Análisis de la dimensionalidad en modelos de valor añadidoestudio de las pruebas de matemáticas empleando métodos no paramétricos basados en TRI (Teoría de Respuesta al Item)

  1. Lizasoain Hernández, Luis
  2. Joaristi Olariaga, Luis Maria
Aldizkaria:
Revista de educación

ISSN: 0034-8082

Argitalpen urtea: 2009

Zenbakien izenburua: El valor añadido en educación

Zenbakia: 348

Orrialdeak: 175-194

Mota: Artikulua

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openSarbide irekia editor

Beste argitalpen batzuk: Revista de educación

Laburpena

The added value based assessment implies the use of a methodology where strong assumptions are assumed. On one hand, longitudinal designs are used and, on the other hand, the scores of every time-moment have to be recoded into a common scale. This common scaling implies a robust equating design.The only way to ensure the comparability within the longitudinal designs is to use a measurement model where every scale shares the same metric properties.The possibility of common scale estimates is based upon the local independence assumption.The aim of this paper is to analyze the dimensional structure of a set of mathematics achievement tests used to assess the academic achievement in the Community of Madrid during 2005-06 and 2006-07 years and in three cohorts corresponding to the following academic degrees: 5th-6th of Primary Education, 1st-2nd and 3-4th of Obligatory Secondary Education. Their essential unidimensionality and the level of simplicity/complexity of their structure are assessed using nonparametric IRT-based procedures.These results confirm that the most of the tests have an essential unidimensional structure. In turn, the more of the contents complexity, the more of the tests dimensional structure complexity.The measurement models that have been used are certainly quite robust to minor violations related to the local independence assumptions

Erreferentzia bibliografikoak

  • ABAD, F.J., PONSODA, V.Y REVUELTA, J. (2006). Modelos politómicos de respuesta al ítem. Madrid: La Muralla.
  • FINCH, H. (2006). Comparison of the Performance of Varimax and Promax Rotations: Factor Structure Recovery for Dichotomous Ítems. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43, 39-52.
  • GAVIRIA, J.L.Y & RUIZ DE MIGUEL, C. (2007). Importancia de algunos supuestos psicométricos en la evaluación de los sistemas educativos. Calibración y equiparación en las prue-bas de Estándares Nacionales de México. Revista de Educación, 343, 223-248.
  • HATTIE, J., KRAKOWSKI, K., ROGERS H.J. & SWAMINATHAN, H. (1996). An Assessment of Stout's Index of Essential Unidimensionality. Applied Psychological Measurement. 20, 1-14.
  • JANG, E.E. & ROUSSOS, L. (2007). An Investigation into the Dimensionality of TOEFL Using Conditional Covariance-Based Nonparametric Approach. Journal of Educational Measurement, 44, 1, 1-21.
  • MARTÍNEZ, M.R., HERNÁNDEZ, M.J.Y HERNÁNDEZ, M.V. (2006). Psicometría. Madrid: Alianza.
  • MONAHAN, P.O., STUMP, T.E., FINCH, H. & HAMBLETON, R.K. (2007). Bias of Exploratory and Cross-Validated DETECT Index Under Unidimensionality. Applied Psychological Measurement, 31, 483-503.
  • NANDAKUMAR, R. & STOUT, W. (1993). Refinements of Stout's procedure for assessing uni-dimensionality. Journal of Educational Statistics.18, 41-68.
  • ROUSSOS, L.A. & OZBEK, O.Y. (2006). Formulation of the DETECT Population Parameter and Evaluation of DETECT Estimator Bias. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43, 3, 215-243.
  • ROUSSOS, L.A. & STOUT, W. (2007). Dimpack. Version 1.0. The Roussos-Stout Software Development Group. St. Paul, MN: Assesment Systems Corp.
  • STOUT, W.F. (1987). A nonparametric approach for assessing latent trait dimensionality. Psychometrika, 52, 589-617.
  • STOUT, W.F. (1990). A new item response theory modelling approach with applications to unidimensional assessment and ability estimation. Psychometrika, 55, 293-326.
  • STOUT, W., HABING, B., DOUGLAS, J., KIM, H., ROUSSOS, L. & ZHANG, J. (1996). Conditional Covariance-Based Nonparametric Multidimensionality Assessment. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 331-354.
  • STOUT, W., NANDAKUMAR, R. & HABING, R. (1996) Analysis Of Latent Dimensionality Of Dichotomously And Polytomously Scored Test Data. Behaviormetrika, 23, 1, 37-65.
  • STOUT, W., FROELICH, A. G. & GAO, F. (2001). Using resampling methods to produce an improved DIMTEST procedure. En A.BOOMSMA, M.A.J.DUIJN,& T.A.B.SNIDJERS (Eds.), Essays on item response theory (357-376). NY: Springer-Verlag.
  • WALKER, C.M., AZEN, R. & SCHMITT, T. (2006). Statistical Versus Substantive Dimensionality. The Effect of Distributional Differences on Dimensionality Assessment Using DIM- TEST. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 66, 5, 721-738.
  • WILSON, D.T., WORD, R. & GIBBONS, R. (1998). TESTFACT. Test scoring, Item Statistics and Item Factor Analysis. Chicago: Scientific Software Internacional, Inc.
  • ZHANG, J. & STOUT, W. (1999). The theoretical Detect index of dimensionality and its application to approximate simple structure. Psychometrika, 64, 2, 213-249.
  • ZHANG, J. (2007). Conditional Covariance Theory And Detect For Polytomous Items. Psychometrika, 72, 1, 69-91.
Datuen iturria: Dialnet