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. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101286