Using User-Defined Fit Statistic to Analyze Two-Tier Items in Mathematics

  • Hak Ping Tam
  • Margaret Wu
  • Doris Ching Heung Lau
  • Magdalena Mo Ching Mok
Chapter
Part of the Education in the Asia-Pacific Region: Issues, Concerns and Prospects book series (EDAP, volume 18)

Abstract

The two-tier item is a relatively new item format and is gradually gaining popularity in some areas of educational research. In science education, a typical two-tier item is made up of two portions. The purpose of the first portion is to assess whether students could identify the correct concept with respect to the information stated in the item stem, while the second examines the reason they supplied to justify the option they chose in the first portion. Since the data thus collected are related in a certain way, they pose challenges regarding how analysis should be done to capture the relationship that exists between the two tiers. This chapter attempts to analyze such data by using a user-defined fit statistic within the Rasch approach. The kind of information that can be gathered will be illustrated by way of analyzing a data set in mathematics.

References

  1. Adams, R. J., & Wu, M. L. (2011). The construction and implementation of user-defined fit tests for use with marginal maximum likelihood estimation and generalized item response models. In N. J. S. Brown, B. Duckor, K. Draney, & M. Wilson (Eds.), Advances in Rasch measurement (Vol. 2). Maple Grove: JAM Press.Google Scholar
  2. Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  3. Tam, H. P., & Li, L. A. (2007). Sampling and data collection procedures for the National Science Concept Learning Study. International Journal of Science Education, 29(4), 405–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Tam, H. P., & Wu, M. (2009). Analyzing two-tier items with user-defined fit statistics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, USA.Google Scholar
  5. Tan, K. D., & Treagust, D. (1999). Evaluating students’ understanding of chemical bonding. School Science Review, 81(294), 75–83.Google Scholar
  6. Treagust, D. (1988). Development and use of diagnostic test to evaluate students’ misconceptions in science. International Journal of Science Education, 10(2), 159–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Treagust, D. F., & Smith, C. L. (1989). Secondary students’ understanding of gravity and the motion of planets. School Science and Mathematics, 89(5), 380–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Wainer, H., Bradlow, E. T., & Wang, X. (2007). Testlet response theory and its applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Wu, M. L., Adams, R. J., & Wilson, M. R. (1998). ConQuest – Generalised item response modeling software. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hak Ping Tam
    • 1
  • Margaret Wu
    • 2
  • Doris Ching Heung Lau
    • 3
    • 4
  • Magdalena Mo Ching Mok
    • 5
  1. 1.Graduate Institute of Science EducationNational Taiwan Normal UniversityTaipei CityTaiwan
  2. 2.Work-based Education Research CentreVictoria UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.Formerly Centre for Assessment Research and DevelopmentThe Hong Kong Institute of EducationTai PoHong Kong
  4. 4.The University of Hong KongHong KongHong Kong
  5. 5.Department of Psychological Studies, and Assessment Research CentreThe Hong Kong Institute of EducationTai PoHong Kong

Personalised recommendations