Assessing Impact, DIF, and DFF in Accommodated Item Scores: A Comparison of Multilevel Measurement Model Parameterizations

被引:12
作者
Beretvas, S. Natasha [1 ]
Cawthon, Stephanie W. [1 ]
Lockhart, L. Leland [1 ]
Kaye, Alyssa D. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas Austin, Dept Educ Psychol, Quantitat Methods Program, Austin, TX 78712 USA
关键词
cross-classified model; differential item functioning; multilevel model; testing accommodations;
D O I
10.1177/0013164412440998
中图分类号
G44 [教育心理学];
学科分类号
0402 ; 040202 ;
摘要
This pedagogical article is intended to explain the similarities and differences between the parameterizations of two multilevel measurement model (MMM) frameworks. The conventional two-level MMM that includes item indicators and models item scores (Level 1) clustered within examinees (Level 2) and the two-level cross-classified MMM (in which item scores are cross-classified by two Level 2 classifications including item and examinee) are discussed. A small subset of National Assessment of Educational Progress 4th grade mathematics item scores is used to demonstrate use of the MMMs for assessing facets of the validity of accommodated test scores. The models' similarities and distinctions are emphasized as well as the flexibility of the models' extensions.
引用
收藏
页码:754 / 773
页数:20
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]  
Abedi J., 2005, 663 CSE NAT CTR RES
[2]  
Abedi J., 2002, EDUC ASSESS, V8, P231
[3]  
Abedi J., 1997, 429 CRESST U CAL
[4]   Multilevel item response models: An approach to errors in variables regression [J].
Adams, RJ ;
Wilson, M ;
Wu, M .
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL STATISTICS, 1997, 22 (01) :47-76
[5]  
Adams RJ, 1996, OBJECTIVE MEASUREMENT: THEORY INTO PRACTICE, VOL 3, P143
[6]  
Beretvas SN, 2010, EUR ASSOC METHODOL S, P313
[7]  
Beretvas SN, 2008, QUANT METH EDUC BEHA, P161
[8]  
Beretvas S Natasha, 2005, J Appl Meas, V6, P247
[9]  
Beretvas S Natasha, 2005, J Appl Meas, V6, P322
[10]   Five of the most frequently allowed testing accommodations in state policy - Synthesis of research [J].
Bolt, SE ;
Thurlow, ML .
REMEDIAL AND SPECIAL EDUCATION, 2004, 25 (03) :141-152