UC Berkeley

This dissertation includes three studies that analyze a new set of assessment tasks developed by the Learning Progressions in Middle School Science (LPS) Project. These assessment tasks were designed to measure science content knowledge on the structure of matter domain and scientific argumentation, while following the goals from the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). The three studies focus on the evidence available for the success of this design and its implementation, generally labelled as “validity” evidence. I use explanatory item response models (EIRMs) as the overarching framework to investigate these assessment tasks. These models can be useful when gathering validity evidence for assessments as they can help explain student learning and group differences.

In the first study, I explore the dimensionality of the LPS assessment by comparing the fit of unidimensional, between-item multidimensional, and Rasch testlet models to see which is most appropriate for this data. By applying multidimensional item response models, multiple relationships can be investigated, and in turn, allow for a more substantive look into the assessment tasks. The second study focuses on person predictors through latent regression and differential item functioning (DIF) models. Latent regression models show the influence of certain person characteristics on item responses, while DIF models test whether one group is differentially affected by specific assessment items, after conditioning on latent ability. Finally, the last study applies the linear logistic test model (LLTM) to investigate whether item features can help explain differences in item difficulties.