FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W40299932> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W40299932 abstract "This study tents -.the hypothesis of a. gender dlifferetpce in academic achievement s a function of measurement methihd. Using a sample of rl 15-16 year old, Irish school st'udents (N=1665), gender, differences in achievement were examined for three school subjects (Irist;41' English* Mathematics) * .assessed,: by two methods (multiple-choice test written public examination). fie has been found in other countries,males performed significantly better than females on multiple-choice compared with written examinations. An additional hypothesis that gendcdifference would be largest for languages and smallest for mathematics was not supported. This finding runs contrary to en explanation of this phenomenon in terms of greater verbal skills of females. Alternative 'explanations are proposed and educational policy implications are 'discussed. Gender difference in academia achievement according to method of measurement The biasing influence of Measurement method on research findings has long been recognisld, and methodologists have urged that multiple mea.t.ires of constructs be obtained in order to counteract this .potential problem (Campbell and Fiske, 1959; C.lok and Campbell, 1979). This issue has acquired relevance in theeducational literature due to finding that males perform relatively better than females on multiple-choice tests co9ipared with written, examinations .(Dwyer, 1979; Murphy, 1982). Moreover, quasi-experimental effectseon public examination scores, have been noted in United. Kingdom,' follOwing a o change from theUse of written questions only to a combination of written and multiple-choice questions. Murphy (1980) provides time series evidence that followink introduction of a multiple-choice paper into a 1977 public examination in. Geography, the percentage of . male candidates obtaining A, HI or C grades becgme-apRroxiamately 10% higher than_ equivalent figure for female candidates. We regard these findings as exemplifying method-trait distinction propond.by Campbell and Fiske (1959). In their now-classic paper, authors suggest that a' considerable proportion of variation in test -scores may be due to features of form of test (method) used rather than individual _characterictios (traits) which 'the test is designed to measure. This issue of method variance is central to present problem, for it appears that substantial gender differences in achievement are attributable to differences in f method by which achievement is measured. The main explanation offered for these results has been that they reflect a gender difference in verbal ability such that females posess a relative advantage where a written. assessment method is used. Evidence for this proposition is provided by Murphy .(1982), who found consistent gender differences in achievement according to measurement method (multiple-choice, written test) for a wide range of subjects excepting mathematics. Given low verbal content required in mathematics examinations, whether written or multiple-choice, this finding supports verbal hypothesis. The aims of, present paper are two fold. First, I will test %cross -culturall genaralizability of this finding by determining whether a sex difference in achievement, as a function of measurement method, exists in Irish case. To do so, I will utilise informati collected on a cohort of pupils whose academic performance was assessed over a number of years in 1970s. I will focus on three secondlevc1 school subjects (English, Irish, and Mathematics' or which scores on standardised multiple-choice tests and grades on Intermediate Certificate public examination (taken mid-way through . high school years) are available. Second, as only one study to dete has attempted to explain .these findings (e.g.i Murphy, 1982), I will test adequacy of th2 verbal, hypothesis as an explanation of gender difference (if found) using a more appropriate statistical model (repeated measures ANOVA vs. a sequence of t-tests) . Consistent with a concern with issues identified by Campbell and Fiske (1959), throughout remainder of paper I wiles utilise their terminology by referring to achievement in Irish, English and -Mathematics as traits, and by referring to 2 5 I" @default.
• W40299932 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W40299932 creator A5054005844 @default.
• W40299932 date "1984-08-01" @default.
• W40299932 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W40299932 title "Gender Difference in Academic Achievement According to Method of Measurement." @default.
• W40299932 cites W1994984342 @default.
• W40299932 cites W2004121680 @default.
• W40299932 cites W2076192758 @default.
• W40299932 cites W2097245483 @default.
• W40299932 cites W2798510847 @default.
• W40299932 hasPublicationYear "1984" @default.
• W40299932 type Work @default.
• W40299932 sameAs 40299932 @default.
• W40299932 citedByCount "4" @default.
• W40299932 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W40299932 hasAuthorship W40299932A5054005844 @default.
• W40299932 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W40299932 hasConcept C138496976 @default.
• W40299932 hasConcept C145420912 @default.
• W40299932 hasConcept C151730666 @default.
• W40299932 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W40299932 hasConcept C176730311 @default.
• W40299932 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W40299932 hasConcept C198531522 @default.
• W40299932 hasConcept C2777267654 @default.
• W40299932 hasConcept C3018023364 @default.
• W40299932 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W40299932 hasConcept C43617362 @default.
• W40299932 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W40299932 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W40299932 hasConceptScore W40299932C105795698 @default.
• W40299932 hasConceptScore W40299932C138496976 @default.
• W40299932 hasConceptScore W40299932C145420912 @default.
• W40299932 hasConceptScore W40299932C151730666 @default.
• W40299932 hasConceptScore W40299932C15744967 @default.
• W40299932 hasConceptScore W40299932C176730311 @default.
• W40299932 hasConceptScore W40299932C185592680 @default.
• W40299932 hasConceptScore W40299932C198531522 @default.
• W40299932 hasConceptScore W40299932C2777267654 @default.
• W40299932 hasConceptScore W40299932C3018023364 @default.
• W40299932 hasConceptScore W40299932C33923547 @default.
• W40299932 hasConceptScore W40299932C43617362 @default.
• W40299932 hasConceptScore W40299932C77805123 @default.
• W40299932 hasConceptScore W40299932C86803240 @default.
• W40299932 hasLocation W402999321 @default.
• W40299932 hasOpenAccess W40299932 @default.
• W40299932 hasPrimaryLocation W402999321 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W123682981 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W12608114 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W195419447 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W1966671532 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W1981386172 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W1994804072 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W1994984342 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W1996955162 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W2041416125 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W2045841529 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W2061851936 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W2065508775 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W2090168614 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W2128828205 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W2333097382 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W2795157632 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W281139828 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W287671903 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W302482133 @default.
• W40299932 hasRelatedWork W75691758 @default.
• W40299932 isParatext "false" @default.
• W40299932 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W40299932 magId "40299932" @default.
• W40299932 workType "article" @default.