Original title: Gender and School-Type Differential Item Functioning in the PISA 2025 Learning in the Digital World Domain: Evidence from Indonesia
Authors withheld for double-anonymous peer review · September 2026
Tests should measure ability fairly, without favoring one group over another. The PISA 2025 exam added a new area called Learning in the Digital World. It tests digital problem-solving and self-regulated learning using computer simulations. Because this test is new, researchers wanted to check if its questions treat all students equally. They analyzed responses from Indonesian students to see if boys, girls, or students from different types of schools had an unfair advantage. When two students have the same overall skill, they should have the same chance of answering a question correctly. If they do not, the question is biased. The researchers found that some questions were biased. Out of 48 items, nine showed bias by gender, with eight favoring boys. Six items showed bias by school type, consistently putting students in private, government-dependent schools at a disadvantage. Unequal past experience and school resources might explain these unfair gaps.
You are baking a cake for a friend with an egg allergy. You follow the recipe exactly, but the cake still flops because your oven heats unevenly. The same ingredients and steps give different results depending on the oven. In this paper, the 'oven' is a student's gender or school type, and some test questions behave like that uneven oven: two students with the same skill get different scores just because of who they are.
Comparing test scores across groups only makes sense if the questions measure the same thing for everyone. In Indonesia, the new PISA digital test is used to judge skills like self-regulated learning and computational thinking, so biased questions could make average scores unfair. The study flags fifteen such questions and urges corrections before using the scores.
The abstract doesn't say what causes the differential item functioning, nor whether the patterns generalize beyond Indonesia. It also does not establish that the flagged items are substantively biased—only that they show statistical DIF. The recommended corrections are not validated in this study.
Ask anything about this paper. Answers come from its abstract, and say so when the abstract doesn't cover your question.
Gender and School-Type Differential Item Functioning in the PISA 2025 Learning in the Digital World Domain: Evidence from Indonesia — Authors withheld for double-anonymous peer review — EdArXiv — doi:10.35542/osf.io/2kp4r_v1
Abstract licence: CC BY
Explanation generated by Synthesis from the abstract — it is not the original paper. This is a preprint, so it hasn't necessarily been peer reviewed.