Journals / Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 23 - Sayı: Özel Sayı

Investigation of Gender Bias in TIMSS 2015 and 2019 Mathematics Items in Turkey: Differential Item Functioning Analysis with the SIBTEST Procedure

TIMSS 2015 ve 2019 Matematik Sorularının Türkiye’de Cinsiyete Göre Madde Yanlılığının İncelenmesi: SIBTEST Prosedürü ile Değişen Madde Fonksiyonu Analizi

Pages
211–258
Publication Date
2022-03-26
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result of the analysis, it was concluded that 25 out of 224 mathematics questions in TIMSS 2015 and 15 out of 259 mathematics questions in TIMSS 2019 exam had item bias based on genders.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study is to determine whether 8th grade mathematics questions in TIMSS international assessment (f=483), 224 in the TIMSS 2015 and 259 in the TIMSS 2019, have item bias between male and female students in Turkey, and if any, to carry out detailed investigations based on TIMSS conceptual framework.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The sample of the study consists of a total of 5,080 students, including 3,058 8th graders (ngirls= 1,577, nboys= 1,481) in TIMSS 2015, and 2,022 8th graders (ngirls= 1,027, nboys= 995) in TIMSS 2019.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result of the analysis, it was concluded that 25 out of 224 mathematics questions in TIMSS 2015 and 15 out of 259 mathematics questions in TIMSS 2019 exam had item bias based on genders.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Madde yanlılığı · Cinsiyet Eşitliği · Değişen Madde Fonksiyonu (DMF) analizi

Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine whether 8th grade mathematics questions in TIMSS international assessment (f=483), 224 in the TIMSS 2015 and 259 in the TIMSS 2019, have item bias between male and female students in Turkey, and if any, to carry out detailed investigations based on TIMSS conceptual framework. The sample of the study consists of a total of 5,080 students, including 3,058 8th graders (ngirls= 1,577, nboys= 1,481) in TIMSS 2015, and 2,022 8th graders (ngirls= 1,027, nboys= 995) in TIMSS 2019. After the Confirmatory Factor Analysis was performed for the mathematics booklets used in two assessments as a prerequisite for the analysis of the data, questions indicating bias were determined using the SIBTEST procedure, which is a special analysis method for the Differential Item Functioning (DIF) statistical technique. As a result of the analysis, it was concluded that 25 out of 224 mathematics questions in TIMSS 2015 and 15 out of 259 mathematics questions in TIMSS 2019 exam had item bias based on genders. The distribution of these biased questions by gender and finally by content and cognitive domains within the TIMSS conceptual framework is presented. The findings were discussed in line with the literature and relevant suggestions were also provided.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı TIMSS 2015 uluslararası sınavında 224 adet, TIMSS 2019’da ise 259 adet olmak üzere toplam 483 adet 8. sınıf matematik sorusunun Türkiye’de kız ve erkek öğrenciler arasında madde yanlılığına sahip olup olmadıklarını tespit etmek, varsa madde yanlılığı içeren soruların TIMSS kavramsal çerçevesi açısından ayrıntılı incelemelerini gerçekleştirmektir. Çalışmanın örneklemini TIMSS 2015’de 3,058 (nkız=1,577, nerkek=1,481) ve TIMSS 2019’da 2,022 (nkız=1,027, nerkek=995) olmak üzere toplam 5,080 öğrenci oluşturmaktadır. Verilerin analizi için öncelikle iki sınavda kullanılan matematik kitapçıkları için Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi gerçekleştirildikten sonra, Değişen Madde Fonksiyonu (DMF) için özel bir yöntem olan SIBTEST prosedürü kullanılmıştır. Sonuç olarak, TIMSS 2015’de toplam 224 matematik sorusunun 25’inin, TIMSS 2019’da ise, 259 matematik sorusunun 15’inin madde yanlılığına sahip olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Bu soruların cinsiyetlere göre ve nihayetinde de TIMSS kavramsal çerçevesinde yer alan içerik ve bilişsel alanlara göre dağılımları sunulmuştur. Bulgular alan yazın doğrultusunda tartışılmış ve buna bağlı öneriler de sunulmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

SADAK, M. (2022). Investigation of Gender Bias in TIMSS 2015 and 2019 Mathematics Items in Turkey: Differential Item Functioning Analysis with the SIBTEST Procedure. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 23 - Sayı: Özel Sayı, 211–258. https://ajindex.com/articles/396867

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Aaronson, D., Barrow, L. & Sander, W. (2007). Teachers and student achievement in the Chicago public high schools. Journal of Labor Economics, 25(1), 95-135.
  2. Aksu, M. (2001). Student performance in dealing with fractions. The Journal of Educational Research, 90(6), 375-380.
  3. Akyüz, G. (2006). Investigation of the effect of teacher and class characteristics on mathematics achievement in Turkey and European Union countries. Elementary Education Online, 5(2), 75-86.
  4. Akyüz, G. (2014). The effects of student and school factors on mathematics achievement in TIMSS 2011. Egitim ve Bilim, 39(172), 150-162.
  5. Akyüz, G. & Berberoğlu, G. (2010). Teacher and classroom characteristics and their relations to mathematics achievement of the students in the TIMSS. New Horizons in Education, 58(1), 77-95.
  6. Alacacı, C. & Erbaş, A. K. (2010). Unpacking the inequality among Turkish schools: Findings from PISA 2006. International Journal of Educational Development, 30(2), 182-192.
  7. Atar, B. (2011). Application of descriptive and explanatory item response models to TIMSS 2007 Turkey mathematics data. Egitim ve Bilim, 36(159), 255-269.
  8. Awuor, R. A. (2008). Effect of unequal sample sizes on the power of DIF detection: An IRT-based Monte Carlo study with SIBTEST and Mantel-Haenszel procedures (Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University). Bakan-Kalaycıoğlu, D. & Kelecioğlu, H. (2011). Öğrenci Seçme Sınavı’nın madde yanlılığı açısından incelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 36(161). Bilican, S., Demirtaşlı, R. N. & Kilmen, S. (2011). The attitudes and opinions of the students towards mathematics course: The comparison of TIMSS 1999 and TIMSS 2007. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 11(3), 1277-1283.
  9. Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Lankford, H., Loeb, S. & Wyckoff, J. (2005). How changes in entry requirements alter the teacher workforce and affect student achievement. (Working Paper No. 11844). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F. & Vigdor, J. L. (2007). Teacher credentials and student achievement: Longitudinal analysis with student fixed effects. Economics of Education Review, 26(6), 673-682.
  10. Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F. & Vigdor, J. L. (2010). Teacher credentials and student achievement in high school a cross-subject analysis with student fixed effects. Journal of Human Resources, 45(3), 655-681.
  11. Demir, I., Kılıç, S. & Ünal, H. (2010). Effects of students’ and schools’ characteristics on mathematics achievement: Findi