Translated Titles

Gender Differences and Differential Item Functioning in Social Studies Basic Competence Test for Junior High School Students




盧雪梅(Sheue-Mei Lu)

Key Words

社會科成就性別差異 ; 社會科性別DIF ; 國中基本學力測驗 ; gender differences in social studies ; gender DIF in social studies ; BCTES



Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

20卷2期(2009 / 12 / 01)

Page #

31 - 61

Content Language


Chinese Abstract


English Abstract

This research investigated gender differences and gender differential item functioning (DIF) on social studies of the Basic Competence Test for Junior High School Students (BCTEST) from 2001 to 2005 administrations. The results based on overall performance on social studies revealed that females performed slightly better than males among total groups and low-achieving groups (bottom 10%), but there were no significant gender differences among high-achieving groups (top 10%). The results from the analyses of performances on different subjects, cognitive demands and types of attachment materials indicated that there were generally no significant gender differences with a few exceptions. The exceptions were that females outperformed males on civics, concept comprehension items and items without attached materials and low-achieving groups. In addition, females outperformed geography, among total groups and low-achieving groups. In addition, females outperformed males on civics, and males outperformed females on geography, concept comprehension items and items with visual attachments among high-achieving groups. In the study of gender DIF, Mantel-Haenszel procedure was used. The results of DIF analyses revealed that the average percentage of items displaying gender DIF were about 8.3%. Among the factors explored in the study, the subject was the most salient factor that affected the performance of the DIF measures. All civics DIF items favored females however, most history (73.2%) and geography (80.0%) DIF items favored males. What is worthy to note, about 45% history DIF items favoring males were related to wars, and more than 50% geography DIF items favoring males were involved map reading or visualization. The follow up review and judgment were conducted for all DIF items, and no construct irrelevant factors were found. That is, though these items displaying DIF, they were not biased items. Implications based on the findings of this study were proposed for educators, test developers and researchers.

Topic Category 社會科學 > 教育學
社會科學 > 社會學
  1. 余民寧、謝進昌(2006)。國中基本學力測驗之DIF的實徵分析:以91年度兩次測驗爲例。教育學刊,26,241-276。
  2. 盧雪梅、毛國楠(2008)。國中基本學力測驗自然科之性別差異和差別試題功能(DIF)分析。測驗學刊,55(4),725-759。
  3. 盧雪梅、毛國楠(2008)。國中基本學力測驗數學科之性別差異和差別試題功能(DIF)分析。教育實踐與研究,21(2),95-126。
  4. American Educational Research Association,American Psychological Association,National Council an Measurement is Education(1999).Standards for educational and psycho logical testing.Washington, DC:American Psychological Association.
  5. Camilli, G.,Shepard, L. A.(1994).Methods for identifying biased test items.Thousand Oaks, CA:Saga.
  6. Cohen, J.(1988).Statistical power analysis for the behavioral science.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  7. Dorans, N. J.,Holland, P. W.(Eds.),N. Wainer(Eds.)(1993).Differential item functioning.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  8. Fairness review guidelines
  9. Hamilton, L. S.,Snow, R, S.(1998).Exploring differential item functioning on science achievement tests (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 403).
  10. Harris, A. N.,Carlton, S. T.(1993).Patterns of gender differences on mathematics items on the SAT.Applied Measurement in Education,6,137-151.
  11. Holland, P. W.,Thayer, D. T.,H. Wainer(Eds.),H. I. Braun(Eds.)(1988).Test validity.Nillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  12. Joint Committee on Testing Practices(1988).Code of fair testing practices in education.Washington, DC:Joint Committee on Testing Practices.
  13. Le, V.(1999).Identifying differential item functioning on the NELS: 88 history achievement test (CSE Tech. Rap. No. 511).
  14. Maccoby, E. E.,Jacklin, C. N.(1974).The psychology of sex differences.Stanford, CA:Stanford University.
  15. Mantel, N.,Haenszel, W.(1959).Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease.Journal of the National Cancer Institute,22,719-748.
  16. Reckase, M. D.(1979).Unifactor talent trait models applied to multifactor tests: Results and implication.Journal of Educational Statistics,4,207-230.
  17. Willingham, W. W.(Eds.),Cole, N. S.(Eds.)(1997).Gender and fair assessment.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  18. Willingham, W. W.(Eds.),Cole, N. S.(Eds.),Lewis, C.,Leung, S. W.(1997).Gender and fair assessment.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  19. Zenisky, A. L.,Hambleton, R. K.,Robin, F.(2004).DIF detection and interpretation in large-scale science assessment: Informing item writing practices.Educational Assessment,9(1&2),61-78.
  20. Zwick, R.,Ercikan, K.(1989).Analysis of differential item functioning in the NAEP history assessment.Journal of Educational Measurement,26,55-66.
  21. Zwick, R.,Thayer, D. T.,Wingersky, M.(1993).A simulation study of methods for assessing differential item functioning in computerized adaptive tests (ETS Research Rep. No. 93.11).
  22. 王嘉寧(2007)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台北市,國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所。
  23. 歷年大專校院學生人數-按3大分類科系及性別分(百分比)
  24. 盧雪梅(2007)。國民中學學生基本學力測驗國文科和英語科成就性別差異和性別差別試題功能(DIF)分析。教育研究與發展期刊,3(4),79-112。
Times Cited
  1. 張志成(2012)。九年一貫課程自然科能力指標與教科書暨國中基測、北北基聯測試題之相關研究。臺灣師範大學化學系在職進修碩士班學位論文。2012。1-187。