Psychological Development and Education ›› 2016, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (1): 73-80.doi: 10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2016.01.10

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Unidimensional Assessment for Ability of Literacy

WEN Hongbo, TANG Wenjun, LIU Xianwei   

  1. Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
  • Online:2016-01-15 Published:2016-01-15

Abstract: Comparability of test scores are affected by the test's dimensionality, before estimating student's scores, we need to estimate literacy's dimensionality. The study aims to analyze dimensionality of literacy ability based on dichotomous items scale for compulsory education phase students. We assume that literacy is unidimensional. The tool is Chinese character quantity test for compulsory education stage students, the test is constructed of two editions; the first edition is used for 1 to 2 grade students, and is consisted of 36 Chinese characters. The second edition is used for 3 to 9 grade students, and is consisted of 45 Chinese characters. And the test's reliability and validity are good, can be used to analyze dimensionality of literacy ability. More than 1300 students, from one to eight grades students, are selected randomly. Using exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) and nonparametric item response theory (NIRT), including the MSP and DETECT, to analyze literacy dimensionality. At first, do exploratory structural equation modeling analysis, using Mplus6.0. The model fit analysis results show, the model fit index for unidimensional model and multidimensional model are all acceptable, and the multidimensional model is better than unidimensional model, but considering of terseness of model, the unidimensional model is more appropriate. The eigenvalue analysis results show, the largest eigenvalue divide the second eigenvalue is 2.62 for 1~2 edition, and 5.35 for 3~9 edition test. According to the criterion, the 3~9 edition test is one-dimensional test, and the 1~2 edition is not. For factor loading analysis, in 1~2 edition test, in single factor model, the factor loading are above than 0.4 for all, except the 8 item. In double factors model, in despite of the 23 item is less than 0.4, the 1 item to 11item and 14 item are all belong to the factor 1, others are belong to the factor 2. Because items are assigned according to the word frequency from high to low, the results indicate, word frequency influenced literacy, but it is just a difficult dimensionality rather than an ability dimensionality. The 3~9 edition test shows similar results. In a word, the unidimensional model is superior to the multidimensional model, and in multidimensional model, didn't find differences between sound and meaning of literacy. The multidimensional results reflect a difficult dimensionality characteristics, is the role of word frequency. Second, nonparametric item response theory analysis is conducted, using Mokken scale to test dimensionality with MSP 5 procedure, the results find, 1~2 test and 3~9 test show unidimensional scale features as c increasing. At last, using DETECT to test dimensionality with DETECT v.2.1, the results show, D<0.2 for 1~2 test and 3~9 test, that is to say, 1~2 test and 3~9 test show unidimensional scale features. For three methods, the literacy ability tends to accept unidimensional hypothesis. We can draw the conclusion, the literacy ability tend to be unidimensional ability, but would be affected by word frequency. So teachers should pay attention to recreate literacy teaching, let students read more, improve students' familiarity of literacy, in order to help students to increase quantity of literacy. But there are some aspects need to improve, for example, at selecting participants, this study selects participants only from eight grades, from nine grades would be better; and the number of 1to 2 grade students is only 253, increasing the number would be better.

Key words: literacy ability, unidimensional assessment, exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), nonparametric item response theory (NIRT)

CLC Number: 

  • G442

Gregory, C., Wang, M., & Jacqueline, F. (1995). The effects of dimensionality on equating the law school admission test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 32(1), 79-96.

Hemker, B. T., Sijtsma, K., & Molenaar, I. W. (1995). Selection of unidimensional scales from a multidimensional item bank in the polytomous Mokken IRT model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19(4),337-352.

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), 1-22.

Kim, H.R. (1994). New techniques for the dimensionality assessment of standardized test data. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Statistics, University of Illinois at Urbana~Champaign.

Marsh, H. W., Liem, G. A. D., Martin, A. J., Morin, A. J. S.,& Nagengast, B. (2011). Methodological measurement fruitfulness of exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM):New approaches to key substantive issues in motivation and engagement. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29(4), 322-346.

Mokken, R. J.(1971). A theory and procedure of scale analysis.The Hague:Mouton/Berlin:De Gruyter.

Roussos, L.A., & Ozbek, O. (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. F., & Marden, J. I. (1998). Using new proximity measures with hierarchical cluster analysis to detect multidimensionality. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35(1), 1-30.

Sass, D. A., & Schmitt, T. A. (2011). Introduction to the special issue:Moving beyond traditional psychometric approaches. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29(4), 299-303.

Schmitt, T. A. (2011). Current methodological considerations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29(4), 304-321.

Slocum, S.L. (2005). Assessing unidimensionality of psychological scales:Using individual and integrative criteria from factor analysis. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of British Columbia, Canada.

Wiley, E.W., Shavelson, R.J., & Kurpius, A.A.(2014). On the factorial structure of the SAT and implications for next~generation college readiness assessments. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 74(5), 859-874.

Zhang, J. (1996). Some fundamental issues in item response theory with applications. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana~Champaign, Department of Statistics.

Zhang, J. (2007). Conditional covariance theory and detect for polytomous items. Psychometrika, 72(1), 69-91.

Zhang, J., & Stout, W. (1999). The theoretical DETECT index of dimensionality and its application to approximate simple structure. Psychometrika, 64(2), 213-249.

艾伟.(1949).汉字问题.上海:上海中华书局.

陈立伟.(2011).艾伟的《阅读心理-汉字问题》研究.聊城大学学报(社会科学版), (2),152-153.

洪俪瑜,王琼珠,张郁雯,陈秀芬. (2008).学童识字量评估测验之编制报告.测验学刊, 55(3),489-508.

教育部.(2012).全日制义务教育语文课程标准(2011年版).北京:北京师范大学出版社.

雷新勇.(2007).用非参数项目反应理论模型研究大规模教育考试维度的问题.华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),25(3),57-69.

李虹,舒华.(2009).学前和小学低段不同识字量儿童的认知能力比较.心理发展与教育,(3),1-8.

钱文.(1998).影响汉字识记的基本因素的研究.教育科学研究,(1),45-49.

王孝玲.(1992).汉字频度与小学生认识率的相关性.上海教育科研,64(4),21-22.

王孝玲,陶保平.(1996).小学生识字量测试题库及评价量表.上海:上海教育出版社.

温红博,唐文君,刘先伟.(2015).义务教育阶段学生识字量的测验编制.语言文字应用,(3),88-100.

张军.(2010).非参数项目反应理论在维度分析中的运用及评价.心理学探新,30(3),80-83.

张军.(2014).非参数项目反应理论在小规模测验中的运用.考试研究,(1),56-61.
[1] WANG Mingzhong, WANG Mengran, WANG Jing. Interparental Conflict Compromises Adolescents' Academic Achievement: The Indirect Roles of Effortful Control and Classroom Engagement [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2018, 34(4): 434-442.
[2] GAO Ruiyan, NIU Meixin, YANG Tao, ZHOU Xinlin. The Accuracy and Form of Fraction Magnitude Representation for 4 to 8 Graders [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2018, 34(4): 443-452.
[3] ZHANG Jie, HUANG Bijuan, SI Jiwei, GUAN Dongxiao. Relationship between Math Anxiety and Mathematical Achievement in Township Pupils: The Chain Mediating Roles of Mathematical Self-efficacy and Metacognition [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2018, 34(4): 453-460.
[4] CHI Liping, ZONG Zheng, XIN Ziqiang, CHEN Yinghe. The Relationship of Constructivist Pedagogy and Metathinking: The Mediating Role of Cognitive Holding Power [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2018, 34(2): 181-190.
[5] HONG Wei, LIU Rude, ZHEN Rui, JIANG Shuyang, JIN Fangkai. Relations between Achievement Goal Orientations and Mathematics Engagement among Pupils: The Mediating Roles of Academic Procrastination and Mathematics Anxiety [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2018, 34(2): 191-199.
[6] LIU Ying, CHAI Xiaoyun, GONG Shaoying, SANG Biao. The Influence of Parents' Autonomous Motivation on Primary School Students' Emotions in Mathematics Homework:The Role of Students' Autonomous Motivation and Teacher Support [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2017, 33(5): 577-586.
[7] MA Xiaofeng, ZHOU Aibao, YANG Xiaoe. Cue Strength: The Important Variables of The Examination of Retrieval Practice Effect Mechanism [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2017, 33(3): 313-320.
[8] JIANG Hong, LYU Houchao. Adolescent's Future Time Perspective and Academic Achievement: The Mediating Role of Grit [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2017, 33(3): 321-327.
[9] WEI Shuhua, SONG Guangwen, ZHANG Dajun. The Social Cognition Processing Characteristics on Occupational Events in Teachers with Different Levels of Professional Identity [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2017, 33(1): 45-55.
[10] WANG Daoyang, LU Xiang, YIN Xin. The Association of Negative Academic Emotions on Perceived Academic Self-efficacy of Migrant Children: The Moderating Role of Emotion Regulation Strategies [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2017, 33(1): 56-64.
[11] PAN Bin, ZHANG Liang, ZHANG Wen-xin, JI Lin-qin. The Relationship of Academic Underachievement, Academic Pressure and Effortful Control among Adolescents: A Cross-lagged Study [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2016, 32(6): 717-724.
[12] ZHANG Xiaohui, ZHAO Hongyu. The Roles of Educational Policy Satisfaction and Faculty Support on Pre-service Teachers' Professional Identity: The Mediating Effect of Teaching Motivation [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2016, 32(6): 725-732.
[13] LI Liping, WU Xinchun, XIONG Cuiyan, CHENG Yahua, NGUYEN ThiPhuong. Effects of Metalinguistic Awareness and Rapid Automatized Naming on Character Dictation for Pupils [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2016, 32(6): 698-705.
[14] WANG Cuicui, XU Qinfang, TAO Sha. The Validity of the RTI Model for Identifying Learning Disabilities and the Moderators: A Meta-analysis of the Past Two Decades' Studies [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2016, 32(6): 706-716.
[15] WANG Yuxin, XIE Heping, WANG Fuxing, AN Jing, HAO Yanbin. Text-Picture Integration in Multimedia Learning: A Meta-Analysis of the Spatial Contiguity Effect [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2016, 32(5): 565-578.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!