Many factors can influence a student's decision to withdraw from college. Intervention programs aimed at retention can benefit from understanding the factors related to such decisions, especially in underrepresented groups. The Institutional Integration Scale (IIS) has been suggested as a predictor of student persistence. Accurate prediction of persistence, especially across subgroups, in part, depends on the instrument's measurement properties being invariant or similar across those groups. Examination of item level invariance is one component of validity assessment to assist in ensuring scores on the IIS have similar meaning across groups. Ordinal logistic regression was used to examine differential item functioning by gender in a revised version of the IIS. Results suggest that the items do function similarly across men and women.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmenkhienanC. A., & KoganL. R. (2004). Engineering students' perceptions of academic activities and support services: Factors that influence their academic performance. College Student Journal, 38, 523–540.
2.
American Educational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological Association (APA), & National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME). (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
BakerB. A.CaisonA. L., & MeadeA. W. (2007). Assessing gender-related differential item functioning and predictive validity with the Institutional Integration Scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 545–559.
5.
Besterfield-SacreM.AtmanC. J., & ShumanL. J. (1997). Characteristics of freshman engineering students: Models of determining student attrition in engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 86, 139–148.
6.
BordesV.SandJ.ArrendondoP.KurpiusRobinson S. E., & RayleA. D. (2006). Validation of four measures of social support with Latina/o and non-Hispanic white undergraduates. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 28, 65–83.
7.
CaisonA. L. (2007). Analysis of institutionally specific retention research: A comparison between survey and institutional database methods. Research in Higher Education, 48, 435–451.
8.
CampbellJ. P. (2007). Utilizing student data within the course management system to determine undergraduate student academic success: An exploratory study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
9.
CastilloL. G.ConoleyC. W.Choi-PearsonC.ArchuletaD. J.PhoummarathM. J., & Van LandinghamA. (2006). University environment as a mediator of Latino ethnic identity and persistence attitudes. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 267–271.
10.
ChickeringA., & GamsonZ. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3–7.
11.
ChuE. Y.OduroA., & GloriaA. M. (2004, July 28). Impact of educational environment on female international college students. Paper presented at the 2004 American Psychological Association Conference. Abstract retrieved February 22, 2007 from http://www.education.wisc.edu/cp/faculty/Gloria%20subpages/Presentations.htm.
12.
ColeD. A.MaxwellS. E.AveryR., & SalasE. (1993). Multivariate group comparisons of variable systems: MANOVA and structural equation modeling. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 174–184.
13.
CollK. M., & StewartR. A., (2008). College student retention: Instrument validation and value for partnering between academic and counseling services. College Student Journal, 41, 41–56.
14.
CruceT. M.WolniakG. C.SeifertT. A., & PascarellaE. T. (2006). Impacts of good practices on cognitive development, learning orientations, and graduate degree plans during the first year of college. Journal of College Student Development, 47, 365–383.
15.
DodeenH., & JohansonG. (2003). An analysis of gender-related differential item functioning in attitude assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28, 129–134.
16.
FelderR. M.ForrestK. D.Baker-WardL.DietzE. J., & MohrP. H. (1994). Gender differences in student performance attitudes: A longitudinal study of engineering student performance and retention (Rep. No. NCSU-94A). ERIC Higher Education Report.
17.
FrenchB. F.ImmekusJ., & OakesW. (2005). An examination of indicators of engineering students' success and persistence. Journal of Engineering Education, 94, 419–425.
18.
FrenchB. F., & MallerS. J. (2007). Iterative purification and effect size use with logistic regression for DIF detection. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 373–393.
19.
FrenchB. F., & OakesW. (2004). Reliability and validity evidence for the Institutional Integration Scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 88–98.
20.
GloriaA. M., & KurpiusRobinson S. E. (2001). Influences of self-beliefs, social support, and comfort in the university environment on the academic nonpersistence decisions of American Indian undergraduates. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 7, 88–102.
21.
GloriaA. M.KurpiusRobinson S. E.HamiltonK. D., & WilsonM. S. (1999). African American students' persistence at a predominantly white university: Influences of social support, university comfort, and self-beliefs. Journal of College Student Development, 40, 257–268.
22.
HancockG. R. (1997). Structural equation modeling methods of hypothesis testing of latent variable means. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 30, 91–105.
23.
HidalgoM. D., & Lopez-PinaJ. A. (2004). Differential item functioning detection and effect size: A comparison between logistic regression and Mantel-Haenszel procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 903–915.
24.
JodoinM. G., & GierlM. J. (2001). Evaluating type I error and power rates using an effect size measure with the logistic regression procedure for DIF detection. Applied Measurement in Education, 14, 329–349.
25.
KalsnerL., & PistoleM. C. (2003). College adjustment in a multiethnic sample: Attachment, separation-individuation, and ethnic identity. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 92–108.
26.
KraemerB. A. (1997). The academic and social integration of Hispanic students into college. The Review of Higher Education, 20, 163–179.
27.
LeppelK. (2002). Similarities and differences in the college persistence of men and women. The Review of Higher Education, 25, 433–450.
28.
LeSure-LesterG. E. (2003). Effects of coping styles on college persistence decisions among Latino students in two year colleges. Journal of College Student Retention, 5, 11–22.
29.
MannanM. A. (2001). An assessment of the academic and social integration as perceived by the students in the University of Papua New Guinea. Higher Education, 41, 283–298.
30.
MannanM. A. (2007). Student attrition and academic and social integration: Application of Tinto's model at the University of Papua New Guinea. Higher Education: An International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning, 53, 147–165.
31.
McKelveyR. D., & ZavoinaL. (1975). A statistical model for the analysis of ordinal dependent variables. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 4, 103–120.
32.
PascarellaE., & TerenziniP. (1980). Predicting freshman persistence and voluntary dropout decisions from a theoretical model. Journal of Higher Education, 51, 60–75.
33.
PascarellaE., & TerenziniP. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
34.
RobinsonT. N. (2003). Identity as a mediator of institutional integration variables in the prediction of undergraduate persistence intentions. Journal of Adolescent Research, 18, 3–24.
35.
SuY., & WangW. (2005). Efficiency of the Mantel, generalized Mantel-Haenszel, and logistic discriminant function analysis methods in detecting differential item functioning for polytomous items. Applied Measurement in Education, 18, 313–350.
36.
TerenziniP.LorangW., & PascarellaE. (1981). Predicting freshman persistence and voluntary dropout decisions: A replication. Research in Higher Education, 15, 109–127.
37.
TintoV. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45, 89–125.
38.
WhittE. J.PascarellaE. T.NesheimElkins B. S.MarthB. P., & PiersonC. T. (2003). Differences between women and men in objectively measured outcomes, and the factors that influence those outcomes, in the first three years of college. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 587–610.
39.
ZumboB. D. (1999). A handbook on the theory and methods of differential item functioning (DIF): Logistic regression modeling as a unitary framework for binary and Likert-type (ordinal) item scoresOttawa, ON: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation, Department of National Defense.
