的结果效度评价","authors":"Yixiao Dong, Denis G. Dumas, D. Clements, Crystal Day-Hess, Julie Sarama","doi":"10.1177/07342829231165812","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Consequential validity (often referred to as “test fairness” in practice) is an essential aspect of educational measurement. This study evaluated the consequential validity of the Research-Based Early Mathematics Assessment (REMA). A sample of 627 children from PreK to second grade was collected using the short form of the REMA. We conducted two sets of analyses with different foci (item- or scale-level) for validation: differential item functioning (DIF) and consequential validity ratio (CVR) analyses. The analyses focused on the demographic subgroups of gender, English Language Learner status, and race/ethnicity. We found a low percentage of DIF items (less than 3%) and high CVRs (ranging from 96 to 98%). Both findings support the consequential validity and thus “fairness” of the REMA.","PeriodicalId":51446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment","volume":"41 1","pages":"575 - 582"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the Consequential Validity of the Research-Based Early Mathematics Assessment\",\"authors\":\"Yixiao Dong, Denis G. Dumas, D. Clements, Crystal Day-Hess, Julie Sarama\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/07342829231165812\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Consequential validity (often referred to as “test fairness” in practice) is an essential aspect of educational measurement. This study evaluated the consequential validity of the Research-Based Early Mathematics Assessment (REMA). A sample of 627 children from PreK to second grade was collected using the short form of the REMA. We conducted two sets of analyses with different foci (item- or scale-level) for validation: differential item functioning (DIF) and consequential validity ratio (CVR) analyses. The analyses focused on the demographic subgroups of gender, English Language Learner status, and race/ethnicity. We found a low percentage of DIF items (less than 3%) and high CVRs (ranging from 96 to 98%). Both findings support the consequential validity and thus “fairness” of the REMA.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51446,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"575 - 582\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829231165812\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829231165812","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

结果有效性(在实践中通常被称为“考试公平性”)是教育测量的一个重要方面。本研究评估了基于研究的早期数学评估(REMA)的相应有效性。使用REMA的缩写形式收集了627名PreK至二年级的儿童样本。我们进行了两组具有不同焦点(项目或量表水平)的分析进行验证:差异项目功能(DIF)和结果有效性比率(CVR)分析。分析的重点是性别、英语学习者地位和种族/民族的人口统计学亚组。我们发现DIF项目的百分比较低(低于3%),CVR较高(从96%到98%不等)。这两项调查结果都支持REMA的相应有效性和“公平性”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating the Consequential Validity of the Research-Based Early Mathematics Assessment
Consequential validity (often referred to as “test fairness” in practice) is an essential aspect of educational measurement. This study evaluated the consequential validity of the Research-Based Early Mathematics Assessment (REMA). A sample of 627 children from PreK to second grade was collected using the short form of the REMA. We conducted two sets of analyses with different foci (item- or scale-level) for validation: differential item functioning (DIF) and consequential validity ratio (CVR) analyses. The analyses focused on the demographic subgroups of gender, English Language Learner status, and race/ethnicity. We found a low percentage of DIF items (less than 3%) and high CVRs (ranging from 96 to 98%). Both findings support the consequential validity and thus “fairness” of the REMA.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
61
期刊介绍: The Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment (JPA) publishes contemporary and important information focusing on psychological and educational assessment research and evidence-based practices as well as assessment instrumentation. JPA is well known internationally for the quality of published assessment-related research, theory and practice papers, and book and test reviews. The methodologically sound and impiricially-based studies and critical test and book reviews will be of particular interest to all assessment specialists including practicing psychologists, psychoeducational consultants, educational diagnosticians and special educators.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信