Browse > Article

Differential Effect of Item Characteristics on Science Achievement Between Genders  

Shin, Dong-Hee (Dankook University)
Moon, Nan-Moo (Dankook University)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.24, no.1, 2004 , pp. 17-28 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to determine the patterns of differences between genders in science achievement. Eleventh grade, 140 female and male students were sampled from a school in Seoul. According to the analysis results of pilot study, 20 items were finally selected for the main study. To sharpen our interpretations of the factors and provide some confirmation, we supplemented the statistical analysis with a more detailed cognitive study of the items using think-aloud protocols and interviews with student test takers. The analysis of this study took into account the different item formats, contexts, and presentation styles. The findings are as follows: First, there was no significant gender difference between multiple-choice and open-ended items. Second, male students achieved significantly better in the context of everyday life in multiple-choice items. Third, male students favored items presented as written texts. Fourth, in problem-solving process, female students tend to apply their science concepts, whereas male students tend to apply their everyday experiences. The results of this investigation indicate that gender difference in science achievement depends heavily on item characteristics.
Keywords
gender differences; science achievement; item formats; contexts; presentation styles; problem-solving process;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Beller, M. & Gafni, N. (1996). The 1991 International assessment of educational progress in mathematics and sciences: The gender differences perspective. Journal of Educational Pscychology, 88(2), 365-377   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Bolger, N. & Kellaghan, T. (1990). Method of measurement and gender differential guessing tendencies. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 23-25   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Bridgeman, B. & Lewis, C. (1994). The relationship of essay and multiple-choice scores with grades in college courses. Journal of Educational Measurement. 31, 37-50   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Hamilton, L. S. (1998). Gender differences on high school science achievement tests: Do format and content matter? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 20, 179-195   DOI
5 Jeon, K. & Noh, T. (2001). The effects of problem solving strategy and paired think-aloud problem solving on high school students' chemistry problem solving. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 21(2), 289-298
6 Jones, A. T. & Kirk, C. M. (1990). Gender differences in students' interests in applications of school physics. Physical Education, 25, 308-313   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Kahle, J. B. & Lakes, M. L. (1983). The myth of equality in science classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(2), 131-140   DOI
8 Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Gonzales, E. J. , Gregory, K. D., Smith, T. A., Chrostowski , S. J., Garden, R. A. & O'Connor, K.M. (2000). TIMSS 1999: International Science Report. International Study Center Boston College Lynch School of Education
9 Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Fierros, E. G., Goldberg, A. L., & Stemler, S. E. (2000). Gender differrences in achievement: lEA’ s Third International Mathematics and Science Study(TIMSS). International Study Center. Lynch School of Education, Boston College
10 Paris, S. G., Lawton, T. A., Turner, J. C. & Ruth, J. (1991). A developmental perspective on standardized achievement testing. Educational Researcher, 20(5), 12-20   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Shin, D. & Kim, D. (2003). Assessment type and gender differences in science achievement. Journal of Korean Earth Science Society, 23(3), 265-275
12 Wester-Wedman, A. (1992). Using open-ended questions in the DTM test (PM No. 56). Umea, Sweden: Department of Education, University of Umea
13 Willingham, W. W. & Cole, N. (1997). Gender and fair assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
14 Young, D. J. & Fraser, B. J. (1994). Gender differences in science achievement: Do school effects make a difference? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(8), 857-871   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Haggerty, S. M. (1987). Gender and science achievement: A case study. International Journal of Science Education, 9, 271-279   DOI
16 Bell, R.C. & Hay, J.A. (1987). Differences and biases in English language examination formats. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 57, 212-220   DOI
17 Feingold, A. (1995). The additive effects of differences in central tendency and variability are important in comparisons between groups. American Psychologist, 50, 5-13   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Klein, S. P., Jovanonic, J., Stecher, B. M., McCaffrey, D., Shavelson, R. J., Haertel, E., Solano-Flores, G. & Comfort, K. (1997). Gender and racial/ethnic differences on performance assessments in science. Educational Evaluation and Policy analysis, 19(2), 83-97   DOI
19 Aberg-Bengtsson, L. (1999). Dimension of performance in the interpretation of diagrams, tables, and maps: Some gender differences in the Swedish Scholarstic Aptitude Test. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(5), 565-582   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Hamilton, L. S., Nussbaum, E.M., & Snow, R.E. (1997). Interview procedures for validating science assessments. Applied Measurement in Education, 10(2), 181-200   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Cole, N. S. (1997). The ETS gender study: How males and females perform in educational settings. Prinston, NJ: Educational Testing Service
22 Kim, J., Lee, M., Yoo, J., & Han, K. (2001). National assessment of educational achievement in science: Year 2001. Korea Institute of Curriculum & Evaluation Research Report PRE 2001-5-5
23 Linn, M. C. & Hyde, J. S. (1989). Gender, mathematics, and science. Educational Researcher, 18, 17-19
24 Maury, S., Janvier, M. & BailIe, J. (1990). Diagram processing procedures. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 5, 293-307   DOI
25 Rennie, L. J. (1991). The relationship between affect and achievement inscience. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(2), 193-209   DOI
26 Winn, W. & Holiday, W. (1982). Design principles for diagrams and charts. In D.H. Jonassen (Eds.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications
27 Makitalo, A. (1993). Gender differences in performance on the DTM subtest in the Swedish Scholastic Aptitude Test as a function of item position and cognitive demands. Unpublished thesis, Goteborg University, Sweden
28 Hanna, G. (1989). Mathematics achievement of girls and boys in grade eight: Results from twenty countries. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 20, 225-232   DOI
29 Harding, J. (1980). Sex differences in performance in science examinations. In R. Deem (Eds.), Schooling for Women's Work. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul
30 Ben-Shakhar, G. & Sinai, Y. (1991). Gender differences in multiple-choice tests: The role of differential guessing tendencies. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28(1), 23-35   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Kahle, J. B., Lakes, M. L., & Cho, H.(1985). An assessment of the impact of science experienves on the career choices of male and female biology student. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(5), 385-394   DOI
32 Wester, A. (1992). Item bias with respect to gender interpreted in the light of problem-solving strategies (EM No.3). Umea, Sweden: Department of Education, University of Umea
33 Wester, A. (1995). The importance of item format with respect to gender differences in test performance: A study of open-format items in the DTM test. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 39, 335-346   DOI   ScienceOn
34 Dimitrov, D. M. (1999). Gender differences in science achievement: Differential effect of ability, response format, and strands of learning outcomes. School Science and Mathematics, 99(8), 445-450   DOI   ScienceOn
35 Choi, K. & Kim, K. (2001). The effects of girl-friendly science content and method on middle school girl's attitude toward science. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 21(1), 149-159
36 Shin, D. (2000). An analysis of elementary 'Chayon' textbooks: From a perspective of gender fairness. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 20(2), 193-199
37 Wester, A. & Henrikson, W. (2000). The interaction between item format and gender differences in mathematics performance based on TIMSS data. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 26, 79-90.   DOI   ScienceOn
38 Shin, D. & Park, C. (2002). Korean students' achievement of earth science in international comparative studies: From the perspectives of gender differences. Journal of Korean Earth Science Society, 23(3), 207-220
39 Song, J., Pak, S. & Jang, K. (1992). Attitudes of boys and girls in elementary and secondary schools towards science lessons and scientists. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 12(3), 109-118
40 Stumpf, H. & Stanley, J. C. (1996). Gender-related differences on the college board's advanced placement and achievement tests, 1982-1992. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 353-364   DOI   ScienceOn
41 Winn, W. (1993). An account of how readers search for information in diagrams. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 162-185   DOI   ScienceOn
42 OECD (2001). Knowledge and skills for life: First results from PISA 2000. Paris: OECD Publications, 322p
43 O'Neil, H. F. & Brown, R. S. (1998). Differential effects of question formats in math assessment on metacognition and affect. Applied Measurement in Education, 11, 331-351   DOI   ScienceOn
44 Shin, D., Park, C. & Noh, K. (2002). Gender differences in achievement of earth and environmental area in PISA 2000. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 22(1), 40-53
45 Hedges , L. V. & Nowell, A. (1995). Sex differences in mental test scores, variability, and numbers of high-scoring individuals. Science, 269, 41-45   DOI