Cognitive Difficulty and Format of Exams Predicts Gender and Socioeconomic Gaps in Exam Performance of Students in Introductory Biology Courses

In a study examining more than 4800 student exams in introductory biology, the authors found that exam characteristics differentially impact students based on gender and socioeconomic status.

[1]  Mary Pat Wenderoth,et al.  PORTAAL: A Classroom Observation Tool Assessing Evidence-Based Teaching Practices for Active Learning in Large Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Classes , 2015, CBE life sciences education.

[2]  Jessi L. Smith,et al.  Losing its expected communal value: how stereotype threat undermines women’s identity as research scientists , 2015 .

[3]  Mary Pat Wenderoth,et al.  Gender Gaps in Achievement and Participation in Multiple Introductory Biology Classrooms , 2014, CBE life sciences education.

[4]  Sarah L. Eddy,et al.  Getting Under the Hood: How and for Whom Does Increasing Course Structure Work? , 2014, CBE life sciences education.

[5]  Michelle K. Smith,et al.  Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[6]  J. Harackiewicz,et al.  Closing the Social Class Achievement Gap for First-Generation Students in Undergraduate Biology. , 2014, Journal of educational psychology.

[7]  Tyler A. Kummer,et al.  Teaching to the Test…or Testing to Teach: Exams Requiring Higher Order Thinking Skills Encourage Greater Conceptual Understanding , 2014 .

[8]  Marie-Christine Toczek-Capelle,et al.  Reducing the Socio-Economic Status Achievement Gap at University by Promoting Mastery-Oriented Assessment , 2013, PloS one.

[9]  Mila Kryjevskaia,et al.  Using Assessments to Investigate and Compare the Nature of Learning in Undergraduate Science Courses , 2013, CBE life sciences education.

[10]  Mark A. McDaniel,et al.  Quizzing in Middle-School Science: Successful Transfer Performance on Classroom Exams , 2013 .

[11]  Jennifer L. Momsen,et al.  Stereotyped: Investigating Gender in Introductory Science Courses , 2013, CBE life sciences education.

[12]  Valerie Purdie-Vaughns,et al.  Deflecting the trajectory and changing the narrative: how self-affirmation affects academic performance and motivation under identity threat. , 2013, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[13]  Jenessa R. Shapiro,et al.  Are all interventions created equal? A multi-threat approach to tailoring stereotype threat interventions. , 2013, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[14]  Ryan D. Sweeder,et al.  Analysis of Student Performance in Large-Enrollment Life Science Courses , 2012, CBE life sciences education.

[15]  Mary Lee S. Ledbetter,et al.  Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education: A Call to Action Presentation to Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience, July 2011 , 2012, Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience.

[16]  Kathrin F. Stanger-Hall,et al.  Multiple-Choice Exams: An Obstacle for Higher-Level Thinking in Introductory Science Classes , 2012, CBE life sciences education.

[17]  Anna Brunken,et al.  Access to Success. , 2011 .

[18]  Scott Freeman,et al.  Increased Course Structure Improves Performance in Introductory Biology , 2011, CBE life sciences education.

[19]  David C. Haak,et al.  Increased Structure and Active Learning Reduce the Achievement Gap in Introductory Biology , 2011, Science.

[20]  S. Lazic,et al.  Model based Inference in the Life Sciences: a Primer on Evidence , 2011 .

[21]  Catherine S. Taylor,et al.  Ethnic DIF in Reading Tests With Mixed Item Formats , 2011 .

[22]  Tammy M. Long,et al.  Just the Facts? Introductory Undergraduate Biology Courses Focus on Low-Level Cognitive Skills , 2010, CBE life sciences education.

[23]  Diane Ebert-May,et al.  Learner-Centered Inquiry in Undergraduate Biology: Positive Relationships with Long-Term Student Achievement , 2010, CBE life sciences education.

[24]  Geoffrey L. Cohen,et al.  Supporting Online Material for Reducing the Gender Achievement Gap in College Science: A Classroom Study of Values Affirmation , 2010 .

[25]  M. Linn,et al.  New trends in gender and mathematics performance: a meta-analysis. , 2010, Psychological bulletin.

[26]  Ryan D. Sweeder,et al.  Gender performance differences in biochemistry , 2010, Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.

[27]  P. Black,et al.  Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards through Classroom Assessment , 2010 .

[28]  L. Garamszegi,et al.  Information-theoretic approaches to statistical analysis in behavioural ecology: an introduction , 2010, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[29]  Shannon D. Willoughby,et al.  Exploring gender differences with different gain calculations in astronomy and biology , 2009 .

[30]  Luc T. Le.  Investigating Gender Differential Item Functioning Across Countries and Test Languages for PISA Science Items , 2009 .

[31]  J. E. West,et al.  Sex and Science: How Professor Gender Perpetuates the Gender Gap , 2009 .

[32]  A. Zuur,et al.  Mixed Effects Models and Extensions in Ecology with R , 2009 .

[33]  K. Barton.  MuMIn : multi-model inference, R package version 0.12.0 , 2009 .

[34]  De Ayala,et al.  The Theory and Practice of Item Response Theory , 2008 .

[35]  Alison Crowe,et al.  Biology in bloom: implementing Bloom's Taxonomy to enhance student learning in biology. , 2008, CBE life sciences education.

[36]  D. Gitomer,et al.  Access to Success:Patterns of Advanced Placement Participation in U.S. High Schools. Policy Information Report. , 2008 .

[37]  D. Hastedt,et al.  Trends in gender differences in mathematics and science (TIMSS 1995–2003) , 2008 .

[38]  Emily J. Shaw,et al.  Examining the Relationship between the SAT®, High School Measures of Academic Performance, and Socioeconomic Status: Turning Our Attention to the Unit of Analysis. Research Notes. RN-36. , 2008 .

[39]  Joshua Aronson,et al.  Problems in the pipeline: Stereotype threat and women's achievement in high-level math courses ☆ ☆☆ , 2008 .

[40]  Johannes Keller,et al.  Stereotype threat in classroom settings: the interactive effect of domain identification, task difficulty and stereotype threat on female students' maths performance. , 2007, The British journal of educational psychology.

[41]  Scott Freeman,et al.  Prescribed active learning increases performance in introductory biology , 2007, CBE life sciences education.

[42]  Lisa S. Blackwell,et al.  Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: a longitudinal study and an intervention. , 2007, Child development.

[43]  Geoffrey L. Cohen,et al.  Reducing the Racial Achievement Gap: A Social-Psychological Intervention , 2006, Science.

[44]  C. Dweck.  Mindset: The New Psychology of Success , 2006 .

[45]  J. Croizet,et al.  Socioeconomic Status and Intelligence: Why Test Scores Do Not Equal Merit , 2004 .

[46]  Laura McCullough,et al.  Gender, Context, and Physics Assessment , 2004 .

[47]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Understanding AIC and BIC in Model Selection , 2004 .

[48]  Joshua Aronson,et al.  Improving adolescents' standardized test performance: An intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat , 2003 .

[49]  C. Dweck,et al.  Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[50]  T. Bastick.  Gender Differences for 6-12th Grade Students over Bloom's Cognitive Domain. , 2002 .

[51]  Carrie B. Fried,et al.  Reducing the Effects of Stereotype Threat on African American College Students by Shaping Theories of Intelligence , 2002 .

[52]  Harold H. Wenglinsky.  The Link Between Teacher Classroom Practices and Student Academic Performance , 2002 .

[53]  Linda J. Sax,et al.  The American College Teacher: National Norms for the 2001-2002 HERI Faculty Survey. , 2002 .

[54]  Helen Raptis,et al.  Gender Differences in Introductory Atmospheric and Oceanic Science Exams: Multiple Choice Versus Constructed Response Questions , 2001 .

[55]  K. Ryan,et al.  An Examination of Item Context Effects, DIF, and Gender DIF , 2001 .

[56]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives , 2000 .

[57]  Christine E. DeMars.  Test Stakes and Item Format Interactions , 2000 .

[58]  M. Beller,et al.  Can Item Format (Multiple Choice vs. Open-Ended) Account for Gender Differences in Mathematics Achievement? , 2000 .

[59]  Richard M. Ingersoll,et al.  The Problem of Underqualified Teachers in American Secondary Schools , 1999 .

[60]  C. Dweck.  Self-theoriestheir role in motivation, personality, and development , 1999 .

[61]  S. Spencer,et al.  Stereotype Threat and Women's Math Performance , 1999 .

[62]  Christine E. DeMars.  Gender Differences in Mathematics and Science on a High School Proficiency Exam: The Role of Response Format , 1998 .

[63]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Model Based Inference in the Life Sciences: A Primer on Evidence , 1998 .

[64]  Jan de Leeuw,et al.  Introducing Multilevel Modeling , 1998 .

[65]  C. Steele.  A threat in the air. How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. , 1997, The American psychologist.

[66]  C. Steele,et al.  Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. , 1995, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[67]  J. Mazzeo,et al.  Sex-Related Performance Differences on Constructed-Response and Multiple-Choice Sections of Advanced Placement Examinations. College Board Report No. 92-7. , 1993 .

[68]  Abigail M. Harris,et al.  PATTERNS OF GENDER DIFFERENCES ON MATHEMATICS ITEMS ON THE SCHOLASTIC APTITUDE TEST , 1993 .

[69]  S. T. Carlton,et al.  CHARACTERISTICS ASSOCIATED WITH DIFFERENTIAL ITEM FUNCTIONING ON THE SCHOLASTIC APTITUDE TEST: GENDER AND MAJORITY/MINORITY GROUP COMPARISONS , 1992 .

[70]  Anthony S. Bryk,et al.  Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods , 1992 .

[71]  N. Entwistle,et al.  Contrasting forms of understanding for degree examinations: the student experience and its implications , 1991 .

[72]  Harvey Goldstein,et al.  New Statistical Methods for Analysing Social Structures: an introduction to multilevel models , 1991 .

[73]  Jeannie Oakes,et al.  Multiplying Inequalities: The Effects of Race, Social Class, and Tracking on Opportunities to Learn Mathematics and Science , 1990 .

[74]  John D. Bain,et al.  Contextual dependence of learning approaches: The effects of assessments. , 1984 .

[75]  John P. Rickards,et al.  The encoding versus the external storage hypothesis in note taking , 1978 .

[76]  H. Akaike,et al.  Information Theory and an Extension of the Maximum Likelihood Principle , 1973 .

[77]  John A. Valentine,et al.  The College Entrance Examination Board , 1961 .

[78]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. , 1957 .