Accounting for measurement bias: new framework for reliable country ranking in large-scale educational assessments

International Large-scale Assessments (ILSAs), such as the Program for Interna tional Student Assessment (PISA) and the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), are cornerstone tools for global educational research and policy-making. By benchmarking educational quality and performance trends, these assessments enable countries to evaluate and share effective pedagogical structures. Specifically, ILSAs employ Item Response Theory (IRT) models to rank countries by students’ performance on cognitive items. However, measurement bias—arising from linguistic, cultural, and curricular differences—poses a significant threat to the statistical inference of IRT models and, consequently, the validity of the resulting rankings. Neglecting this bias can lead to systematic errors in parameter estimation, ultimately distorting national standings. To address this, we propose a novel method that avoids the restrictive assumptions typical of existing approaches, such as the prior identification of unbiased “anchor items” or designated reference groups. Our approach is computationally efficient and provides theoretical guarantees for the reli able recovery of group rankings. We apply this method to PISA 2022 data across the mathematics, science, and reading domains, yielding corrected performance rankings and insights into the survey’s measurement-bias structures.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science)
Published
2026-05-01
Primary Topic
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Accounting for measurement bias: new framework for reliable country ranking in large-scale educational assessments

Gongjun Xu, Chengcheng Li, Jing Ouyang, Yunxiao Chen
London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science)
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
article

Accounting for measurement bias: new framework for reliable country ranking in large-scale educational assessments

Gongjun Xu, Chengcheng Li, Jing Ouyang, Yunxiao Chen
article en

Abstract

International Large-scale Assessments (ILSAs), such as the Program for Interna tional Student Assessment (PISA) and the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), are cornerstone tools for global educational research and policy-making. By benchmarking educational quality and performance trends, these assessments enable countries to evaluate and share effective pedagogical structures. Specifically, ILSAs employ Item Response Theory (IRT) models to rank countries by students’ performance on cognitive items. However, measurement bias—arising from linguistic, cultural, and curricular differences—poses a significant threat to the statistical inference of IRT models and, consequently, the validity of the resulting rankings. Neglecting this bias can lead to systematic errors in parameter estimation, ultimately distorting national standings. To address this, we propose a novel method that avoids the restrictive assumptions typical of existing approaches, such as the prior identification of unbiased “anchor items” or designated reference groups. Our approach is computationally efficient and provides theoretical guarantees for the reli able recovery of group rankings. We apply this method to PISA 2022 data across the mathematics, science, and reading domains, yielding corrected performance rankings and insights into the survey’s measurement-bias structures.

London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.