Authors: Aituariagbon, K. Ehis, Osarumwense, H. Judith
Journal Article | Publish Date: 30/June/2022
Abstract This study analyzed Non-Parametric Methods of Detecting Differential Item Functioning (DIF) in SSCE 2019 Economics Multiple Choice Items. Three (3) research questions were raised to guide the study. The survey research design was employed. The population of the study consists of 14,400 SS II Economics students from Edo South Senatorial District of Edo State, Nigeria. The number of sample size used in the study was 1,440 SS II Economics students. The stratified random sampling technique was adopted for this study. The instrument used to gather information was 60 Economics multiple choice items of NECO SSCE 2019 June/July. The instrument was validated by experts in Economics and Measurement and Evaluation and Quality Assurance Unit of National Examination Council (NECO) officials. Reliability was determined using Cronbach’s Alpha Statistics and coefficient of 0.72 was obtained to detect the items that functioned differentially by sex, three (3) DIF methods (Mantel Haenszel, Standardized p-diff and transform item difficulty (delta plot) were used. The findings showed that the three (3) methods displayed DIF. It was found that standardized p-difference and transform item difficulty are most suitable methods than Mantel Haenszel statistics in detecting 2019 Economics Multiple Choice Items prepared by SSCE 2019. It was also recommended that other non-parametric statistics be used to detect differential item functioning. Keywords: Differential Item Functioning, Mantel Haenszel, Transform Item Difficulty and Standardized P-Difference.
Abdulaziz, L. (2016). Differential item functioning in on line learning instrument (EPFUN) Creative Education. 7, 180 – 188.
Acar, T. & Kelecioğlu, H. (2010). Comparison of Differential Item Functioning Determination Techniques: HGLM, LR and IRT-LR. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 10 (2), 639-649.
Angoff W.H. (1988). Validity: An evolving concept. In H. Wainer & Braun. H. (EDS) Test validity p 19-32 Hillsdale. N Erbaum.
Angoff, W. H. & Ford, S.F (1973). Item race international on a test of scholastic aptitude. Journal of Educational measurement 10, 95 – 106.
Bastug, O. Y. O. (2016). A comparison of four differential items functioning procedures in the presence of occult dimensionality. Educational Research and Reviews. 11 (3) pp. 1251– 1261.
Clauser, B. E. & Mazor, K. M. (1998). Using statistical procedure to identifying differentially functioning test items. Educational Measurement: Issues and practice. 17(1), 31 – 44.
Dorans, N. J. & KuIlick, E. (1986). Demonstrating the utility of the standardization approach to assessing unexpected differential item performance on scholastic aptitude Test. Journal of Educational Measurement. 23, 355 – 368.
Emaikwu, S. U. (2012). Issues in test item bias in public examination in Nigeria and implication for testing. International journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development. 1(1) 175-187.
Facon, B. & Nuchade, E, M. L. (2010). An item analysis of Raven’s colored progressive matrices among participants with down syndrome. Research in Developmental Disabilities. 31, 243-249.
Gomez – Benito, J. BaIluerka, N., Gonzalez A., Widaman, K. & Padilla, J. (2017). Detecting differential item functioning in behavioural indictors across Paralle forms. Psicothema. 29(1), 91 – 95.
Gomez – Benito, J. BaIluerka, N., Gonzalez A., Widaman, K. & Padilla, J. (2017). Detecting differential item functioning in behavioural indictors across Paralle forms. Psicothema. 29(1), 91 – 95.
Mantel, N. & Haenszel, W. (1959). Statistical Aspect of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. Journal of National Cancer Institute. 22, 719-748.
Ndifon, B. O., Umoinyang, I. E. and Iduku, F. O. (2010). Differential Item Functioning of 2010 Junior Secondary School Certificate Mathematics Examination in Southern Educational Zone of Cross River State, Nigeria. Paper presented at the 7th annual conference of Nigeria Association of Educational Psychologists Zaria, Nigeria.
Ogbebor U. & Onuka, A. (2013). Differential items functioning methods as item bias indication Educational Research 4(4) 367-373 online at http://www.intersjournals qrs/ER.
Osterlind, S. J., Everson, H. T. (2009). Differential item function (2nd ed) Thousand oaks, CA: sage.
Quesen, S. (2016). Differential item functioning for accommodated students with Disabilities: Effect of differences in proficiency distributions. PhD Dissertation, School of Education, University of Pittsburgh.
Sasaki, M. (1991). A comparison of two methods for detecting in an ESL placement test. Language testing, 8(2) 95 – 111.
Sheppard, L. A., Camilli, G & Williams, D. M. (1985). Validity of approximation techniques for detecting items bias. Journal of Educational Measurement. 22, 77 – 105.
Theodora, M. S. (2013). Differential item functioning detection in reading comprehension Test using mental Haenszel, item response theory and logical data analysis. The International Journal of Social Sciences. 1(14). www.tijoss.com
Van Herwegen, J., Farran, E. & Annaz, D. (2011). Item and error analysis of ravern’s colored progressive matrices in Williams syndrome. Research in Developmental Disabilities. 32, 93 – 99.
Wiberg, M. (2007). Measuring and Detecting Differential item functioning in criterion referenced test. A theoretical comparison of methods. UMEA university press.
Yaghoobi, M. (2016). Fairness and Bias in language testing. International Journal of Research in Linguistics, Language Teaching and Testing. 3(1), 136 -143.
Zumbo, B. D. (2007). Three Generation of DIF Analysis: considering where it has been where it is now and where it is going. Language Assessment Quarterly. 4(2), 223-233.