Abstract:
Numeracy skills are an important point in the structure of mathematics, and boarding school students are no exception. This study aims to identify gender bias in numeracy assessment in Islamic boarding schools. This research is a descriptive exploratory research using quantitative methods. The instrument used in this study was a numeracy test of 25 questions consisting of matching, multiple-choice, complex multiple-choice, and description questions. The research subjects involved 383 students in West Java consisting of 4 pesantren in 4 cities, namely West Bandung Regency, Cirebon Regency, Tasikmalaya Regency, and Tasikmalaya City. Quantitative analysis used Item Response Theory (IRT) followed by Differential Item Functioning (DIF) analysis with the Mantel-Haenzel method. The results showed that the instrument was suitable for use because it met the standards of validity and reliability. The model fit test that meets is GPCM, and DIF analysis shows that there is 1 number, namely number 21, in numeracy questions that indicate gender bias. The results of this analysis indicate that the numeracy test instrument set is suitable for use by boarding school students with minimal gender bias.
References
Amelia, R. N., Astuti, S. R. D., & Sari, A. R. P. (2022). Deteksi bias gender pada instrumen evaluasi belajar kimia dengan metode Mantel-Haenzel. JURNAL TARBIYAH, 29(2), 243. https://doi.org/10.30829/tar.v29i2.1781
Antara, A. A. P. (2020). Penyetaraan vertikal dengan pendekatan klasik dan item response theory (teori dan aplikasi). Deepublish.
Ate, D., & Lede, Y. K. (2022). Analisis kemampuan siswa kelas VIII dalam menyelesaikan soal literasi numerasi. Jurnal Cendekia : Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 6(1), 472–483. https://doi.org/10.31004/cendekia.v6i1.1041
Bahar, R., Istiyono, E., Widihastuti, W., Munadi, S., Nuryana, Z., & Fajaruddin, S. (2021). Analisis karakteristik soal ujian sekolah hasil musyawarah guru matematika di Tasikmalaya. AKSIOMA: Jurnal Program Studi Pendidikan Matematika, 10(4), 2660. https://doi.org/10.24127/ajpm.v10i4.4359
Basharat, S. (2022). Exploring gender gaps in mathematics achievement: The case of single-sex education in Saudi Arabia [Universitetet i Oslo]. https://www.duo.uio.no/handle/10852/95343
Berndt, A. E. (2020). Sampling methods. Journal of Human Lactation, 36(2), 224–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890334420906850
Chen, W.-H., & Thissen, D. (1997). Local dependence indexes for item pairs using item response theory. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22(3), 265–289. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986022003265
Clavel, J. G., & Flannery, D. (2023). Single‐sex schooling, gender and educational performance: Evidence using PISA data. British Educational Research Journal, 49(2), 248–265. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3841
DeMars, C. E. (2018). Classical test theory and item response theory. In The Wiley Handbook of Psychometric Testing (pp. 49–73). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118489772.ch2
Desjardins, C. D., & Bulut, O. (2018). Handbook of educational measurement and psychometrics using R. CRC Press.
Etikan, I. (2017). Sampling and sampling methods. Biometrics & Biostatistics International Journal, 5(6). https://doi.org/10.15406/bbij.2017.05.00149
Franklin, D., & Rangel, V. S. (2024). Estimating the effect of single-sex education on girls’ mathematics and science achievement. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 23(1), 97–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2022.2108461
Gomez-Benito, J., Sireci, S., Padilla, J.-L., Hidalgo, M. D., & Benitez, I. (2018). Differential Item Functioning: Beyond validity evidence based on internal structure. Psicothema, 30(1), 104–110. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2017.183
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., & Babin, B. J. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7th ed.). Prentice Hall.
Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Sage.
Heidari, S., Babor, T. F., De Castro, P., Tort, S., & Curno, M. (2016). Sex and Gender Equity in Research: rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 1(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0007-6
Isbah, M. F. (2020). Pesantren in the changing Indonesian context: History and current developments. QIJIS (Qudus International Journal of Islamic Studies), 8(1), 65. https://doi.org/10.21043/qijis.v8i1.5629
Karkal, Y. R., & Kundapur, G. S. (2016). Item analysis of multiple choice questions of undergraduate pharmacology examinations in an International Medical School in India. Journal of Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences, 5(3), 183. https://doi.org/10.4103/2277-8632.191842
Khaerudin, K., & Munadi, S. (2020). Pengembangan model evaluasi internal program pembelajaran pondok pesantren modern [Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta]. https://eprints.uny.ac.id/70135/
Lee, P., & Joo, S.-H. (2021). A new investigation of fake resistance of a multidimensional forced-choice measure: An application of differential item/test functioning. Personnel Assessment and Decisions, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.25035/pad.2021.01.004
Lee, S., & Kim, S. (2017). Detecting Differential Item Functioning based on gender: Field of mathematics in the TIMSS 2007. Journal of Fishries and Marine Sciences Education, 29(3), 757–766. https://doi.org/10.13000/JFMSE.2017.29.3.757
Masqon, D. (2014). Dynamic of pondok pesantren as indegenous Islamic education centre in Indonesia. EDUKASI: Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Agama Dan Keagamaan, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.32729/edukasi.v12i1.78
Peraturan Menteri Agama Republik Indonesia Nomor 31 Tahun 2020 tentang Pendidikan Pesantren, Pub. L. No. 31 (2020).
Montoya, S. (2018). Defining literacy: UNESCO. https://gamltest.uis.unesco.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/12/4.6.1_07_4.6-defining-literacy.pdf
Muafiah, E., Sofiana, N. E., & Khasanah, U. (2022). Pesantren education in Indonesia: Efforts to create child-friendly pesantren. Ulumuna, 26(2), 447–471. https://doi.org/10.20414/ujis.v26i2.558
Munthe, A. P. (2015). Pentingya evaluasi program di institusi pendidikan: Sebuah pengantar, pengertian, tujuan dan manfaat. Scholaria : Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Kebudayaan, 5(2), 1. https://doi.org/10.24246/j.scholaria.2015.v5.i2.p1-14
Myszkowski, N. (2021). Development of the R library “jrt”: Automated item response theory procedures for judgment data and their application with the consensual assessment technique. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 15(3), 426–438. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000287
Nadal, K. L. (2017). Gender bias in education. In The SAGE Encyclopedia of Psychology and Gender (Vol. 01, pp. 37–47). SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483384269.n209
Nathan, N. A., & Umoinyang, E. I. (2022). Differential Item Functioning in Basic education certificate examination in Mathematics in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. Journal of Research in Education and Society, 13(3), 136–146. https://doi.org/10.58579/AJB-SDR/4.1.2022.62
Odukoya, J. A., Adekeye, O., Igbinoba, A. O., & Afolabi, A. (2018). Item analysis of university-wide multiple choice objective examinations: the experience of a Nigerian private university. Quality & Quantity, 52(3), 983–997. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0499-2
OECD. (2019). Programme for international student assessment (PISA) results from PISA 2018. OECD Publishing, III, 1–10.
Rahman, M. M., Tabash, M. I., Salamzadeh, A., Abduli, S., & Rahaman, M. S. (2022). Sampling techniques (probability) for quantitative social science researchers: A conceptual guidelines with examples. SEEU Review, 17(1), 42–51. https://doi.org/10.2478/seeur-2022-0023
Raju, N. S. (1988). The area between two item characteristic curves. Psychometrika, 53(4), 495–502. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294403
Ramdhani, S., Suryadi, D., & Prabawanto, S. (2021). Hambatan belajar matematika di pondok pesantren. Jurnal Analisa, 7(1), 46–55. https://doi.org/10.15575/ja.v7i1.10106
Retnawati, H. (2014). Teori respons butir dan penerapannya: Untuk peneliti, praktisi pengukuran dan pengujian, mahasiswa pascasarjana. Nuha Medika.
Sahri, I. K., & Hidayah, L. (2020). Kesetaraan gender di Pesantren NU: Sebuah telaah atas single sex classroom di pendidikan diniyah formal Ulya Pondok Pesantren Al Fithrah Surabaya. Journal of Nahdlatul Ulama Studies, 1(1), 67–105. https://doi.org/10.35672/jnus.v1i1.67-105
Samritin, S. (2022). Identifikasi muatan Differential Item Functioning pada data ujian nasional matematika. Journal on Education, 4(4), 1675–1684. https://doi.org/10.31004/joe.v4i4.2508
Sarstedt, M., & Mooi, E. (2014). A concise guide to market research. In A Concise Guide to Market Research. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-53965-7
Steegh, A. M., Höffler, T. N., Keller, M. M., & Parchmann, I. (2019). Gender differences in mathematics and science competitions: A systematic review. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(10), 1431–1460. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21580
Supriatna, D. (2018). Motivasi orang tua memilih pondokp pesantren untuk Anaknya. Intizar, 24(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.19109/intizar.v24i1.1951
Wekke, I. S., & Hamid, S. (2013). Technology on language teaching and learning: A research on Indonesian Pesantren. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 83, 585–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.111
Wetzel, E., Hell, B., & Pässler, K. (2012). Comparison of different test construction strategies in the development of a gender fair interest inventory using verbs. Journal of Career Assessment, 20(1), 88–104. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072711417166
Whiteford, C. (2020). Mathematics, numeracy and literacy: A combination for success. Practical Literacy, 25(2), 36–38. https://doi.org/10.3316/aeipt.228037
Yasid, A. (2018). Paradigma baru pesantren: menuju pendidikan islam transformatif. Yogyakarta: IRCiSOD.
Yildiz, H. (2021). IRTGUI: An R Package for Unidimensional Item Response Theory Analysis With a Graphical User Interface. Applied Psychological Measurement, 45(7–8), 551–552. https://doi.org/10.1177/01466216211040532
Yusnita, E. (2011). Pembelajaran Kontekstual berlatar pondok pesantren pada materi garis dan sudut di kelas VII MTS. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Penelitian, Pendidikan Dan Penerapan MIPA, Fakultas MIPA, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, 11–18.
