dc.contributor.author | Mitchell, Matthew | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-12-15T22:10:45Z | |
dc.date.available | 2020-12-15T22:10:45Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2019-11-21 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1793/80878 | |
dc.description.abstract | The 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.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.subject | Educational tests and assessments--United States | en_US |
dc.subject | Reading (Middle school) | en_US |
dc.subject | Oral reading--Study and teaching (Middle school) | en_US |
dc.title | Academic Screening in Middle School: How well do AIMSweb Measures of Oral Reading Fluency, and NWEA Measures of Academic Progress, Predict Future Performance on State Exams | en_US |
dc.type | Thesis | en_US |