View Item 

Show simple item record

The Author Responds…

dc.contributor.authorKunnan, Antony Johnen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-03-16T16:01:52Z
dc.date.available2012-03-16T16:01:52Z
dc.date.issued1992-09en_US
dc.identifier.citationKunnan, Antony John (1992). "The Author Respondsâ ¦." TESOL Quarterly 26(3). <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/90409>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0039-8322en_US
dc.identifier.issn1545-7249en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/90409
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.titleThe Author Responds…en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelLinguisticsen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelEducationen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHumanitiesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumThe University of Michiganen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/90409/1/3587188.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.2307/3587188en_US
dc.identifier.sourceTESOL Quarterlyen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCoffman, W. E. ( 1982 ). Methods used by test publishers to “debias” standardized tests: Riverside Publishing Company/Houghton Mifflin. In R. A. Berk (Ed.), Handbook of methods for detecting test bias (pp. 240 – 255 ). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHenning, G. ( 1989 ). Does the Rasch model really work for multiple‐choice items? Take another look: A response to Divgi. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 91 – 97.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHoover, H. D., & Kolen, M. J. ( 1984 ). The reliability of six item bias indices. Applied Psychological Measurement, 8, 173 – 181.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKunnan, A. J. ( 1992, April ). A case for construct validation of tests through structural modeling. Paper presented at the Department of Linguistics Colloquium Series, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcCauley, C. D., & Mendonza, J. ( 1985 ). A simulation study of item bias using a two‐parameter item response model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 389 – 400.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceReynolds, C. R. ( 1982 ). Methods for detecting construct and predictive bias. In R. A. Berk (Ed.), Handbook of methods for detecting test bias (pp. 199 – 227 ). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRudner, L. M., Getson, P. R., & Knight, D. L. ( 1980a ). Biased item detection techniques. Journal of Educational Statistics, 5, 213 – 233.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRudner, L. M., Getson, P. R., & Knight, D. L. ( 1980b ). A Monte Carlo comparison of seven biased item detection techniques. Journal of Educational Measurement, 17, 1 – 10.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRyan, K. E. ( 1991 ). The performance of the Mantel‐Haenszel procedure across samples and matching criteria. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 325 – 337.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSandoval, J., & Miille, M. P. W. ( 1980 ). Accuracy of judgments of WISC‐R item difficulty for minority groups. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 48, 249 – 253.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceScheuneman, J. D. ( 1987 ). An experimental, exploratory study of causes of bias in test items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 97 – 118.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceShepard, L. A. ( 1982 ). Definitions of bias. In R. A. Berk (Ed.), Handbook of methods for detecting test bias (pp. 9 – 30 ). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceShepard, L. A., Camilli, G., & Williams, D. M. ( 1985 ). Validity of approximating techniques for detecting item bias. Journal of Educational Measurement, 22, 77 – 105.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSubkoviak, M. J., Mack, J. S., Ironson, G. H., & Craig, R. D. ( 1984 ). Empirical comparison of selected item bias detection procedures with bias manipulation. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21, 49 – 58.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSwaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. ( 1990 ). Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 361 – 370.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWainer, H. ( 1991 ). The isthmus of acceptance: A graphical tool for function‐based item analysis and test construction. Journal of Educational Statistics, 16, 109 – 124.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWainer, H., Sireci, S. S., & Thissen, D. ( 1991 ). Differential testlet functioning: Definitions and detection. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 197 – 219.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAngoff, W. H. ( 1982 ). Use of difficulty and discrimination indices for detecting item bias. In R. A. Berk (Ed.), Handbook of methods for detecting test bias (pp. 96 – 116 ). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAngoff, W. H., & Ford, S. F. ( 1973 ). Item‐race interaction on a test of scholastic aptitude. Journal of Educational Measurement, 10, 95 – 106.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBerk, R. A. (Ed.) ( 1982 ). Handbook of methods for detecting test bias. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBurrill, L. E. ( 1982 ). Comparative studies of item biased items. In R. A. Berk (Ed.), Handbook of methods for detecting test bias (pp. 161 – 179 ). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChen, Z., & Henning, G. ( 1985 ). Linguistic and cultural bias in language proficiency tests. Language Testing, 2, 155 – 163.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
3587188.pdf
Size:
27.77KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.