[Rasch] Specificity of Facets

Shirin Shirazi shirin.shirazi at gmail.com
Sat Mar 4 02:22:50 AEDT 2017


Thank you very much Harry for your valuable information.

As I gather (I hope I am not mistaken), most of research studies using MFRM
zoom in on speaking and writing. I would really appreciate if I can be
directed to some references related to Reading Comprehension off the list.
I google searched though of no avail. Your guidance is greatly appreciated.

Shirin

On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Charalambos Kollias <chkollias at outlook.com>
wrote:

> Dear Shirin,
>
>
>
> I am pretty confident you can use either Winsteps or Facets for your
> specified analysis. In Winsteps, add the DIF codes to the person label. In
> FACETS , there is no need for there to be a rater facet in the model in
> your case – besides the rater facet is just like any other facet (active or
> inactive) in an analysis which can be added to the analysis model or left
> out of it completely. It all comes down to what you wish to investigate.
> From the sounds of things, you are interested in pairwise interactions
> (bias) between examinees and your other facets, so run FACETS without
> adding the rater facet in the model or use Winsteps with DIF codes in
> person label.  Hopefully, your data is connected and you do not have any
> subset problems and/or you have enough responses for what you are
> investigating..
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Harry
>
>
>
> *From:* Rasch [mailto:rasch-bounces at acer.edu.au] *On Behalf Of *Shirin
> Shirazi
> *Sent:* 02 March 2017 09:34
> *To:* rasch at acer.edu.au
> *Subject:* Re: [Rasch] Specificity of Facets
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear Dr Linacre and Dear Edward,
>
>
>
> I really appreciate your answers. Perhaps I could not convey what I am
> getting at.
>
> The question is "can we run facets (for DIF for example) without having
> any rater-mediated questions?" The test includes MC questions containing
> either 4, 5 or 6 options.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Mar 2, 2017, at 1:05 AM, Edward Li <edwardfli at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> If you are trying to access the potential bias in questions, a DIF
> analysis is the first thing came to my mind.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Edward
>
>
>
> On 2 Mar. 2017 6:01 am, Shirin Shirazi <shirin.shirazi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Rasch Experts,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The impetus for asking this question is that I have been thinking of the
> possibility of assessing reading comprehension questions in the format of
> Multiple choice to find *bias *of facets (examinees, text type/genre,
> number of items, field of study, age, length of the passage) through MFRM
> knowing that the raters do not have a say in MC type in the assessment
> procedure due to the objectivity of scoring, hence I am wondering another
> measurement technique should be taken to find it?
>
> As a matter of course, I would hesitate to use either Facets or Winsteps
> to find the biases induced by the above-mentioned facets?
>
>
>
> Your help for my briefing will be highly appreciated. In advance, I
> express my gratitude for tolerating to read such a weird question.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Great Regards,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Shirin
>
> PhD in TEFL, Assistant Professor
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
> Rasch mailing list
> email: Rasch at acer.edu.au
> web: https://mailinglist.acer.edu.au/mailman/options/rasch/
> shirin.shirazi%40gmail.com
>
>
> ________________________________________
> Rasch mailing list
> email: Rasch at acer.edu.au
> web: https://mailinglist.acer.edu.au/mailman/options/rasch/
> shirin.shirazi%40gmail.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailinglist.acer.edu.au/pipermail/rasch/attachments/20170303/d5c01795/attachment.html>


More information about the Rasch mailing list