Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMitchell, Matthew
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-15T22:10:45Z
dc.date.available2020-12-15T22:10:45Z
dc.date.issued2019-11-21
dc.identifier.urihttp://digital.library.wisc.edu/1793/80878
dc.description.abstractThe current study examined the diagnostic accuracy of two common screening assessments in reading, Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) and Reading-Curriculum Based Measurement (R-CBM), when used to predict end of the year performance on state tests in 8th grade. The sample consisted of 389 8th grade students enrolled in a school district in the Upper Midwest. Results of this study demonstrate that MAP was the better individual measure when assessing diagnostic accuracy. Further the combination of R-­CBM and MAP assessment results did not improve diagnostic accuracy when compared to MAP as a single screening assessment. However, these results suggest using only MAP to screen students in 8th grade may result in many students being misidentified as not at-risk when using publisher recommended cut-off scores. Future middle school research could explore different cut-scores for defining "at-risk" students or more liberal approaches when using a combined screening model.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectEducational tests and assessments--United Statesen_US
dc.subjectReading (Middle school)en_US
dc.subjectOral reading--Study and teaching (Middle school)en_US
dc.titleAcademic Screening in Middle School: How well do AIMSweb Measures of Oral Reading Fluency, and NWEA Measures of Academic Progress, Predict Future Performance on State Examsen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record