Nonignorable Consequences of (Partially) Ignoring Missing Item Responses: Students Omit (Constructed Response) Items Due to a Lack of Knowledge

Author:

Robitzsch Alexander12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. IPN—Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Olshausenstraße 62, 24118 Kiel, Germany

2. Centre for International Student Assessment (ZIB), Olshausenstraße 62, 24118 Kiel, Germany

Abstract

In recent literature, alternative models for handling missing item responses in large-scale assessments have been proposed. Based on simulations and arguments based on psychometric test theory, it is argued in this literature that missing item responses should never be scored as incorrect in scaling models but rather treated as ignorable or handled based on a model. The present article shows that these arguments have limited validity and illustrates the consequences in a country comparison using the PIRLS 2011 study. It is argued that students omit (constructed response) items because they do not know the correct item answer. A different treatment of missing item responses than scoring them as incorrect leads to significant changes in country rankings, which induces nonignorable consequences regarding the validity of the results. Additionally, two alternative item response models are proposed based on different assumptions for missing item responses. In the first pseudo-likelihood approach, missing item responses for a particular student are replaced by a score that ranges between zero and a model-implied probability computed based on the non-missing items. In the second approach, the probability of a missing item response is predicted by a latent response propensity variable and the item response itself. The models were applied to the PIRLS 2011 study, demonstrating that country comparisons change under different modeling assumptions for missing item responses.

Publisher

MDPI AG

Reference101 articles.

1. Lietz, P., Cresswell, J.C., Rust, K.F., and Adams, R.J. (2017). Implementation of Large-scale Education Assessments, Wiley.

2. Martin, M.O., Mullis, I.V., and Hooper, M. (2017). Methods and Procedures in PIRLS 2016, Boston College.

3. Martin, M.O., Mullis, I.V., and Hooper, M. (2016). Methods and Procedures in TIMSS 2015, Boston College.

4. OECD (2020). PISA 2018. Technical Report, OECD. Available online: https://bit.ly/3zWbidA.

5. Reframing rankings in educational assessments;Pohl;Science,2021

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3