Responding to Claims of Misrepresentation

Santelices, María Verónica; Wilson, Mark

doi:10.17763/haer.80.3.p35268145347xp56

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 14 publications

(16 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To investigate the first research question we drew from the College Board datafile of students from California public high school seniors who took the SAT forms DX and QI in 1994 or SAT forms IZ and VD in 1999 and spoke English as their best language. We only considered groups and forms in which the Freedle phenomenon has been observed and reported before (Santelices & Wilson, 2010a, 2010b. In particular, the R-SAT was calculated for African Americans in forms IZ, QI and DX and for Hispanics in forms IZ and VD (see Table 1).…”

Section: Methodology Data Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Freedle phenomenon has been assessed with respect to a large new data set in a series of recent papers (Santelices & Wilson, 2010a, 2010b. The analyses reported in those papers use a modified R-SAT approach, incorporating the changes recommended by the ETS researchers, and the data sets all post-date the changes that were made to the ETS review procedures.…”

Section: The Revised-satmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This section presents the details of how the R-SAT score was calculated and how the relative predictive power of these scores was assessed. Since previous studies found stronger evidence of the relationship between DIF estimates and item difficulty in the Verbal test than in the Mathematics test (Santelices & Wilson, 2010a, 2010b, all the analyses focus on the Verbal test although always controlling for the Mathematics scores.…”

Section: Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The revised SAT score and its potential benefits for the admission of minority students to higher education

Santelices

Wilson

2015

EPAA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates the predictive validity of the Revised SAT (R-SAT) score, proposed by Freedle (2003) as an alternative to compensate minority students for the potential harm caused by the relationship between item difficulty and ethnic DIF observed in the SAT. The R-SAT score is the score minority students would have received if only the hardest questions from the test had been considered and was computed using a formula score and a regression approach. In this article we examine the potential effects of using the R-SAT of minority students in the admissions decision to selective institutions, and its capacity to predict short and long-term academic outcomes as well as its potential benefits regarding differential prediction of college grades for minority students. To test this out, we examined the performance of the R-SAT score compared to the standard SAT score in a sample of graduates from California public schools and in a subsample ofstudents who enrolled in the University of California. We found that, in terms of the potential for college admissions for minority students, prediction power and the issue of overprediction, the R-SAT score did not perform significantly better than the SAT score.

show abstract

Section: Methodology Data Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Revised-satmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The revised SAT score and its potential benefits for the admission of minority students to higher education

Santelices

Wilson

2015

EPAA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The correlation is 0.61 when a 2PL model is used to estimate item parameters and the Mantel–Haenszel is used to estimate DIF (Scherbaum & Goldstein, 2008). Santelices and Wilson (2010a) investigated the methodological concerns voiced by researchers about the way Freedle applied the standardization approach (Dorans, 2004, 2010) and found that, when the problems were indeed addressed, many of Freedle’s claims remained steady. Although not as strong nor as widely spread as Freedle asserted, the authors found evidence supporting Freedle’s original claim.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Relationship Between Differential Item Functioning and Item Difficulty

Santelices

Wilson

2011

Educational and Psychological Measurement

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationship between differential item functioning (DIF) and item difficulty on the SAT is such that more difficult items tended to exhibit DIF in favor of the focal group (usually minority groups). These results were reported by Kulick and Hu, and Freedle and have been enthusiastically discussed by more recent literature. Examining the validity of the original reports of this systematic relationship is important so that we can move on to investigating more effectively its causes and the consequences associated to test score use. This article explores the hypothesis that the observed relationship between DIF and item difficulty observed in the SAT could be because of one of the following explanations: (a) the confounding of DIF and impact by the shortcomings of the standardization approach and/or (b) by random guessing. The relationship between DIF and item difficulty is examined using item response theory, which better controls for differences between impact and DIF than the standardization approach and also allows us to test the importance of guessing. The results obtained generally find evidence in support of the relationship between item difficulty and DIF suggesting that the phenomenon reported by earlier research is not a mere artifact of the statistical methodologies used to study DIF.

show abstract