Who are those random responders on your survey? The case of the TIMSS 2015 student questionnaire

IF 2.6 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Large-Scale Assessments in Education Pub Date : 2023-11-18 DOI:10.1186/s40536-023-00184-6
Jianan Chen, Saskia van Laar, Johan Braeken
{"title":"Who are those random responders on your survey? The case of the TIMSS 2015 student questionnaire","authors":"Jianan Chen, Saskia van Laar, Johan Braeken","doi":"10.1186/s40536-023-00184-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>A general validity and survey quality concern with student questionnaires under low-stakes assessment conditions is that some responders will not genuinely engage with the questionnaire, often with more random response patterns as a result. Using a mixture IRT approach and a meta-analytic lens across 22 educational systems participating in TIMSS 2015, we investigated whether the prevalence of random responders on six scales regarding students’ engagement and attitudes toward mathematics and sciences was a function of grade, gender, socio-economic status, spoken language at home, or migration background. Among these common policy-relevant covariates in educational research, we found support for small group differences in prevalence of random responders (<span>\\({\\text {OR}}\\ge 1.22\\)</span>) (average prevalence of 7%). In general, being a student in grade 8 (vs. grade 4), being male, reporting to have fewer books, or speaking a language different from the test language at home were all risk factors characterizing random responders. The expected generalization and implications of these findings are discussed based on the observed heterogeneity across educational systems and consistency across questionnaire scales.</p>","PeriodicalId":37009,"journal":{"name":"Large-Scale Assessments in Education","volume":"12 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Large-Scale Assessments in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-023-00184-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A general validity and survey quality concern with student questionnaires under low-stakes assessment conditions is that some responders will not genuinely engage with the questionnaire, often with more random response patterns as a result. Using a mixture IRT approach and a meta-analytic lens across 22 educational systems participating in TIMSS 2015, we investigated whether the prevalence of random responders on six scales regarding students’ engagement and attitudes toward mathematics and sciences was a function of grade, gender, socio-economic status, spoken language at home, or migration background. Among these common policy-relevant covariates in educational research, we found support for small group differences in prevalence of random responders (\({\text {OR}}\ge 1.22\)) (average prevalence of 7%). In general, being a student in grade 8 (vs. grade 4), being male, reporting to have fewer books, or speaking a language different from the test language at home were all risk factors characterizing random responders. The expected generalization and implications of these findings are discussed based on the observed heterogeneity across educational systems and consistency across questionnaire scales.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
那些随机回答你调查的人是谁?TIMSS 2015学生问卷的案例
在低风险评估条件下,学生问卷的有效性和调查质量问题是,一些应答者不会真正参与问卷调查,结果往往是更随机的回答模式。使用混合IRT方法和元分析的视角,在参与TIMSS 2015的22个教育系统中,我们调查了关于学生对数学和科学的参与和态度的六个量表上随机反应者的患病率是否与年级、性别、社会经济地位、家庭口语或移民背景有关。在这些教育研究中常见的与政策相关的协变量中,我们发现随机应答者的患病率存在小群体差异(\({\text {OR}}\ge 1.22\))(平均患病率为7%)%). In general, being a student in grade 8 (vs. grade 4), being male, reporting to have fewer books, or speaking a language different from the test language at home were all risk factors characterizing random responders. The expected generalization and implications of these findings are discussed based on the observed heterogeneity across educational systems and consistency across questionnaire scales.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Large-Scale Assessments in Education
Large-Scale Assessments in Education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
6.50%
发文量
16
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Assessment of student ICT competence according to mathematics, science, and reading literacy: evidence from PISA 2018 Teacher-centered analysis with TIMSS and PIRLS data: weighting approaches, accuracy, and precision Secondary school students’ attitudes of tolerance towards minorities Participation rates, characteristics, and differential effects on reading literacy of extracurricular tutoring in a German large-scale assessment Teaching practices and organisational aspects associated with the use of ICT
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1