IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/u8kf5.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparing Different Trend Estimation Approaches in International Large-Scale Assessment Studies

Author

Listed:
  • Robitzsch, Alexander
  • Lüdtke, Oliver

Abstract

One major aim of international large-scale assessments (ILSA) like PISA is to monitor changes in student performance over time. To accomplish this task, a set of common items (i.e., link items) is repeatedly administered in each assessment. Linking methods based on item response theory (IRT) models are used to align the results from the different assessments on a common scale. This work employs the one-parameter logistic (1PL) and the two-parameter logistic (2PL) IRT models as scaling models for dichotomous item response data. The present article discusses different types of trend estimates for countries in ILSA. These types differ in three aspects. First, the trend can be assessed by an indirect or direct linking approach for linking a country’s performance at an international metric. Second, the linking for the trend estimation can rely on either all items or only the link items. Third, item parameters can be assumed to be invariant or noninvariant across countries. It is shown that the most often employed trend estimation methods of original trends and marginal trends can be conceived as particular cases in this classification. Through a simulation study, it is demonstrated that trend estimates using a direct linking approach and those that rely on only link items outperformed alternatives for the 1PL model with uniform country differential item functioning (DIF) and the 2PL model with uniform and nonuniform country DIF. We also illustrated the performance of the different scaling models for assessing the PISA trend from PISA 2006 to PISA 2009 in the cognitive domains of reading, mathematics, and science. In this empirical application, linking errors based on jackknifing testlets were utilized that adequately quantify DIF effects in the uncertainty of trend estimates.

Suggested Citation

  • Robitzsch, Alexander & Lüdtke, Oliver, 2022. "Comparing Different Trend Estimation Approaches in International Large-Scale Assessment Studies," OSF Preprints u8kf5, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:u8kf5
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/u8kf5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/636fa1420e715d18b1a99bca/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/u8kf5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simon Grund & Oliver Lüdtke & Alexander Robitzsch, 2021. "On the Treatment of Missing Data in Background Questionnaires in Educational Large-Scale Assessments: An Evaluation of Different Procedures," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 46(4), pages 430-465, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xie, Zilong & Chen, Yunxiao & von Davier, Matthias & Weng, Haolei, 2023. "Variable selection in latent regression IRT models via knockoffs: an application to international large-scale assessment in education," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120812, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:u8kf5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.