Premium
The role of Rasch analysis when conducting science education research utilizing multiple‐choice tests
Author(s) -
Boone William J.,
Scantlebury Kathryn
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
science education
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.209
H-Index - 115
eISSN - 1098-237X
pISSN - 0036-8326
DOI - 10.1002/sce.20106
Subject(s) - rasch model , graduation (instrument) , test (biology) , differential item functioning , item response theory , mathematics education , science education , psychology , item analysis , achievement test , standardized test , academic standards , reliability (semiconductor) , national science education standards , educational assessment , medical education , psychometrics , higher education , comparative education , political science , engineering , developmental psychology , law , biology , paleontology , power (physics) , quantum mechanics , mechanical engineering , medicine , clinical psychology , physics
Recent international studies note that countries whose students perform well on international science assessments report the need to change science education. Some countries use assessments for diagnostic purposes to assist teachers in addressing their students' needs. However, in the United States, standards‐based reform has focused the national discussion on documenting students' attainment of high educational standards. Students' science achievement is one of those standards, and in many states, “high‐stakes” tests determine the resultant achievement measures. Policymakers and administrators use those tests to rank school performance, to prevent students' graduation, and to evaluate teachers. With science test measures used in different ways, statistical confidence in the measures' validity and reliability is essential. Using a science achievement test from one state's systemic reform project as an example, this paper discusses the strengths of the Rasch model as a psychometric tool and analysis technique, referring to person item maps, anchoring, differential item functioning, and person item fit. Furthermore, the paper proposes that science educators should carefully inspect the tools they use to measure and document changes in educational systems. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed 90 :253–269, 2006