Ackerman T. A. (1992). A didactic explanation of item bias,.item impact, and iteln validity from a multidimensional perspective. Journal of
Educational Measurement, 15, 1, 13-24. Agresti, A. (1990). Categorical Data Analysis. New York : Whiley. ‘ ' s native ld , D.L. & Holland P.W. (1981). Item performance actos
A ermalrclmguage groups on the Test of English as a Foreign Language (ETS Research Rep. No. 81-16). Princeton NJ : Educational Testing SerVice. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1985). Standards for educational and psychological testing.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Assocıatıon. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement ın Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing.
Washington, DC“. American Psychological Assocıation. American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association & National Council on Measurement ın Education. (1966). Standards for educational anti psychological test and manuals.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Assocıatıon. American Psychological Association, American Educational İlle-search Association & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1974). Standards for educational anfi psychological test and manuals.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Assocıatıon. Angoff, W. H., & Ford, S. F. (1973). Item race interaction on a test of scholastic aptitude. Journal of Educational Measurement, 10, 95-105.
Bock, R. D. (1975). Multivariate Statistical IVIethods. New York: McGraw—Hill.
Camilli, G. (1979). A critique of the chi square method for assessing item bias.
Unpublished manuscript, University of Colorado, Laboratory of Educational Research, Boulder. Cardal], C., & Coffman, W. E. (1964). A method for comparing the performance of different groups on the items in a test (College Entrance Examination
Board Research and Development Rep. 64-5 No. 9; ETS Research Bulletin 64-61). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service. Cleary, T. A. (1968). Test bias: prediction of grades of Negro and white students in integrated colleges. Journal of Educational Measurement, 5, 115-124.
Cleary, T. A., & Hilton, T. L. (1968). An investigation of item bias. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 28, 61—75.
Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to Classical Modern Test Theory.
Rinehard and Winston Inc. United States. Embi‘etson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item Reponse Theory for Psychologists.
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. Mahway, New Jersey. Fienberg, S. E. (1980). The analysis of cross—classiŞed categorical data.
Cambridge MA: MIT Press. Gier], M. J., Bisanz, J., Bisanz, G., Boughton, K.A., & Khaliq, S. N. (2003)
Identifying content and cognitive skills that produce gender differences in mathematics: a demonstration of the multidimensionality—based DIF analysis. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40, 281-306. Hambleton, K. R., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item Response Theory
Principles and Application. Ni j hoff Publishing. Hollan, P. W. (1985). On the study of differential item performance without lRT.
Proceesings of the 27'h Annual Conference of the Military Testing Association (Vol. I,‘ pp.282—287). San Diego CA: Navy Personnel Research and Development Center. Holand P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1988). Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In H. Wainer & H. 1. Braun (Eds), Test validity (pp.129-145). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.
Mantel, N., & Haensze], W. (1959). Statistical aspect ofthe analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. Journal ofthe National Cancer Institude, , 719-748. Mellenbergh, 1982
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. Linn, Robert L. (ED). Educational Measurement
(3rd ed.). The American council on education / Macmillan series on higher education. (pp. 13-103).
Ackerman T. A. (1992). A didactic explanation of item bias,.item impact, and iteln validity from a multidimensional perspective. Journal of
Educational Measurement, 15, 1, 13-24. Agresti, A. (1990). Categorical Data Analysis. New York : Whiley. ‘ ' s native ld , D.L. & Holland P.W. (1981). Item performance actos
A ermalrclmguage groups on the Test of English as a Foreign Language (ETS Research Rep. No. 81-16). Princeton NJ : Educational Testing SerVice. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1985). Standards for educational and psychological testing.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Assocıatıon. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement ın Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing.
Washington, DC“. American Psychological Assocıation. American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association & National Council on Measurement ın Education. (1966). Standards for educational anti psychological test and manuals.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Assocıatıon. American Psychological Association, American Educational İlle-search Association & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1974). Standards for educational anfi psychological test and manuals.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Assocıatıon. Angoff, W. H., & Ford, S. F. (1973). Item race interaction on a test of scholastic aptitude. Journal of Educational Measurement, 10, 95-105.
Bock, R. D. (1975). Multivariate Statistical IVIethods. New York: McGraw—Hill.
Camilli, G. (1979). A critique of the chi square method for assessing item bias.
Unpublished manuscript, University of Colorado, Laboratory of Educational Research, Boulder. Cardal], C., & Coffman, W. E. (1964). A method for comparing the performance of different groups on the items in a test (College Entrance Examination
Board Research and Development Rep. 64-5 No. 9; ETS Research Bulletin 64-61). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service. Cleary, T. A. (1968). Test bias: prediction of grades of Negro and white students in integrated colleges. Journal of Educational Measurement, 5, 115-124.
Cleary, T. A., & Hilton, T. L. (1968). An investigation of item bias. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 28, 61—75.
Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to Classical Modern Test Theory.
Rinehard and Winston Inc. United States. Embi‘etson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item Reponse Theory for Psychologists.
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. Mahway, New Jersey. Fienberg, S. E. (1980). The analysis of cross—classiŞed categorical data.
Cambridge MA: MIT Press. Gier], M. J., Bisanz, J., Bisanz, G., Boughton, K.A., & Khaliq, S. N. (2003)
Identifying content and cognitive skills that produce gender differences in mathematics: a demonstration of the multidimensionality—based DIF analysis. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40, 281-306. Hambleton, K. R., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item Response Theory
Principles and Application. Ni j hoff Publishing. Hollan, P. W. (1985). On the study of differential item performance without lRT.
Proceesings of the 27'h Annual Conference of the Military Testing Association (Vol. I,‘ pp.282—287). San Diego CA: Navy Personnel Research and Development Center. Holand P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1988). Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In H. Wainer & H. 1. Braun (Eds), Test validity (pp.129-145). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.
Mantel, N., & Haensze], W. (1959). Statistical aspect ofthe analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. Journal ofthe National Cancer Institude, , 719-748. Mellenbergh, 1982
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. Linn, Robert L. (ED). Educational Measurement
(3rd ed.). The American council on education / Macmillan series on higher education. (pp. 13-103).