Differential Item Functioning Analysis for Accommodated Versus Nonaccommodated Students

Finch, Holmes; Barton, Karen; Meyer, Patrick

doi:10.1080/10627190902816264

Cited by 18 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other test-level research has employed DIF analysis to explore differences in quantities of DIF items by grade level and subject area (Bolt & Ysseldyke, 2006;Finch, Barton, & Meyer, 2009), as well as disability category (Stone, Cook, Cahalan-Laitusis, & Cline, 2010). Additionally, in what some consider another form of test-level research, some studies have parceled tests into component parts and used DIF analysis to test for group differences in patterns of subskills, content level, or standards and benchmarks (Finch et al, 2009;Bolt & Ysseldyke, 2006). These study approaches have produced results that are mixed, inconclusive, and inconsistent.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the Effectiveness of Test Accommodation Using DIF and a Mixture IRT Model

Cho

Lee

Kingston

2012

Applied Measurement in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the Effectiveness of Test Accommodation Using DIF and a Mixture IRT Model

Cho

Lee

Kingston

2012

Applied Measurement in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…With the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) accountability requirements putting increased pressure on U.S. schools, especially at Grades 3 through 8, it is no wonder the majority of DBF fairness research in the United States has been centered around these critical grades. In fact, Finch, Barton, and Meyer (2009) covered the entire third to eighth grade range. The sample sizes varied widely among the 16 studies.…”

Section: Learner Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The sample sizes varied widely among the 16 studies. The lowest sample size was 92 (Finch et al, 2009) and the largest sample size was 12,367 (Walker & Beretvas, 2001).…”

Section: Learner Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Synthesis of the Peer‐Reviewed Differential Bundle Functioning Research

Banks

2013

Educational Measurement

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this article was to present a synthesis of the peer‐reviewed differential bundle functioning (DBF) research that has been conducted to date. A total of 16 studies were synthesized according to the following characteristics: tests used and learner groups, organizing principles used for developing bundles, DBF detection methods used, and types of bundles that indicated statistically significant DBF in the hypothesized direction on multiple occasions. The article concludes with a list of suggestions to individuals who conduct DBF research. For example, effect size guidelines should be established for interpreting the amount of DBF in bundles of items assessed with simultaneous item bias test (SIBTEST), given that it is the most commonly used DBF procedure. This would reduce our reliance on statistical significance testing. General effect size guidelines are needed as well as guidelines for special circumstances like small sample cases. Other useful suggestions are offered as well.

show abstract

“…Design 2 (see Table 2) is routinely used with standard DIF methods to study the impact of accommodation use (e.g., Bolt & Ysseldyke, 2006;Laitusis, Cook, & Aicher, 2004;Cohen, Gregg, & Deng, 2005;Finch, Barton, & Meyer, 2009;Ling & Stone, 2008;Stone, Cook, Laitusis, & Cline, 2010). In some situations, this design is the only feasible option (e.g., studying DIF for blind students tested with items delivered in Braille relative to sighted students).…”

Section: Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recommendations for Conducting Differential Item Functioning (Dif) Analyses for Students With Disabilities Based on Previous Dif Studies

Buzick

Stone

2011

ETS Research Report Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study is to help ensure that strategies for differential item functioning (DIF) detection for students with disabilities are appropriate and lead to meaningful results. We surveyed existing DIF studies for students with disabilities and describe them in terms of study design, statistical approach, sample characteristics, and DIF results. Based on descriptive and graphical summaries of previous DIF studies, we make recommendations for future studies of DIF for students with disabilities.

show abstract

Differential Item Functioning Analysis for Accommodated Versus Nonaccommodated Students

Cited by 18 publications

References 12 publications

Examining the Effectiveness of Test Accommodation Using DIF and a Mixture IRT Model

Examining the Effectiveness of Test Accommodation Using DIF and a Mixture IRT Model

A Synthesis of the Peer‐Reviewed Differential Bundle Functioning Research

Recommendations for Conducting Differential Item Functioning (Dif) Analyses for Students With Disabilities Based on Previous Dif Studies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About