跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.222.189.51) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/05/24 19:36
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:Kh. Otgonbaatar
研究生(外文):Kh. Otgonbaatar
論文名稱:蒙古八年級學生數學成就之性別與區域差異分析:IRT取向
論文名稱(外文):Gender and Location Difference in Mathematics Achievement in Mongolia: An Item Response Theory Approach.
指導教授:郭伯臣郭伯臣引用關係
指導教授(外文):Kuo Bor-Chen
口試委員:黃孝雲廖晨慧
口試委員(外文):Huang Hsiao-yunLiao Chen-Huei
口試日期:2013-07-01
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺中教育大學
系所名稱:教育測驗統計研究所
學門:教育學門
學類:教育測驗評量學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2013
畢業學年度:101
語文別:英文
論文頁數:68
中文關鍵詞:Item Response Theorymath achievementMongoliagender differenceTIMSSThree Parameter Logistic Model
外文關鍵詞:Item Response Theorymath achievementMongoliagender differenceTIMSSThree Parameter Logistic Model
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:160
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:11
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
The current study investigated whether males and females differed in math
achievement based on an Item Response Theory Approach. This stud y also explored the
difference in math achievement between students attending schools in rural areas and
those enrolled in urban schools. 482 stude nts (54.14% males and 45.86% females) were
given a mathematical test which consists of 15 TIMSS math items and 15 Mongolian
math items. Mean age of the participants was 14.01 (standard deviation=0.193) 324 of
them are from urban schools and 158 from rural schools in Mongolia. The test items are
grouped into five content categories such as arithmetic, statistics and probability,
geometry, algebra, and proportionality. The test was administrated to the participants in
paper-based format and lasted for 40 minutes. For the statistical analysis, t-test was used
to decide the difference between variable s. For the item analysis Three Parameter
Logistic Model was used.
The study has found no significant gender difference in mathematics achievement
among Mongolian 8
th
graders. However, it had small difference favoring boys.
Interestingly, examining differences by cont ent area reveals males scored higher on
average than females in arithmetic, propor tionality and statistics and probability with
the exception of geometry and algebra in which female students scored higher.
The study has found there is significant difference in math achievement between
students from rural and urba n schools. The students from small rural schools performed
worse than those attending large urban schools. The Mongolian items had higher item
difficulty index versus TIMSS mathematics items for 8
th
grade. However, the hardest
item was found among TIMSS items.
The current study investigated whether males and females differed in math
achievement based on an Item Response Theory Approach. This stud y also explored the
difference in math achievement between students attending schools in rural areas and
those enrolled in urban schools. 482 stude nts (54.14% males and 45.86% females) were
given a mathematical test which consists of 15 TIMSS math items and 15 Mongolian
math items. Mean age of the participants was 14.01 (standard deviation=0.193) 324 of
them are from urban schools and 158 from rural schools in Mongolia. The test items are
grouped into five content categories such as arithmetic, statistics and probability,
geometry, algebra, and proportionality. The test was administrated to the participants in
paper-based format and lasted for 40 minutes. For the statistical analysis, t-test was used
to decide the difference between variable s. For the item analysis Three Parameter
Logistic Model was used.
The study has found no significant gender difference in mathematics achievement
among Mongolian 8
th
graders. However, it had small difference favoring boys.
Interestingly, examining differences by cont ent area reveals males scored higher on
average than females in arithmetic, propor tionality and statistics and probability with
the exception of geometry and algebra in which female students scored higher.
The study has found there is significant difference in math achievement between
students from rural and urba n schools. The students from small rural schools performed
worse than those attending large urban schools. The Mongolian items had higher item
difficulty index versus TIMSS mathematics items for 8
th
grade. However, the hardest
item was found among TIMSS items.
English Abstract……………………………………………………I
Acknowledgements……………………………………………………II
Table of Contents…………………………………………………III
List of Figures………………………………………………………IV
List of Tables…………………………………………………………V
Explanation of Symbols……………………………………………VI
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION…………………………………………1
1.1 Motivation…………………………………………………………1
1.2 Objectives………………………………………………………2
1.3 Significance of the study………………………………2
1.4 Limitations of the study…………………………………2
1.5 Organization of the study…………………………………3
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………4
2.1. Related studies………………………………………………4
2.2. Overview of Item Res ponse Theory…………………6
2.3. Item Response Theory models……………………………8
Rasch Simple Logistic Model………………………………………9
The One-Parameter Logistic Model………………………………11
The Two-Parameter Logistic Model………………………………11
The Three-Parameter Logistic Model……………………………12
2.4. Item Response Theory Parameters………………………12
The “a” parameter: Item Disc rimination……………12
The “b” parameter: Item Difficulty……………………13
The “c” parameter: Pseudo-guessing…………………13
2.5. Overview of TIMSS……………………………………………13
2.6. Mathematics Curriculum in 8th Grade in Mongolia ……………15
CHAPTER THREE METHODS AND MATERIALS………………… 20
3.1 Sample size …………………………………………………… 20
3.2 Data Collection Procedures…………………………………20
3.3 Research Instru ments………………………………………21
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS……………………………………………………23
4.1 Item Analysis…………………………………………………24
4.2 Statistical Analysis……………………………………………26
CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION………………………30
REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………33
APPENDIX…………………………………………………………………………37
Ainara Gonzalez de San Roman & Sara de la Rica (2010). The Impact of Social norms
and the Mother’s transmission of role attitudes.
Alspaugh, J. W. (1992). Socioeconomic measures and achievement: Urban vs. rural.
Rural Educator, 13, 2-7.
Alspaugh, J.W., & Harting, R.D. (1995). Transition effects of school grade-level
organization on student achievement. Journal of Research and Development
in Education, 28, 145-149.
Beaton, A.E.; Mullis,I.V.; Martin,M.O.; Go nzales , E.J.; Kelly , D.L.; Smith, T.A.
(1996). Mathematics achievement in th e middle school years: IEA’s Third
International Mathematics and Science Study . Boston: TIMSS International
study Center Boston College
Bock, R. D. (1997). A brief hist ory of item response theory. Educational Measurement:
Issues and Practice, 16, 21-33.
Bock, R. D., & Aitkin, M. (1981). Marginal maximum li kelihood estimation of item
parameters: application of an EM algorithm . Psychometrika, 46, 443-459.
Christina Stage (2000). Predicting Gender Differences in WORD Items:
A Comparison of Item Response Th eory and Classical Test Theory.
Chrostowski, S. J., & Smith, T. A. (2000). TIMSS 1999 intern ational mathematics
report: Findings from IEA‘s Repeat of th e Third International Mathematics and
Science Study at the eighth grade. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
C. Howley, Research About Mathematics Achievement in the Rural Circumstance.
(Athens, OH: Ohio University , Appalachian Collaborative Center for the Study of
Learning, Assessment, and Instruction in Mathematics, 2002), available at
http://acclaim.coe.ohiou.edu/rc /rc_sub/pub/3_wp/CBH_WP1.pdf).
Coe, P., Howley, C. B., & Hughes, M. (1989a). The condition of rural education
in Kentucky: A profile. Charleston, WV: Appalachia Educational
Laboratory. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 319 579)
Coe, P., Howley, C . B., & Hughes, M. (1989b). The condition of rural education in
Virginia: A profile. Charleston, WV: Appalachia Educational
Laboratory. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 319 577)

34

Ercikan, K.; McCreith, T. and Lapointe , V. (2005). Factors associated with
mathematics achievement and participation in advanced mathematics courses:
An examination of gender differences from an international perspective . School
Science and Mathematics v105 n1 p5.
Edington, E.D. (1981). ACT scores of incoming freshmen to New Mexico State
University by high school size. (ERIC Document Repr oduction Service No.
ED 272354).
E. Bouck, How Size and Setting Impact Education in Rural Schools. Rural Educator,
vol. 25, no.3 (2004): 38-42.
Fierros, E.G. (1999). Examining Gender Differences in Mathematics Achievement on
the Third International Mathemat ics and Science Study (TIMSS).
Gila Hanna & Toronto (2000). Declining Gend er Difference from FIMS to TIMSS.
Guiso, L., Monte, F., Sapienza, P. & Zing ales, L. (2008). Culture, Gender and Math.
Science, 320(5880): 1164-1165.
Haller, E. J., Monk, D. H., & Tien, L.T. (1993). Small schools and higher order
thinking skills. Journal of Research in Rural Education,
Johnson, R. M. (2000). Gender Differences in Mathematics Performance: Walberg’s
Educational Productivity Model and the NELS: 88 Database.
J.Serrita Jane, Thomas F.Oltmanns & Susan C. South, Eric Turkheimer (2007).
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 116, No. 1, 106-175
Khattri, N., Riley, K. W., & Kane, M. B. (1997). Students at risk in poor, rural
areas: Journal of Research in Rural Education, 13, 79-100.
Lawless, J. (2009). Advantages and Disadvantages of Attending Rural and Urban
Middle Schools.
Linden, W. J., & Hambleton, R. K. (Eds.) (1997). Handbook of modern item response
theory . New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
Mellenbergh, G.J. (1994). A unidimensional latent trai t model for continuous item
responses. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 29, 223-236.
Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M.O., Fierros, E.G., Goldberg, A. L., & St emler, S. E. (2000).
Gender differences in achievement: IEA’ s Third International Mathematics and
Science Study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.

35

Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Gonzalez, E. J., & Chrostowski, S. J. (2004). TIMSS
2003 international mathematics report: Finding from IEA’s Trends in
International Mathematics and Science St udy at the fourth and eighth grades.
Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
Ou Lydia Liu, Mark Wilson. (2008). A Multidimensional Rasch Analysis of Gender
Differences in PISA Mathematics. Journal of Applied Measurement, (1), 18-35
Rasch, G (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests.
Chicago: MESA.
Stevenson, H. W., Chen, C., & Booth, J. (1990). Influence of schooling and
urban-rural residence on gender differences in cognitive abilities and academic
achievement.
Sunha Kim & Mido Chang (2010). Computer games for the Math Achievement of
Diverse Students. Educational Technology & Society, 13 (3), 224-232
TIMSS (2000). Gender differences in achievement TIMSS. (2000).
TIMSS (2007). International Students Achievement in Mathematics. (2007).
TIMSS (2008). International Students Achievement in Advanced Mathematics (2008).
TIMSS (2011), Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study Encyclopedia-
2011.
Thissen, D & Steinberg, L. (1988). Data analysis using item response theory.
Psychological Bulletin, 104, 385-395.
Thissen, D. & Orlando, M. (2001). Chapter 3- Item response theory for items scored in
two categories. In D.Thissen & H.Wainer (Eds.) , Test Scoring. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Tinsley, H.E.A. (1992). Psychometric theory and counceling psychology research. In
S.D.Brown & R.W.Lent (Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (2
nd
ed., pp.
37-70), New York, NY: Wiley.
Thompson, T., & Dinnel, D. L. (2007). Poor performance in Mathematics.
Educational Psychology, 27,377-399.
Wright, B.D. (1997). A history of social science measurement. Educational
Measurement: Issue and Practice, 16, 21-33.
Xitao Fan & Micheal J.Chen (1 999). Academic achievement of rural school students:

36

A Multi-year comparison with their peers in suburban and urban schools.
Journal of Research in Rural Educatio n, Spring, 1999, Vol. 15, No, 1, 31-46
Young, D. J. (1998). Rural and Urban Differences in Student Achievement in Science
and Mathematics: A Multilevel Analysis. School Effectiveness and School
Improvement, 9(4), 386-412.
Zhang, L. and Manon, J. (2000). Gender and Achievement—Understanding Gender
Differences and Similarities in Mathematics Assessment.
Zhang, L. and Lee, K.A., 2011. Deco mposing achievement gaps among OECD
countries. Asia Pacific Education Review 12 (3), pp. 463-474.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top