Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Chapter 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness p206 Unfair Discrimination Item & Test Bias Test-Score Banding Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Chapter 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness p206 Unfair Discrimination Item & Test Bias Test-Score Banding Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness."— Presentation transcript:

1 Chapter 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness p206 Unfair Discrimination Item & Test Bias Test-Score Banding Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness 1

2 – Bias defined “Systematic group differences in item responses, test scores, or other assessments for reasons unrelated to the trait.” – Cultural bias defined “ if an acceptable response depends on skills or information common in one culture but not in the other.” – Discrimination defined “Making distinctions” – – not same as unfair discrimination Define “unfair” discrimination What’s the differences between the two –give an example Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness 2

3 DISCRIMINATION Discrimination Based on Group Membership – Protected groups Race Color Religion Gender Nat’l origin LGBT? Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness 3

4 Distributional Differences Group Mean Differences (Give an example for each below) 1.Two groups are biased samples (from respective populations) E.g. extensive uncritical recruiting for lower scoring group Would not be biased (why not?) 2.Two groups are representative (not biased if actually differ on the trait) 3.Test items require experiences not common to lower scoring group (not biased if experiences required) 4.Test administration conditions differ for the two groups Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness 4

5 Racial Differences in IQ Few believe there are no race differences – Means for: East Asians 105 Europeans (Whites) 100 Blacks 85 – Cohen effect size Hispanics.6 to.8 SD < Whites Blacks 1 SD

6 Race Differences in IQ (Furnham ’08, p 207) Three plausible explanations 1.Evidence of biological & genetic differences between races 2.Evidence of sociocultural, economic & political forces for differences -distinct from racial characteristics -But confounded with them 3.Differences are only artifacts of test design, administration, or measurement -no real differences Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness 6

7 Black-White Racial Differences in IQ Greater variation within groups than between – 16% Blacks score above the White mean – For a cutoff of 70 score for special education There will be 1 White for every 7 Blacks – Black/White differences are constant over time and life span – Differences are present prior to school entry – Differences are not constant for diff types of measures of intelligence Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness 7

8 Black & White Differences in IQ (implications for workforce) Gottfredson (2002) 22% Whites & 59% of Blacks have IQ < 90 – Considerably fewer Blacks (proportionately) are competitive for mid-level jobs: fire fighting, skilled trades, many clerical jobs – Mean IQ is about 100 (1 SD above Whites) – 80 is the threshold for being competitive in lowest level jobs » 4 times as many Blacks (30%) cf Whites (7%) fall bellow that threshold Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness 8

9 Implications for Black / White IQ Differences On the higher end of the distribution (IQ =125) – Score of 125 = mean for professionals (e.g. lawyers, physicians, engineers, high-level executives etc.) Black / White ratio is only 1:30 at this level Conclusion: Disparate impact with legal and political tension… Is “particularly acute in the most complex, most socially desirable jobs” (Gottfredson, ’02, p. 41). Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness 9

10 Differences in Other Distributional Characteristics (table 9.1 p211) – Note: group means are different, but variability is greater – At lower selection ratios, differences in proportions may disappear. Discrimination as Systematic Measurement Error – If discrimination error is systematic and more for one group than the other (e.g. test taking habits) – can be unfair even if not illegal Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness 10

11 ANALYSIS OF BIAS AND ADVERSE IMPACT IN TEST USE Test bias Unwanted sources of variance in scores from different groups Adverse impact Social, political or legal term (effects of test use) Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness 11

12 ANALYSIS OF BIAS AND ADVERSE IMPACT IN TEST USE Test Bias as Differential Psychometric Validity – Bias = “when groups matched on the trait have different scores because of one or more sources of variances related to group membership” 1.It is the “Meaning inferred” from scores may or may not be biased ( Not the test itself) 2.It is group related (not just for a single individual) 3.Groups must be assumed to be equal on the trait 4.Definition emphasizes sources of group variances (potentially identifiable) (not on group means) -e.g. “stereotype threat” (Steele & Aronson, ‘95) Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness 12

13 ANALYSIS OF BIAS AND ADVERSE IMPACT IN TEST USE Adverse Impact (legal term, not statistical) – Mean differences alone do not indicate bias How does this “attitude problem” force adversarial roles? What’s a better term? – Adverse impact reasons: 1.Chance (not due to bias) 2.Measurement problems 3.Nature of test use 4.Differences in distribution sizes 5.Reliable sub-group approaches to test taking 6.True population differences in trait (not due to bias) 1.NOTE TABLE 9.2 P 216 Criterion Bias (criterion must be valid) Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness 13

14 DIFFERENTIAL ITEM FUNCTIONING (DIF) DIF preferred over ‘bias’ – “Simple minded item difficulty statistics” You can’t consider the item itself (dependent upon the trait distribution –thus confounded with it) – Court cases: Golden Rule Insurance Company v. Washburn (‘84) – Mandated that group item difficulty could not differ by more than.15!! Allen v. Alabama State Board of Education (‘85) – More restrictive – not more than.05 max difference!!! Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness 14

15 ACTING ON THE FINDINGS Corrective Actions (4) Under the Uniform Guidelines – p 218 – Should we maximize the criterion performance or avoid the appearance of discriminatory practice? – To ease tensions how should the Ferguson police dept deal with the imbalance in B &W police officers as it reflects the population’s racial mix? Score Adjustments – Race norming in U.S. Employment Service (GATB) Scores of Hispanics, Blacks and Whites were % ile ranks within groups What effect did this have ? – Employment Quotas USTES Are quotas acceptable in other countries? Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness 15

16 Analysis of Bias (con’t) “Ranges of Indifference” in Test Score Bands – Band Width They exist whatever you do…so how to decide? Standard error of the difference in scores (s d = s m √ 2 ) Adjustment in band with should be based on judgments re: loss of utility – Decisions Within Bands – Fixed Bands (don’t slither down) – Sliding Bands (slither down) – Rubber Bands What are these used for? Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness 16


Download ppt "Chapter 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness p206 Unfair Discrimination Item & Test Bias Test-Score Banding Chapater 9 Analyzing Bias and Assuring Fairness."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google