Detecting DIF According to Gender and Liking Mathematics for Probability Problems Given Within / Without Context
Author :
Year-Number: 2019-Volume 11, Issue 2
Language : null
Konu :
Abstract
Keywords
Abstract
In this study, it was aimed to see whether probability problems, given within a context and without a context, had differential item functioning (DIF) according to gender and level of liking mathematics. For this reason, a multiple-choice test was prepared with nine problems within a context and nine without a context by researcher. After a pilot study for reliability and validity studies of the test, DIF analyses were conducted with 222 eight grade students by Mantel-Haenzel (MH) and SIBTEST methods. Gender and level of liking mathematics (low-medium-high) were detected as variables to detect DIF. According to results in terms of gender, only one without context item had DIF in favor of male students, where one within context item had DIF in favor of female students. In addition to that in terms of level of liking mathematics, a without context item had DIF in favor of low group in low and high comparison and in favor of low group again in low and high comparison.
Keywords
- Abedalaziz, N. (2010). A gender-related differential item functioning of mathematics test items. International Journal, 5, 101-116.
- Amir, G., & Williams, J. (1999). Cultural influences on children’s probabilistic thinking. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 18(1), 85-107.
- Baki, A. & Kartal, T. (2004). Characterizing High School Students’ Algebra Knowledge in Terms of Procedural and Conceptual Knowledge. The Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 2(1), 27-46.
- Bart, W.M., Baxter. J., & Frey, S. (1980). The relationships of spatial ability and sex to formal reasoning capabilities. The Journul of Psvchology, 104, 191-198.
- Baumgartner, H., & Homburg, C. (1996). Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: A review. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13(2), 139-161.
- Bay-Williams, J. M., & Martine, S. L. (2004). Math and literature, Grades 6–8. Sausalito, CA: Math Solutions.
- Berberoglu, G. (1995). Differential Item Functioning (DIF) Analysis of Computation, Word Problem and Geometry Questions across Gender and SES Groups. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 21(4), 439-56.
- Brown, N., Wilson, K., & Fitzallen, N. (2007, November). Using an inquiry approach to develop mathematical thinking. Paper presented at the AARE 2007 International Educational Research Conference, Fremantle, Australia. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Noleine_Fitzallen/publication/ 228553227_Using_an_Inquiry_Approach_to_Develop_Mathematical_Thinking/links/54ea9c180cf2f7aa 4d57f8a5.pdf.
- Bulut, S., Ekici, C. & İşeri, A.İ. (1999). Bazı olasılık kavramlarının öğretimi için olasılık yapraklarının geliştirilmesi. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 15, 129–136. Retrived from http://www.efdergi. hacettepe.edu.tr/yonetim/icerik/makaleler/1153-published.pdf.
- Busadee, N., & Laosinchai, P. (2013). Authentic problems in high school probability lesson: Putting research into practice. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 2043-2047.
- Cochran, J. J. (2005). Can you really learn basic probability by playing a sports board game? The American Statistician, 59, 266–272.
- Çelik, D. & Güneş, G. (2007). 7, 8 ve 9. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Olasılık İle İlgili Anlama ve Kavram Yanılgılarının İncelenmesi. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 173, 361-375. Retrieved from http://dhgm.meb.gov.tr/yayimlar/ dergiler/ Milli_Egitim_Dergisi/173/173/24.pdf.
- Çepni, Z. (2011). Differential item functioning analysis using SIBTEST, Mantel Haenszel, logistic regression and item Response Theory Methods. Un published doctoral dissertation, Hacettepe University, Ankara.
- Dogan, E., Guerrero, A., & Tatsuoka, K. (2005). Using DIF to investigate strengths and weaknesses in mathematics achievement profiles of 10 different countries. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME), Montreal, Canada. Retrieved from http://cms.tc. columbia.edu/i/a/1688_ncme-05-enis.pdf.
- Doolittle, A.E., & Cleary. T.A. (1987). Gender-based differential item performance in mathematics achievement items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24 (2), 157- 166.
- Ebel, R. L., & Frisbie, D. A. (1986). Essentials of educational measurement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
- Ercikan, K. Gierl, M. J., McCreith, T., Puhan, G., & Koh, K. (2004). Comparability of bilingual versions of assessments: Sources of incomparability of English and French versions of Canada's national achievement tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 17, 301-321.
- Falk, R., Falk, R., & Levin, I. (1980). A potential for learning probability in young children. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 11(2), 181-204.
- Fennema, E. (1980). Sex-related differences in mathematics achievement: Where and why. In L.H. Fox. L. Brody, & D. Tobin T. (Eds.). Women and the mathematical mystique, (pp. 76-93). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Fischbein, H. (1975). The intuitive sources of probabilistic thinking in children. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Reidel.
- Fischbein, E., & Schnarch, D. (1997). The evolution with age of probabilistic, intuitively based misconceptions. Journal for research in mathematics education, 28(1), 96-105.
- Frankel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw Hill.
- Geary, D. C. (1996). Sexual selection and sex differences in mathematical abilities. Behavioral and Brain Science, 19, 229-284.
- George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. Boston, USA: Allyn & Bacon.
- Gürbüz, R. (2006). Olasılık Kavramlarıyla İlgili Geliştirilen Öğretim Materyallerinin Öğrencilerin Kavramsal Gelişimine Etkisi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Buca Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 20, 59-68. Retrieved from http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/235069.
- Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. CA: Sage.
- Harris, A. M. & Carlton, S. T. (1993). Patterns of Gender Differences on Mathematics Items on the Scholastic Aptitude Test. Applied Measurement in Education, 6, 2, 137-151.
- Holland, P. W. & Thayer, D. T. (1986). Differential item performance and the Mantel Haenszel procedure. (Research Report No. 86-31) Princeton: Educational Testing Service.
- İnal, H., Koğar, E. Y., & Özdemir, B. (2015). Evaluation of Required Features In Measuring Instruments Chapter By Tyler’s Objective Model Of Evaluation. Journal of Bayburt Education Faculty, 10(2), 400-416.
- Kazak, S., & Confrey, J. (2007). Elementary school students’ intuitive conceptions of random distributions. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 2(3), 227-244.
- Kazak, S. (2014). Olasılık konusu öğrencilere neden zor gelmektedir?. In E. Bingölbali, & M. F. Özmantar, (Eds.), Illköğretimde Karşılaşılan Matematiksel Zorluklar ve Çözüm Önerileri (pp. 217-239). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
- Kline, R.B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.
- Kristanjansonn E., R. Aylesworth, I. McDowell & B.D. Zumbo (2005). A Comparison of Four Methods for Detecting Differeantial Item Functioning In Ordered Response Model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 65(6), 935-953.
- Konold, C. (1994). Teaching Probability Through Modeling Real Problems, Mathematics Teacher, 87(4), 232-235.
- Lane, S., Wang, N., & Magone, M. (1996). Gender Related Differential Item Functioning on a Middle‐School Mathematics Peformance Assessment. Educational measurement: Issues and practice, 15(4), 21-27.
- Mendes-Barnet, S. & Ercikan, K. (2006). Examining sources of gender DIF in mathematics assessments using a confrmatory multi dimensional model approach. Applied Measurement in Education, 19(4), 289-304.
- Munisamy, S., & Doraisamy, L. (1998). Levels of understanding of probability concepts among secondary school pupils. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 29(1), 39-45.
- National Council of Teachers of Mathematics NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Virginia, VA: NCTM.
- Osterlind, J. S. (1983). Test item bias. London: Sage Publications.
- Pange, J. (2003). Teaching probabilities and statistics to children. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, 2003, 163-172.
- Pange, J. and Talbot, M. (2003). Literature survey and children’s perception of risk, ZDM, (35)4, 182-186.
- Pattison. P., & Grieve, N. (1984). Do spatial skills contribute to sex differences in different types of mathematical problems? Journal of Educational Psychology, 76 (4). 677-689.
- Penfield, R. D., & Lam, T. C. (2000). Assessing differential item functioning in performance assessment: Review and recommendations. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 19(3), 5-15.
- Piaget, J. and Inhelder, B. (1975). The origin of the idea of chance in children. New York: Norton.
- Reckase, M. D. (1979). Unifactor latent trait models applied to multifactor tests: Results and implications. Journal of Educational Statistics, 4, 207-230.
- Schlottman, A. (2001). Children’s probability intuitions: Understanding the expected value of complex gambles. Child Development, 72(1), 102-122.
- Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S., (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics. Pearson, Boston.
- Wolff-Michael R. (1996). Where is the Context in Contextual Word Problem?: Mathematical Practices and Products in Grade 8 Students' Answers to Story Problems, Cognition and Instruction, 14(4), 487-527.
- Wood. R (1976). Sex difference in mathematics attainment at GCE ordinary level. Educational Studies, 2, 141- 160.
