LearningToLearn
is a real longitudinal dataset used in Martinkova et al (2020) study,
demonstrating differential item functioning in change (DIF-C) on Learning to Learn (LtL) test. Among other
variables, it primarily contains binary-coded responses of 782 subjects to (mostly) multiple-choice test
consisting of 41 items within 7 subscales (see Format for details). Each respondent was tested twice
in total -- the first time in Grade 6 and the second time in Grade 9. Most importantly, school track
(variable track_01
or track
) is available, with 391 students attending basic school (BS) and 391 pursuing
selective academic school (AS). This dataset was created using propensity score matching algorithm to achieve
similar characteristics in both tracks (see References for details). To further simplify the work with LtL
dataset, we provide computed total scores as well as 7 subscores, both for Grade 6 and Grade 9.
The dataset also includes change variables for each item (see Format for details) for more detailed
DIF-C analysis using multinomial regression model.
data(LearningToLearn)
A LearningToLearn
data frame consists of 782 observations on the following 141 variables:
dichotomously scored school track, where "1"
denotes the selective academic school one.
school track, where "AS"
represents the selective academic school track, and "BS"
stands
for basic school track.
total test score value obtained by summing all 41 items of LtL
, the number denotes
the Grade which the respondent was taking at the time of testing.
scores of respective cognitive subtest (1--7) of LtL
in Grade 6.
scores of respective cognitive subtest (1--7) of LtL
in Grade 9.
dichotomously coded 41 individual items obtained at Grade 6, "1"
represents
the correct answer to the particular item.
dichotomously coded 41 individual items obtained at Grade 9, "1"
represents
the correct answer to the particular item.
change patterns with those possible values:
a student responded correctly in neither Grade 6 nor in Grade 9 (did not improve, "00"
)
a student responded correctly in Grade 6 but not in Grade 9 (deteriorated, "10"
)
a student did not respond correctly in Grade 6 but responded correctly in Grade 9 (improved, "01"
), and
a student responded correctly in both grades (did not deteriorate, "11"
)
Martinkova, P., Hladka, A., & Potuznikova, E. (2020). Is academic tracking related to gains in learning competence? Using propensity score matching and differential item change functioning analysis for better understanding of tracking implications. Learning and Instruction, 66, 101286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101286