Examination of Differential Item Functioning on a Standardized Achievement Battery with Limited English Proficient Students

Abstract

This study examines the incidence of differential item functioning (DIF) on three subtests of the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills. Test scores for 2,867 Alaskan students categorized as native Alaskan or White were available at two points in time: fourth and sixth grade or sixth and eighth grade. Analysis of language proficiency was conducted exclusively on native Alaskans classified according to one of three language proficiency categories: limited English, bilingual, or English proficient. Although a consistent decrease in effect-size change over time was observed in the comparison between bilinguals and English proficient students, the incidence of DIF tended to be sporadic in terms of which group was favored. Recognizing the inseparable link between language and cultural/ethnic background, an additional DIF analysis comparing Whites to native Alaskans of equal English proficiency was conducted to enhance understanding of the language comparison. Effect-size differences, favoring Whites, were much larger than those observed in the language comparisons.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association , & National Council on Measurement in Education . (1985). The standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Camilli, G. , & Shepard, L. A. (1994). Methods for identifying biased test items. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Campbell, P. R. (1994). Population projections for states by age, race, and sex: 1993 to 2020 (U. S. Bureau of the Census—Current population reports, pp. 17-23). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

Clair, N. (1994). Informed choices: Articulating assumptions behind programs for language minority students. News Bulletin, Eric Clearinghouse on Language and Linguistics, 18(1), 1-8.

Cummins, J. (1982). Tests, achievement, and bilingual students. Ontario, Canada: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 238 907)

Dorans, N. J. , & Holland, P. S. (1993). DIF detection and description: Mantel-Haenszel and standardization. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 35-66). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Garcia, G. E. (1994). Assessing the literacy development of second-language students: A focus on authentic assessment. In K. Spangenberg-Urbschat (Ed.), Kids come in all languages: Reading instruction for ESL students (pp. 180-205). Newark, NJ: International Reading Association.

Haedden, S. (1995, September). One nation, one language. U. S. News and World Report, p. 40-40.

Holland, P. W. , & Thayer, D. T. (1988). Differential item functioning and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In H. Wainer & H. I. Brown (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 129-145). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

10.

Hoover, H. D. (1984). The most appropriate scores for measuring educational development in the elementary schools: GE’s. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 3(4), 8-18.

11.

Hoover, H. D. (1990). Alaska item bias analyses. Unpublished raw data.

12.

Hoover, H. D. , Hieronymus, A. N. , Frisbie, D. A. , & Dunbar, S. B. (1994). Iowa Tests of Basic Skills interpretative guide for school administrators, levels 5-14. Chicago: Riverside.

13.

Krauss, M. E. (1975). Native peoples and languages of Alaska. The Alaska Native Language Center, University of Alaska. In J. M. Orvik (Ed.), An overview of Alaska native bilingual education, Culture Learning, 2-2. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 116 472)

14.

Lam, T. C. M. (1993). Testability: A critical issue in testing language minority students with standardized achievement tests. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 26, 179-191.

15.

Miller, S. K. (1988, April). Differential item performance for Mexican-American ESL students and White non-ESL students on mathematics and English achievement tests. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans, LA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 300 446)

16.

Oxford-Carpenter, R. , Pol, L. , Lopen C. , Stupp, P. , Gendell, M. , & Peng, S. (1984). Demographic projections of non-English-language-background and limited English proficient persons in the United States to the year 2000 by state, age, and language group. Rosslyn, VA: Inter-American Research Associates.

17.

Rhodes, R. W. (1988, November). Standardized testing of minority students: Navajo and Hopi. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council of Teachers of English, St. Louis, MO.

18.

Sudweeks, R. R. , & Tolman, R. R. (1993). Empirical versus subjective procedures for identifying gender differences in science test items. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 3-19.

19.

Testing in the Schools . (1990). ETS policy notes, 2 (3). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

20.

Torres, J. (1991). Equity in education and the language minority student. Forum, 14(4), 1-3.

21.

U. S. Bureau of the Census . (1990). 1990 census of population social and economic characteristics, Alaska. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

22.

U. S. House . (1993). Improving America’s Schools Act of 1993. 1115 (HR6). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.