MPG Technical Manual - Richland County School District Two 5...Technical Manual for Measures of...

Technical Manual

For Measures of Academic Progress® (MAP®) and Measures of Academic Progress for Primary Grades (MPG)

Technical Manual for Measures of Academic Progress -&- Measures of Academic Progress for Primary Grades

© 2011 Northwest Evaluation Association, Portland, Oregon

January, 2011

Copyright © 2011 Northwest Evaluation Association

All rights reserved. No part of this manual may be reproduced or utilized in

any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including

photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval

system, without written permission from NWEA.

Northwest Evaluation Association

121 NW Everett Street

Portland, OR 97209-

www.nwea.org

Tel 503-624-1951

Fax 503-639-7873

Email [email protected]


TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD ..................................................................................................................................... i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................. ii

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1 Organization of this Manual ........................................................................................................ 1 Overview of MAP and MAP for Primary Grades ......................................................................... 2

Test Types .............................................................................................................................. 2

DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND QUALITY INDICATORS .................................................................... 5

ITEM DEVELOPMENT .................................................................................................................... 8 Item Specification Creation ......................................................................................................... 9 Item Writing and Review Process ............................................................................................. 10

Item Writing Resources ......................................................................................................... 10 Sensitivity and Fairness ........................................................................................................ 10 Permissions and Plagiarism Review ..................................................................................... 11 Initial Quality Review (IQR) ................................................................................................... 14 Editorial Review .................................................................................................................... 14 Item Publishing ...................................................................................................................... 14

Provisional Item Difficulties and Field-Testing .......................................................................... 21

MEASUREMENT SCALES AND ITEM CALIBRATION ................................................................ 23 The Measurement Model .......................................................................................................... 23 The RIT Scales.......................................................................................................................... 23

Original Scale Development ................................................................................................. 24 Initial Scale Construction ...................................................................................................... 24 Scale Maintenance ............................................................................................................... 25

Field Testing .............................................................................................................................. 26 Item Analysis and Calibration .................................................................................................... 26 Item Bank Overview .................................................................................................................. 31

Differential Item Functioning ................................................................................................. 38 Detecting Differential Item Functioning (DIF) ........................................................................ 38 DIF Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 39

Test Construction and Quality Assurance ................................................................................. 47

ADMINISTRATION CHARACTERISTICS OF TESTS .................................................................. 49 Allowable Accommodations for MAP Assessments .................................................................. 50

TEST AND INFORMATION SECURITY PROCEDURES ............................................................. 53 Test Item Security ..................................................................................................................... 53 System Security and Confidentiality ......................................................................................... 54

PSYCHOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS OF ASSESSMENTS .................................................... 55 Reliability ................................................................................................................................... 55

Consistency of MAP and MAP for Primary Grades Tests Across Time ............................... 55 Internal Consistency of MAP and MAP for Primary Grades Tests ..................................... 122 Accuracy and Consistency of Classification Decisions Using MAP Scores ....................... 171

Validity ..................................................................................................................................... 182 Content Validity ................................................................................................................... 183 Concurrent Validity .............................................................................................................. 184 Predictive Validity ................................................................................................................ 187 Criterion-related validity ...................................................................................................... 190 Precision of MAP and MAP for Primary Grades Scores ..................................................... 193 Test Information .................................................................................................................. 196

APPENDIX A: ITEM DEVELOPMENT READING LIST .............................................................. 200




Reading ................................................................................................................................... 200 Mathematics ............................................................................................................................ 201

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 203

Technical Manual for Measures of Academic Progress -&- Measures of Academic Progress for Primary Grades i

FOREWORD

For more than five decades the following questions have been central to educational assessment and research:

How do we efficiently and accurately measure student achievement? How can assessment results be leveraged to inform instruction? How can the rate of learning be accelerated using assessment information?

NWEA was founded in 1976 by a group of school districts looking for practical answers to these central questions. In 2000, NWEA introduced computer-based assessment tools including the Measures of Academic Progress® (MAP®). The MAP system enables educational agencies to measure the achievement of virtually all of their students from late second grade on with a great deal of accuracy in a short period of time. All MAP assessments are computerized and are presented adaptively, adjusting in difficulty based on each student’s responses to test questions. Assessments in reading, language usage, mathematics, general science topics, and science concepts and processes are provided in a survey structure with content area goal scores supplementing an overall score.

In 2006, NWEA responded to the growing need for better assessment for younger students by introducing the Measures of Academic Progress for Primary Grades (MAP® for Primary Grades) system. The MAP for Primary Grades system is an integrated collection of computerized assessments designed for students in kindergarten through second grade. These assessments include screening tests, diagnostic skills checklist tests, and adaptive survey with goals tests in reading and mathematics. The MAP for Primary Grades system uses the same measurement scales that are used in the MAP system, which allows a direct connection between the fundamental skills assessed in the MAP for Primary Grades system and the learning of a student in later years.

Students enter school with a wide variety of life experiences. Early identification of each student’s achievement level provides a strong foundation for teachers to use in establishing an environment for academic success. The assessments in the MAP for Primary Grades system are designed to:

• Provide teachers with an efficient way to assess achievement levels of early learners so they can spend more time teaching and less time administering individual diagnostic tests

• Provide information to guide instruction during the early stages of a student's academic career

• Identify the needs of a wide variety of primary grades students, from struggling to advanced learners

• Use engaging test items, interactive elements, and audio to encourage student participation for more accurate results and to help beginning readers understand the test questions

This manual details the technical measurement characteristics of the MAP and MAP for Primary Grades assessments, including psychometric characteristics, item development processes, test development processes, and processes for development and maintenance of the measurement scales. Detailed information concerning the operational psychometric characteristics of the


ii Technical Manual for Measures of Academic Progress -&- Measures of Academic Progress for Primary Grades


assessments is also included, with emphasis on reliability, validity, and precision. Test blueprints for each of the tests in the system are also included to help evaluate the utility of the assessments for a specific implementation.

As with any technical manual, this one will not answer all questions. In fact, you may find yourself with many new questions as you use this document. For additional information, please contact your local NWEA representative or consult the NWEA web site at www.nwea.org.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It is with great appreciation that we recognize the creativity and ingenuity of Dr. George Ingebo in the development of the reading and mathematics vertical scales. Without these scales, the development of the MAP and MAP for Primary Grades systems would not have been possible. And, as with most NWEA documents, much of the inspiration and many of the best ideas and suggestions have come from individuals in our member agencies and board of directors. If this document is useful, it is due to these contributions.

http://www.nwea.org/


INTRODUCTION

This manual provides technical information for tests included in the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP®) and in the Measures of Academic Progress for Primary Grades (MAP® for Primary Grades). Among the types of technical information provided are the following:

a. Detailed descriptions concerning test content and its research basis b. Descriptions of the development of the assessments c. Technical descriptions of the psychometric characteristics of MAP and MAP for Primary

Grades assessments d. Information concerning procedures for assuring test and data security

Normative references for specific scores obtained from the MAP and MAP for Primary Grades are not provided in this document. This information can be obtained from RIT Scale Norms: For use with Measures of Academic Progress (NWEA, 2008).

This manual is not an administration guide for the tests or a technical description of the hardware and software needed for the use of the system. That information can be found in the Test Administration pages of the Partner Support section of www.nwea.org.

This document is written for measurement professionals and administrators who will find information within this document to help them evaluate the quality of NWEA assessments.

Organization of this Manual

The information in this manual is organized as follows:

• The Introduction includes this description and an overview of the MAP and MAP for Primary Grades systems.

• Test Types talks about the different types of tests, what information they provide, how the tests assess performance, and how NWEA ensures that the tests accurately measure what they purport to measure.

• Design Principals and Quality Indicators introduces the measurement principles used in the design of these systems.

• The Item Development section discusses how test items are created and edited, how NWEA designs questions to avoid bias, and the testing process to ensure that these design goals are met.

• Measurement Scales and Item Calibration defines the measurement model used to assess student achievement, the RIT scale that is based on this model, and how items are tested and calibrated against this model.

• A discussion of test administration and permitted accommodations is in the Administration Characteristics of MAP and MAP for Primary Grades section.

• Procedures to ensure that security and confidentially of test taker information and test results are discussed in Test and Information Security Procedures.


http://www.nwea.org/

2 Technical Manual for Measures of Academic Progress -&- Measures of Academic Progress for Primary Grades

• Psychometric Characteristics of Assessments presents an analysis of the reliability and validity of the tests and test results in both systems.

Much of this information also pertains to NWEA Achievement Level Tests (ALT), the paper/pencil testing system that was the precursor to MAP. Where the two systems differ in ways that can lead to important differences in the quality of information, these differences are noted.

Overview of MAP and MAP for Primary Grades

The MAP system measures achievement in reading, language usage, mathematics, general science topics, and science concepts and processes for students in grades 2 through 12. All items are in a multiple-choice format and are administered adaptively. Test content domains are broken down into major blocks that are consistent with a specific instructional content structure. These blocks are commonly referred to as content goals or strands and commonly range from three to seven per test, depending on the domain.

Test Types

Two types of tests are commonly used within the MAP system, as follows:

Survey with goals tests: These adaptive tests are designed to measure achievement of students as they grow through the grades. They commonly consist of more than 40 questions. This allows the system to provide educators with sub-scores (representing the content goals) and an overall score for each student. The MAP tests are aligned with the content standards for each state (and sometimes the individual school district) so the number of sub-scores varies from state to state. Seven or more items typically support each sub-score. The breadth and depth of the initial item pools allows these tests to be administered up to four times per academic year. The accuracy of this test allows it to be used to measure student growth as well as current status.

Survey tests: These adaptive tests are designed to identify students’ overall standing in a subject area. Since the test produces only a single overall score, it is shorter than the survey with goals test (commonly less than 30 items.) It can be used to identify a student’s status at any time during the school year. Since the survey test is relatively short, it is not recommended for growth measurement.

The MAP for Primary Grades system measures achievement in reading and mathematics for students in the primary grades (kindergarten to approximately the end of grade 2). It includes multiple-choice items and a variety of other item types that allow the system to measure a broad range of student capabilities. All items include audio in their presentation to allow measurement of a variety of language skills. Audio presentation also prevents differences in students’ reading skills from decreasing the validity of mathematics results. The system includes three types of assessments:

Survey with goals tests: These adaptive tests are designed to measure achievement of students who have a firm grasp of foundational skills. They provide educators with six sub-scores and two overall scores. Six to 10 items, typically eight items, support each sub-score. To allow young students to complete the test without losing focus or tiring, the test is divided into two segments, each with three sub-scores and one overall segment score. If students are given both segments within a 28-day window, the results from the two segments are combined as if students had taken one test, resulting in a more reliable


Technical Manual for Measures of Academic Progress -&- Measures of Academic Progress for Primary Grades 3


overall score. Because the combined score is more reliable, it is the score used to compute student growth. The breadth and depth of the initial item pools allows these tests to be administered up to three times per academic year.

Screening tests: These diagnostic tests are designed to identify students’ strengths in the foundational skills needed for successful development of reading and mathematics proficiency. Screening tests are used for students who may not be ready for the survey with goals tests. These tests include content that is fundamental to developing literacy and numeracy. The reports for these tests do not report a scale score; rather, they report the percent correct of each element of the identified content. These tests may be administered as often as is useful for the educator.

Skills checklist tests: These diagnostic tests provide educators with percent-correct data on instructionally-specific content. Educators should use these tests to determine student performance relative to many basic reading and mathematics skills. Teachers may use these tests as unit tests, for instructional planning, or to measure instructional effectiveness. These tests may be administered as often as is useful for the educator.


DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND QUALITY INDICATORS Educators need detailed information about individual student achievement. They use this information to provide appropriate instruction and to form instructional groups within a class. They also use it to help parents and other stakeholders understand the strengths of a particular student’s educational development as well as the areas that need further instruction. When constructed and used properly, educational assessments are efficient tools that yield consistent, precise information concerning student achievement and growth.

The MAP and MAP for Primary Grades systems were designed using a small number of guiding principles. Each principle reflects educators’ needs and helps NWEA design assessments for a specific educational purpose. These principles hold that, given its intended purpose, the test should:

1. Be challenging for a student across all its test items. It should not be frustrating or boring.

2. Be economical in its use of student time. It should provide as much information as possible for the time it takes to administer.

3. Provide a reflection of a student’s achievement that is as accurate and reliable as needed for the decisions to be made based on its results.

4. Consist of content the student should have had an opportunity to learn.

5. Provide information about a student’s change in achievement level from one test occasion to another as well as the student’s current achievement level.

6. Provide results to educators and other stakeholders as quickly as possible while maintaining a high level of integrity in the reported results.

The first principle is to keep the student engaged throughout the test event, making it less likely that the student will respond based on negative psychological reactions to the test. The second and third principles call for tests that are reliable, accurate, and effective in delivering high levels of information in the shortest period of time. The fourth principle suggests that a test only has value for determining a student’s level of learning when it can reasonably be assumed that the student had an opportunity to learn the tested content. In the fifth principle, we are reminded that a single test’s results are a mere snapshot in the life of a student; multiple snapshots are needed to understand the student’s movement through a content area. Finally, the sixth principle tells us that test results are most useful when the time between test completion and availability of its results is minimized.

These design principles are validated when the tests are used in the schools, but that validation needs to be accompanied with a variety of indicators of test quality. These include traditional statistical indicators of overall quality such as validity and reliability. They also include other aspects that have recently become more important, such as the conditional standard error and information functions. These aspects are discussed briefly here and are addressed more formally throughout the remainder of this document.

Reliability is a fundamental requirement of any assessment and is central to test design. It can be defined as the consistency of achievement estimates obtained from the assessment. Traditionally, reliability has been examined in three primary ways. The first has been to demonstrate the temporal stability of a test by administering it to a group of students two times separated by a reasonable period of time. This is commonly referred to as “test-retest” reliability. The question being answered with this type



of reliability is, “To what extent does the test administered to the same students twice yield the same results from one administration to the next?”

The second way of examining reliability has been to develop another test with different test items that is equivalent in difficulty and content structure to the test of interest. That is, the two tests would have the same number and types of items in the same structure, with the same difficulty levels, measuring the same content within a domain. The two tests are administered to the same students within a short time frame. This is commonly referred to as parallel forms reliability. The question being answered with this type of reliability is, “To what extent do two equivalent forms of the test yield the same results?”

The third traditional way of examining test reliability has been to examine its consistency across test items. This has been referred to as internal consistency. The question being answered with this type of reliability is, “To what extent do items in the test measure the test’s construct(s) in a consistent manner?” Perhaps the most common method used to answer this question is known as coefficient alpha or Cronbach’s Alpha. This method is equivalent to splitting the test into half in every possible way, correlating the raw scores in each half for each split, adjusting for test length, and then averaging the correlations of all the splits.

Decision consistency is a form of reliability that is being used increasingly in the context of educational accountability. The focus is not directly on the test score, per se, but rather on the use of the test score as a decision-making aid. The question being answered with this type of reliability is, “To what extent would a decision to classify a student into one of several categories (e.g., proficiency categories) based on a test score, be expected to remain the same if the student were to take the test again (with no memory of the first test).”

All these forms of reliability were initially developed to assess the performance of fixed-form tests. However, for adaptive tests built using Item Response Theory (IRT) (Lord & Novick, 1968; Lord, 1980; Rasch, 1980), these methods need to be adjusted or replaced. Temporal stability, score consistency, and decision consistency are still extremely important, but the methodology needs to be adjusted to fit a dynamic testing situation.

Validity is another fundamental quality that is important in designing and evaluating assessments. Current views of test validation consider it as the process of assembling a portfolio of evidence that indicates that the test measures the construct that it is intended to measure and that actions taken based on the test scores can be supported by evidence. Given this view, we can say that validation requires the collection of a wide range of validity evidence, including:

• The extent to which the content of an assessment matches the content area to be assessed (content validity)

• The extent to which the scores from the assessment allow us to predict student performance on other assessments of the same content area (concurrent and predictive validity)

• The extent to which the scores from the assessment generalize and fit into a wider set of observations and fit the pattern of relations that we would expect among these constructs (construct validity)

• The extent to which the scores from the assessment can appropriately be used to make decisions concerning test takers (consequential validity)



• The extent to which an individual student’s test score appropriately reflects that student’s capabilities within the content area (individual score validity)

While many aspects of validity have been discussed in the past, the student/test interaction becomes extremely important within an educational context, and requires some explanation. Two of the most critical elements influencing this interaction are:

1. The degree to which an assessment measures what is expected to be taught in the classrooms in which the assessment is used

2. The degree to which the test taker was engaged with the test so that lack of engagement can be ruled out as an explanation for the student’s test score

These two aspects of validity play a key role in several of the assessment design principles noted earlier. Both warrant further discussion.

The extent to which a measurement is an accurate, complete indicator of the variable to be measured defines its validity as an expression of the content being assessed. In educational assessment, this is highly dependent upon the local curriculum. For example, a generic mathematics assessment may contain content that differs greatly from the content that is likely taught in the local classroom. On the other hand, a mathematics assessment designed to include content that is included in the local curriculum fits the content needs of the educational school or district more completely (design principle 4). The latter assessment is more valid and is clearly more valuable to educators in understanding student achievement.

All validity arguments rest on a fundamental but usually unspoken assumption: namely, that the test taker was sufficiently engaged in interacting with the test’s questions so that low engagement with the test items can be ruled out as a plausible explanation for the test score. Therefore, the test score is more likely, but not guaranteed, to accurately reflect the student’s status on the variable being measured. This aspect of validity is also a key to the third design principle. Moreover, it can be viewed as a prerequisite for validity arguments regarding uses of test scores for whatever purpose (Hauser, Kingsbury & Wise, 2008).

The relationships of MAP and ALT scores to other indicators of student achievement are discussed in the section Psychometric Characteristics of the Assessments. These are more traditional evidentiary forms of validity. Also included in that section is a form of validity evidence that is pertinent in the context of accountability and other forms of high stakes assessment. In these situations, the accuracy and consistency of classification decisions based on test scores becomes a form of validity evidence.

Item targeting is an aspect of tests that is becoming recognized as a critical influence on virtually all facets of test quality. The object of item targeting is to present test items that, given the purpose of the test, are well matched to a test taker’s experience, characteristics, or behavior. For example, a fixed-form test designed to test mathematics for first grade students might be carefully aligned to some set of first grade mathematics content standards.

If all students in a class were taught to those content standards, we might conclude that the test items were targeted indirectly to the students through the content. This would be considered a very low level of item targeting because it is directed exclusively at the test taker’s experience or presumed experience and ignores other student characteristics and behaviors.



As a higher level of targeting, we might consider a test that is administered adaptively. Items presented may be selected from a core “grade level” content pool as well as from pools that extend both above and below the core pool. Items are selected using a specified content structure. An algorithm is used to estimate the student’s achievement level after the student’s response to each item, and randomly selects the next item from all available items having difficulty values that match the estimate of the student’s achievement. Such a test engages the student by presenting items that are neither too easy (leading to boredom) nor too hard (leading to frustration) – the first assessment design principle cited earlier.

When a student remains sufficiently engaged in such a test, the measurement error associated with the test score will be much smaller than a fixed-form test of the same length or even somewhat longer. Therefore, an adaptive test makes efficient use of the time that the student spends in the testing environment (the second design principle) by maximizing the level of information that each test item contributes to the total test score. The result is total test scores with higher information values, for virtually all students, than would be expected from a fixed-form test of the same length administered to the same group of students.

Precision is a characteristic of the scores from virtually any test and is a direct demonstration of the third design principle cited earlier. Test developers, of course, generally seek to maximize precision. The metric of precision is commonly referred to as the standard error of measurement (SEM). SEM is an estimate of the amount of error in a test score that is itself an estimate of the student’s true status on the variable being measured. For educational tests, the variable is typically academic achievement. Lower values of SEM indicate greater precision in the score. In a fixed-form test designed using item response theory (IRT) methodology, values of SEM are generally lowest in the middle of the test’s score distribution and increase as we move away from the middle. Thus, students functioning well below or well above the middle of the test’s difficulty will be measured with less precision than those functioning in the middle of the difficulty range. This suggests that the range of a test’s score precision is as important as the maximum level of precision that can be obtained. A simple method of evaluating the level of test score precision is offered in Kingsbury and Hauser (2004).

With greater score precision across a broad range of ability, several benefits follow. Differences between similar students become more apparent. Because there is a direct mathematical relationship between test information and SEM, lower SEM indicates greater test information. This means that the level of test information observed across a group of students from even a fairly wide grade span (say, grades 2 through 10) should be quite comparable across the achievement range. When change in student scores from one test occasion to another is of interest (the fifth assessment design principle), measurement errors accrue with each test occasion. The greater the precision of individual scores the greater the likelihood of drawing reliable conclusions about changes in student status over time. Finally, the level of classification accuracy will be improved as the level of test scores precision is increased. The effects of greater precision can be seen in the classification accuracy information provided in the Psychometric Characteristics of the Assessments section.

ITEM DEVELOPMENT

Item development is triggered by a needs analysis performed on a particular test pool or set of academic content standards. Once areas of need are articulated in an item acquisition plan, item specifications are written to address these areas. Areas of need can include both content and depth of knowledge.



The goal is to have test item pools that match the assessable sections of a set of academic content standards both in breadth of content and depth of knowledge.

Item Specification Creation

Item specifications contain guidance regarding the content, context, cognitive complexity, item format, item asset (e.g., passage, graph, diagram, etc.), and any corollary skills or understandings needed to assess the topic or skill; in short, anything that will help the item writer create an item that is aligned to and assesses the intended topic or skill.

NWEA Content Specialists write item specifications to the lowest tier in a set of standards, that is, the most specific and granular level, sometimes called learning indicators, depending on the terminology employed in the standards. That said, all levels of the hierarchy in a set of academic standards are analyzed and “unpacked” for the fullest understanding of the intention, scope, and focus of the instruction. Content Specialists also consider any supplemental instructional materials supplied by the state, appendices in the academic content standards, and any documents that aid in understanding and unpacking the standards for assessment.

There are basic requirements that guide the development of item specifications. These requirements are intended to ensure two things: alignment to the standards and following best practices as items are developed. NWEA’s item specifications require that each item:

• Has a direct and demonstrable relationship to areas of need • Supplies cognitive complexity to guide the item writer who matches the cognitive complexity of

the learning indicator • Narrows the content to fit the constraints of the item type (e.g., multiple choice, hot spots,

constrained constructed response, etc.) • Gives guidance around passage/item resource/context when applicable • Unpacks an objective into discrete statements when the objective has numerous aspects • Focuses on one topic/skill • Ensures that nothing relevant is lost in translation when unpacking an objective • Indicates a grade or grade range • Provides parameters, examples, definitions, and resources when applicable • Provides suggestions on the types of possible options (e.g., the options for this item could be

charts or graphs) when applicable

Content Editors review each specification for clarity, completeness, and alignment to assure that contractual item writers will understand the types of items expected.

Content Editors then assign item specifications to freelance item writers based on each item writer’s strengths. Freelance item writers must meet strict qualification requirements. Item writers are typically current or retired educators or educational consultants who make their living through freelance opportunities in item writing, curriculum design, and development. All candidates for freelance item writing go through a selection process that includes submission of their résumé or curriculum vita and a



review of sample items written to set specifications. Content Specialists and Editors self-assign specifications for internal item writing.

Item Writing and Review Process

Item Writing Resources Item writers are provided with an NWEA Item Writing Content Guide for their specific subject area. These guides were influenced by the work of Haladyna, 1994; Osterlind, 1998; Roid & Haladyna, 1997. Each guide outlines best practice in item construction and details the type of information that an item writer needs in order to develop high quality, consistent items.

Some of the basics that are covered in the Guide are item construction, cognitive complexity, bias and sensitivity, readability, and overall item purpose.

Principles from the Guide that govern overall item, stem, and answer option construction appear below. This list is a non-comprehensive sampling of topics covered in the Guide for each subject area.

• Item assesses only one important concept • The concept being measured is accurately reflected in the item assets • There is only one best or correct answer (key) • Answer options (distractors) are plausible and reflect common student mistakes or

misunderstandings • Stems state the essential idea/task • Stems are specific, concise, and clear • Stems should be a question whenever possible • Stems should be worded positively • Answer options should be independent from each other • Answer options should be balanced in length, complexity, and grammatical structure • Answer options should be at the appropriate reading level

Sensitivity and Fairness Chapter 6 of the NWEA Item Writing Guide for each content area deals with sensitivity and fairness. Sensitivity in this context means an awareness of the different things that can distract a student during assessment. Fairness in this context relates to giving each student equal opportunity to answer the item correctly based solely on their knowledge of the item content.

The job of an item is to activate a student’s thought process and help him or her focus on the task. A successful item is fair to all students.

An item should NOT: Distract, potentially upset, or confuse in any way • Require construct-irrelevant knowledge or specialized knowledge • Favor students from certain language communities • Favor students from certain cultural backgrounds • Favor students based on gender • Favor students based on social economic issues • Employ idiomatic or regional phrases and expressions



• Stereotype certain groups of people or behaviors • Favor students from certain geographic regions • Favor students who have no visual impairments

There is not a hard and fast “list” of material that is potentially distracting or upsetting material, but there are topics that are seldom appropriate for K-12 level assessments, such as sexuality, illegal substances, illegal activities, excessive violence, discriminatory descriptions, death, grieving, catastrophes, animal neglect or abuse, loss of family member, and weight and body issues.

The best way to ensure that items are as fair and sensitive as possible is to review them specifically for sensitivity and fairness issues. An Editorial Review, Item Production Review, and two independent Content Reviews are used for this purpose.

A checklist is used for the Sensitivity and Fairness Reviews. It has a section for “other” as items may have content that is inappropriate with respect to sensitivity and fairness but involve issues that fall outside the established categories.

NWEA takes seriously the task of creating items that are free from sensitivity issues and fair to all students. Any sensitivity and fairness issues found in items are eliminated in revision.

Sensitivity and Fairness Review Checklist Each item is evaluated against a set of criteria. An item is flagged if it:

• Requires prior knowledge other than the skill/concept being assessed • Has cultural bias • Has linguistic bias • Has socio-economic bias • Has religious bias • Has geographic bias • Has color-blind bias • Has gender bias • Inappropriately employs idiomatic English • Offensively stereotypes a group of people • Mentions body/weight issues • Has inappropriate or sensitive topics (smoking, death, crime, violence, profanity, sex, etc.) • Has other bias issues

Permissions and Plagiarism Review The first review point for an item, written either internally or externally, is the Permissions and Plagiarism review. An NWEA Editorial Associate verifies that the item is an original work, not plagiarized. NWEA has a strict policy on plagiarism. Once we are reasonably confident that the item is an original work, the Editorial Associate verifies copyright and permissions.

NWEA Plagiarism Policy Overview



As an educational services organization NWEA has a zero-tolerance policy toward plagiarism. Not only does plagiarism damage NWEA’s credibility and integrity, it is considered a violation of our partners’ trust in us and theft of another person’s intellectual property and may lead to legal action against NWEA. The purpose of this policy is to define plagiarism and to instruct how to avoid plagiarizing and how to detect plagiarism in work we receive from outside sources.

The NWEA Plagiarism Policy applies to all staff but particularly affects those taking part in the Content Team’s item writing and review process. This group includes item writers, item reviewers, editors, and content specialists. This document includes the following sections:

Definitions

Plagiarism is presenting others’ ideas or text as one’s own. It may take various forms, including but not limited to:

• Passing off others’ original ideas as one’s own

• Putting one’s name on a work written by someone else

• Using verbatim phrases, sentences, or passages from another person’s work without putting them in quotation marks

• Incorrectly paraphrasing a source. When paraphrasing, it is important to explain the ideas from the original source entirely in one’s own words. Taking sentence structure from the original source and swapping out the original wording with synonyms is not an acceptable way to paraphrase.

• Not citing the source of a paraphrased idea

• Not citing the source of a quote

• Improperly citing a quote or paraphrase

• Improperly using quotation marks

Roles and Responsibilities

When writing items, take the following steps to avoid plagiarizing: • Be aware that plagiarism consists in presenting others’ ideas or text as one’s

own

• Appropriately cite ideas

• Appropriately paraphrase ideas

• Appropriately quote and cite original text

• Check item with an Internet search before handing off to editorial

• Be vigilant. If ever in question as to whether something would be considered plagiarism, ask colleagues for advice

When editing items, take the following steps to detect plagiarism: • Search on a line of the text in Google® or Google Books®.

• Be alert for portions of the text that stand out, possibly indicating plagiarism:



o Certain ideas, phrases, or passages that are more complex or sophisticated

o Writing in parts of the text that are different from the author’s regular style or may have a different “voice”

o A portion of the writing that is more polished than the rest of the writing in the document

• If an item’s content does not quite match the topic or specification or seems “off,” this may be an indication of plagiarism as well.

Ways to Avoid Plagiarism

In order to avoid plagiarism, document all sources. • Provide the author, title, and publication date of a source. If the source is from

the Internet, also provide the URL where the original work can be found.

• Use quotation marks correctly and provide a citation.

• Cite ideas, keeping in mind that not all ideas have to be cited. Common knowledge for the general public, as well as for academic disciplines, does not need citation. Original ideas, findings, published theories, or criticisms need to be cited. For example:

o If one included Charlotte Bronte’s birth date, birthplace, and published works in a document, this would be considered common knowledge and would not need to be cited. This information is easily accessible from many sources and likely known in academic literary circles.

o However, more specific information found in a particular biography, such as her childhood inclinations, schools she attended, family lineage, etc., would require citation, as they are not likely known even in academic literary circles. An author’s theories about Charlotte Bronte’s work would also need to be cited.

o The same is true when paraphrasing an idea. If paraphrasing an original idea, it must be cited. If paraphrasing something considered common knowledge, a citation is not necessary. However, the paraphrase needs to be entirely in one’s own words.

o Quotations – Use quotation marks correctly and provide a citation.

References

If unsure about how to correctly use quotation marks or provide citations, you can consult NWEA’s style source, The Modern Language Association (MLS) Handbook.

Enforcement

NWEA considers plagiarism a serious breach of conduct and will result in disciplinary action up to and including termination of employment.

Copyright

While items as a whole are required to be original, part of the development process will include using source materials to support the content within the context of an item. Item Contractors must cite sources for any excerpted work that is used in an item whether



from a book, periodical, manual or website. Items submitted without proper citation for passages will be returned to the Item Contractor for proper citation.

Initial Quality Review (IQR) Concurrently with the permissions and plagiarism review, items receive an initial quality review. This review is performed by Item Quality Reviewers. During this review, the item is evaluated to verify content validity, instructional relevance, and currency.

The content validity evaluation involves ensuring that the item assesses what it is intended to assess, and that all parts of the item are correct. This includes confirming that any context used in the item is appropriate, the item has one and only one correct response, and the distractors are plausible and based on student misconceptions.

The instructional relevancy evaluation involves ensuring that the concept assessed is presented in a way that is consistent with current classroom practices.

The currency evaluation involves ensuring that the terminology or information in the item is not dated or likely to become dated.

Editorial Review Once an item has gone through IQR and the plagiarism and permissions reviews, the next step in its development process is an editorial review.

An NWEA Content Editor performs a thorough content and formatting review. This review involves a more in-depth examination of the directions, asset, stem, and distractors in order to ensure that the item is aligned to the specification and is a valid measure of the target concept. In addition to content review, the reading level of the item is evaluated to ensure that reading difficulty does not interfere with the concept being assessed. A bias and sensitivity review is performed. The item is also examined from the perspective of Universal Design for Learning in order to maximize the item’s accessibility for all students. Edits are performed to maximize the ability of the item to reveal student understanding of the concept. Items are formatted according to the NWEA Style Guide and are then ready for the Item Publishing Team.

The NWEA Style Guide is a compilation of style and formatting guidelines as defined by the various teams developing items for NWEA assessments. This guide defines NWEA style and is used as a reference resource during the editorial review.

Additional resources used during editorial review to maintain consistency in our items are the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, MLA Formatting and Style Guide, and Write Source 2000, among others.

Item Publishing A successful item moves from the editorial review to the Item Publishing Team. The Item Publishing Team enters the item into the NWEA item management system following the NWEA Style Guide. Any graphics, audio, or enhanced functionality needed by the item are created and incorporated. At this point, the item has the look and feel it will have in the test delivery system.

The Item Publishing Team also completes a sensitivity and fairness review once the item has been entered into the item management system.



Content Review One The item moves from Item Publishing into Content Review One. During this review, a Content Specialist in the appropriate content area reviews the item using a detailed checklist to confirm that the item is instructionally relevant, the content is important and aligned, the item has clear face validity, the item is free of sensitivity and fairness issues, and is sound in terms of item construction. During Content Review One, items are flagged for review if they meet any of the criteria listed in the Item Review checklist below.

Item Review Checklist:

Item Purpose and Construction

Item inappropriately assesses more than one topic or skill

Item does not have instructional relevance

Item is a trick question

Item contains incorrect facts and/or information

Inaccurate content or application of concepts

Terminology is used incorrectly

Item is trivial in approach to content/concepts

Concept is not accurately reflected in item resource (passage/graphic)

Item resource (passage/graphic) is not essential

Item does not start with a word

Item construct needs to be changed

Item needs a graphic

Other

Directions/Introductory Text

Directions/Introductory text are not clear

Directions/Introductory text are not appropriate to the item

Directions /Introductory text do not introduce the passage/graphic in a meaningful or useful way

Directions/Introductory text have locational references (e.g., above, below, of the following)

Directions/Introductory text are missing

Other

Graphics

Graphic is not appropriately titled or labeled

Appropriate units are not included

Graphic is hard to read

Graphic is not correctly portrayed/formatted

Graphic needs editing

Graphic is not appealing

Graphic is not real to life

Graphic is out of date



Graphic is not age appropriate

Other

Passages

Passage is not relevant to the content

Passage is not essential to the item

Passage is not engaging

Passage is too long

Passage has inappropriate readability for skill level

Passage has inappropriate level of vocabulary for skill level

Passage needs to be published material

Passage is plagiarized

Passage has bias

Passage has offensive stereotyping

Passage has inappropriate sensitivity issues

Passage citation is not correct

Other

Stems

Stem is not focused on topic or skill

Stem is too open

Stem does not contain essential idea or phrasing of the task

Stem is not precisely worded

Stem is not worded well

Stem should be a question

Stem has unnecessary terminology

Stem has unnecessary prepositional or appositive phrases

Stem does not need a “NOT construction”

Stem has too difficult vocabulary

Stem has a blank in beginning or middle

Stem needs a superlative (e.g., most, best)

Stem needs a qualifier (e.g., most likely)

Superlative/qualifier/word of emphasis is incorrectly formatted

Stem needs “According to the passage/graphic” for literal questions

Stem needs “Based on the passage/graphic” for inferential questions

Other

Key and Distractors

Item does not contain a key



Item does not have a strong key

Item has multiple keys

Key and distractors are not independent (overlapping, logical opposites)

Key and distractors are inappropriate regarding terminology/vocabulary

Key and distractors are unbalanced regarding length or complexity

Key and distractors are inconsistent regarding grammatical form

Key and distractors are not arranged in ascending/descending/alphabetical order

Key and distractors are not arranged in a “stair” or “stepped” manner

Distractors are not plausible

Distractors contain “all of the above,” “none of the above,” never,” “always,” “not”

Item includes an incorrect number of distractors for the content area

Key and distractors are not phrased in a positive manner

A distractor cues the key

A distractor is an outlier

Key is inappropriately cued

Distractors are not written in standard English

Other

Bias and Sensitivity (see checklist in the Sensitivity and Fairness section, above)

Editing

Item has incorrect grammar

Item has incorrect punctuation

Item has incorrect capitalization

Item has incorrect spelling

Other

Math and Science – Specific

Labels are repeated in the answer options (e.g., 13 balls, 16 balls, 19 balls, 21 balls, 25 balls)

Units of measurement are missing in the answer options

Decimal does not use leading zero

Units of measurement not correctly capitalized (units that use a person’s name or Liter)

Metric units are not abbreviated

Appropriate superscripts are not used for square metric units or cubic metric units

Abbreviations are used for seconds, hours, days, years

Rates are not abbreviated correctly

Stem and distracters use inconsistent abbreviations

Mathematical formatting is incorrect

Labels A,B, C, D, or E are used in a diagram

Chemical formulas/compounds are incorrectly named/formatted



Chemical reactions are incorrectly named/formatted

Astronomical body/Earth/Moon is not capitalized

Other

After completing this review, the Content Specialist “tags” the item for its intended use (e.g., End of Course Test, MAP Survey Test, etc.) and whether it is appropriate for international and Canadian test pools. Finally, the Content Specialist assigns it a preliminary difficulty level (called a provisional calibration) for field test purposes. The provisional estimate of difficulty is based on the observed difficulty of similar items and the Content Specialist’s expertise.

Content Review Two The second content review is performed by a different Content Specialist from the same content area. This Content Specialist reviews the item using the Content Review checklist, and verifies that the fields have been set appropriately in the item management system to ensure that the item is ready for field-testing.

Copyedit After content review two, the item is copyedited. The copyeditor checks the syntax, grammar, usage, spelling, and punctuation of each item to ensure the quality of the final product.

At any point during the multiple reviews, an item can be sent back to a previous stage if it is not up to standard.

Item Quality Review All operational NWEA item banks underwent a rigorous review in 2008-2009 as the first stage of a cyclical process. Beginning in 2012, the process will continue with a follow-up review of the oldest 20% of the bank items. The following year there will be a review of the next 20% of the oldest items. Each successive year, NWEA will review items according to this schedule so that all items will be reviewed at least one time every five years. The goal of this review is to ensure that items in the bank meet the criteria of being current, valid, and instructionally relevant. Items that are tagged as having any of these issues are reviewed on a case-by-case basis and retired from active status or revised as needed.

Currency is considered in terms of: Pedagogical approaches, how content used to be taught as opposed to now. An example of this

would be a former focus on naked computation in mathematics. Evolving definitions regarding what is considered important knowledge and understandings within

domains. An example of this would be the former focus on functional texts and “real world” reading, which has phased out in the past decade.

Discovery and new understandings in the domains. An example of this would be the evolving conception of the classification system of the living things, from a four- to a five- to even a six-kingdom schema.

Contexts that are unfamiliar, out of sync, or illogical due to their datedness. An example of this would be an item that asks a student to make a prediction based on a past event.

The functional criteria for currency identify items with the following characteristics for removal from the

item bank:



o Items that have disconcertingly outdated topical content, such as prices, references to outdated technology, dates that require a prediction

o Passages that comment on current societal conditions that are clearly no longer current o Items that have graphs that are out-dated and this out-datedness affects the student’s ability

to interface cleanly with the content o Items that deal directly with naked computation o Items that deal with vocabulary questions, but offer no context o Items that have outdated content (e.g., Pluto or outdated classification systems) o Not in scope:

a) Graphics, unless the problem leads to content validity issues b) Passages which are not relevant or engaging to students’ lives

Content validity is considered in terms of:

Content accuracy and correctness Reasonably solid item constructs Reasonably clear of construct-irrelevant variance (i.e., factors that interfere with the student’s

ability to interface with the content, such as inappropriate reading level or an unreadable graphic) Developmental appropriateness. This means that the content is presented in appropriate ways,

following instructional norms of scope and sequence.

The functional criteria for content validity identify items with the following characteristics for removal

from the bank: o Items that inappropriately assess more than one topic or skill o Items that are trick questions o Facts/information in the item is incorrect o Inaccurate content or application of content o Terminology used incorrectly o Concepts not accurately reflected in the item asset o Items with unessential assets o Directions that lead to confusion and inability to interface with content o Graphics that weren’t appropriately labeled o Units of measurement that were not appropriately labeled o Graphics that were incorrectly portrayed or formatted o Stems that lead to confusion and inability to interface with content o Passages that were too long o Passages that have inappropriate readability for the skill level o Items with no correct answer o Items with multiple correct answers o Items requiring prior knowledge o Items with keys and distractors inconsistent regarding grammatical form when it directly

affects the content of the item (e.g., a vocabulary item) o Distractors contain “all of the above,” “none of the above,” “never,” “always” o Item in which the correct answer is cued o Items in which units of measurement are missing (and are needed) o Items with no leading zero in decimals



o Items in which units of measurement are not correctly capitalized o Items with incorrect math formatting o Chemical formulas/reactions that were incorrectly named/formatted o Astronomical bodies not capitalized

Instructional relevancy was considered in terms of:

Significance of content or skill being assessed. An example of this would be an item that asks students to match obscure scientists with their achievements.

Content or skill is presented in an item according to how the concept is taught in the classroom. This means using the equivalent vocabulary, basic definitions, and conceptual application of content in items as it is employed in classrooms.

Content or skill is assessed according to instructional goals. This means assessing what is reasonably expected to be internalized knowledge, skills, or understandings in each content area. We would not ask what a teacher would not ask. For example, we would not want an item that assesses a student on advanced application of MLA style guidelines. The instructional goal is that a student can apply citation guidelines, not memorize them.

The functional criteria for instructional relevance identify items with the following characteristics for

removal from the item bank: Items that ask the student trivia questions (e.g., names of obscure scientists) Items that ask the students to know detailed rules of AP or MLA formatting Items that ask the students to have internalized grammar and mechanics rules that are not

expected to be internalized Assets that deal with the business world, recipes, bus schedules, and other hold-overs from the

“functional reading” days Content that is presented in bizarre or unusual ways that would never occur in a classroom

Once an item has navigated through Plagiarism and Permissions Review, Editorial Review, Item Publishing, and Content Reviews One and Two, it is ready for field testing. Additional information about field testing is provided in the Measurement Scales and Item Calibration section of this document.

Additional Considerations for Primary Grade Items To the extent that they are applicable, the above points in the item development process apply to the development of items for use in the MAP for Primary Grades tests. However, the age and academic development of students necessitate several additional procedures. These additional procedures commonly entail different methods of creating and preparing items for presentation in a test. For example, the vast majority of students in grades K and 1 lack the reading skills necessary to “read” assessment instructions or passages. Thus, all assessment tasks in the MAP for Primary Grades require little or no reading skills to communicate the nature of the assessment task to the student. This is accomplished by providing task instructions through audio headphones to capitalize on non-readers’ or early readers’ much higher level of auditory comprehension than reading comprehension.

Human readers are employed to present the verbal parts of items to students. The intent of using human readers was to be able to present items that sounded as natural and fluent as possible. However, using



human readers introduced another possible confounding element: inconsistency in audio production. To remedy this inconsistency, a set of audio recording conventions was developed and readers were selected for their voice timbre, crispness of their enunciation, and their recording pace.

When recording an item, the answer options are read before the question is read. This is done to prevent unintended verbal cueing. Reading the responses before reading the question reduces the likelihood of the reader providing cues since the question was not known at the time the responses were recorded. The desired recording pace was identified as slow enough to allow the student to track the reading of the words with their eyes, but fast enough to not have any perceptible choppiness. The initial reader was a primary grades speech therapist with more than 20 years of experience.

Audio is used as much as possible except under the following two instances: 1. Where number or letter recognition is being sampled 2. Where English reading comprehension is being sampled

“Enhanced item styles” is another feature of MAP for Primary Grades test items. As indicated above, the assessment of primary student achievement presents many challenges, but innovations in technology and the development of many new item styles present unique opportunities for K-2 assessment. Enhanced technological methods of presenting and responding to items are considered only if they are believed to significantly contribute to:

1. Greater score reliability 2. Increased efficiency 3. Measurement of critical elements of the teaching-learning process that are not measured with

current item styles 4. Improving student engagement (motivation) in the assessment process

When we applied these guidelines to the necessary skills a student would need to interact with any item, we limited it to the ability to use a mouse to navigate across the screen, and the ability to use only a left mouse click. Thus, any student of limited experience can negotiate the tasks as easily as one who is familiar with computers. No click and drag functionality, for instance, is used, and the keyboard can be set aside to prevent distraction.

Final Comments Each item in the NWEA item pool for each subject area has undergone a multi-tiered and rigorous review process. NWEA is committed to creating test items that assess what they are intended to assess, adhere to best practice, and are as fair as possible. To this end, NWEA plans to conduct external Sensitivity and Fairness Panels with educators from culturally diverse backgrounds, as well as integrate even more aspects of Universal Design into our item development.

Provisional Item Difficulties and Field-Testing The provisional difficulty levels assigned at the conclusion of Content Review 1 (see above) allow items to be chosen for presentation that closely match the student’s estimated achievement level. This helps to optimize the use of the student’s testing time by presenting questions that are neither too difficult nor too easy for the particular student.

As the final stage in the item development process, items are field-tested by presenting them to students in an operational testing environment. The purpose of field testing is to collect item response data that



will be used to analyze the quality of the items and incorporate them into the measurement scales. Once we have this empirical information, the provisional difficulty estimate is retired; only information from student samples is used from that point on.

Item development and field testing for MAP and for MAP for Primary Grades occurs continuously. Items are developed based on changes and revisions in state content standards and structure. The details of field testing and calibration of item difficulties are described in the next section.



MEASUREMENT SCALES AND ITEM CALIBRATION

The measurement quality of any test, including the reliability, validity, and precision of its scores, rests fundamentally on the quality of the scale used to measure the variable of interest. To be useful, a scale’s unit of difficulty must be a constant size throughout the intended measurement range. If the scale is intended to allow student progress to be monitored, it must be able to span the ability range of interest for monitoring. The dimensionality of a scale must also be known and understood. Finally, the scale must be stable with respect to both difficulty and dimensionality.

Following a brief overview of the measurement model, this section outlines the process that has been followed to create and maintain the measurement scales used in the MAP and MAP for Primary Grades systems. The section also includes two brief demonstrations of scale characteristics as well as an overview of the item banks.

The Measurement Model

Item Response Theory (IRT) (Lord & Novick, 1968; Lord, 1980; Rasch, 1980) defines models that guide both the theoretical and practical aspects of NWEA scale development. IRT provides a basis for measurement scale development that rests on the relationship between a student’s achievement level and item characteristics. MAP and MAP for Primary Grades use the one-parameter logistic IRT model (1PL), also known as the Rasch model. This model estimates the probability, Pij, that a student, j, with an achievement level of θj, will correctly answer a test question, i, of difficulty δi, and can be expressed as:

( )

( )1

j i

j iijePe

θ δ

θ δ

−

−=+

(1)

A benefit of the use of an IRT model is that values of achievement levels, θj, and the values of item difficulties, δi, reside on the same scale. The scale is equal interval in the sense that the ratio of the log odds of success on dichotomously scored items of the same difficulty for any two individuals of differing achievement levels is maintained throughout the scale.

The RIT Scales

The value of the achievement levels and item difficulties in Equation (1) is on the logit metric. The logit metric is an arbitrary scale that is commonly used for academic studies of the Rasch model. To allow the measurement scale to be easily used in educational settings, a linear transformation of the logit scale is performed to place it onto the RIT (Rasch unIT) scale. This transformation is:

( *10) 200jRIT θ= + (2)

This scale has positive scores for all practical measurement applications and is not easily mistaken for other common educational measurement scales. The RIT scale was developed by NWEA for use in all MAP tests and MAP for Primary Grades survey with goals tests.



The RIT scales, like other IRT measurement scales, have a number of useful characteristics when applied and maintained properly. The most important characteristics to the development the measurement scales and item banks are:

• Item difficulty calibration is sample free. This means that if different sets of students who have had an opportunity to learn the material answer the same set of questions, the resulting difficulty estimates for any particular item are estimates of the same parameter that differ only in the accuracy of the estimate’s value. The accuracy will differ due to the sample size and the relative achievement of the students compared to the difficulty of the items.

• Achievement level estimation is sample free. This means that if different sets of questions are given to a student who has had an opportunity to learn the material, the scores obtained are estimates of the same student achievement level. Again, accuracy may differ due to the number of items administered and the relative difficulty of the items compared to the student’s level of achievement.

• The item difficulty values define the test characteristics. This means that once the difficulty estimates for the items to be used in a test are known, the precision and the measurement range of the test are determined.

These properties of IRT have been empirically verified for the RIT scales (Ingebo, 1997), and can be used in a variety of test development and delivery applications. Since IRT enables one to administer different items to different students and obtain comparable results, the development of targeted tests becomes practical. Targeted testing is the cornerstone for the development of computerized adaptive testing as well as level testing systems. These IRT characteristics also facilitate the building of item banks with item content that extends beyond a single grade level or school district. This enables the development of measurement scales and item banks that extend from elementary school to high school. By combining these properties of IRT with appropriate scale development procedures, NWEA has developed scales and item banks that endure across time and generalize to a wide variety of educational settings.

Original Scale Development Development of the original NWEA RIT scales was a multi-stage procedure. The first several stages established the utility of the 1PL model with the items to be used. A series of experiments concerning the reliability of student scores, the stability of the item difficulties, and the factor structure of the data set convinced the original researchers that the 1PL model was appropriate for use with the items in the pool (Ingebo, 1997). The original set of field trials to create the initial scales used a very conservative four-square linking design (Wright, 1977) that allowed the creation and recursive comparison of multiple difficulty estimates for each item. This resulted in very strong original scales. The procedures used in the original scale development served to establish the methodological foundations for scale development going forward.

Currently, measurement scales are developed in two primary phases. In the initial phase, the boundaries for the scale are established, initial field-testing of items is performed, and scale values are established. In the second phase, emphasis is placed on scale maintenance, extension of content, and the addition of new items.

Initial Scale Construction The development of the measurement scales used within both MAP and MAP for Primary Grades follows the same steps. The steps differ from those used to develop the original scales only in the way in which items are field-tested. Measures of Academic Progress have replaced field-testing with paper form tests



with tests delivered via computer. This has the advantage of presenting different sets of test items to different students (vis-à-vis, to different groups of students) in different orders, thus minimizing the effects of other items in the test as well as the serial position of items on item difficulty levels. The development steps include:

• Identify the content boundaries for the measurement scale. During this step, a variety of content structures from different agencies for the domain of interest are reviewed and joined. These content structures create a content index that is just as detailed but broader in scope than any single description of the content area.

• Develop items that sample the content with a wide range of difficulty. Groups of classroom teachers are trained to write high-quality test questions and to participate in a multi-day workshop to produce test items related to each element of the content domain. Each item is assigned a provisional difficulty level during this step. The provisional difficulty level is used during the field test process in the item selection algorithm. This step is discussed in more detail in the Item Development section.

• Identify samples of students appropriate for the items to be tested. Each test item is presented to at least 1,000 students in different classrooms, schools, and grades.

• Administer the field test. Students take the field tests in settings that mimic the actual test as closely as possible. Tests are proctored by teachers or trained testing proctors in a school. Field tests, like standard Measures of Academic Progress tests, are presented without fixed time limits. Responses are entered in the same manner used for the operational tests.

• Estimate item difficulties. Once field test information has been collected, a conditional maximum-likelihood procedure is used to calculate item difficulty estimates for the items (Baker, 2001; Warm, 1989). This procedure results in a set of estimates and fit statistics for each item.

• Test items for model fit. Fit statistics (point-measure, mean square fit) are calculated for each item. In addition, the percentage of students answering each item correctly is calculated. Each item is then reviewed, and is eliminated from further consideration if it exhibits poor fit statistics or is answered correctly by too high or too low a percentage of the students in the sample.

• Tests for dimensionality. Once field tests are administered, the pool of successfully calibrated items is used to investigate whether responses are affected by more than one primary dimension of achievement. These analyses include factor analytic procedures and content area calibration procedures (Bejar, 1980).

• Apply Logit-to-RIT transformation. In the development of any IRT scale, a single linear transformation is allowed. This gives the scale the numerical characteristics desired by the developers. Once the items have been successfully calibrated, the linear transformation described in Equation 3 is used to transfer the item difficulty values from the logit scale to the RIT scale.

Scale Maintenance Once the initial phase of scale development has been completed, the items on the scale can be used to design tests, estimate student achievement, and explore student changes in achievement. At this point, the highest priority shifts from scale development to scale maintenance. A primary element in this phase is ensuring scale stability as new test items for a scale are added to the item banks. Items are always added to the item banks using processes to ensure that the original scale remains intact. To accomplish this, the field-testing process is designed to collect data to permit the seamless addition of items to the original scale. To examine scale stability more closely, periodic reviews of item performance are conducted.



Field Testing Field-testing is the heart of the development of item banks. Student response data from field test items presented within a set of calibrated items are used to analyze and to calibrate the difficulty estimate for each new item to the existing measurement scale. Successfully calibrated items are added to the item banks.

Items have been added to the MAP item banks by administering assessments that contain several field test items placed within an operational assessment so that they are transparent to the student. When the assessment is scored, only the data from the active items are used, so a student’s score is not influenced by the presence of field test items. By constructing and administering the field tests in this manner, student time is minimally impacted and student scores are unaffected.

To ensure that the quality of the data is high, field test items are administered only in the grade range suggested by the item author. This ensures that the sample of students taking any field test item is reflective of the sample of students who will be taking the item after it becomes active. The size of the student sample also affects the quality of the data. Each item is administered to a sample of at least 1000 students. Ingebo (1997) has shown that a sample size of 300 is adequate for accurate item calibrations.

Another essential aspect of quality data collection is student motivation. By embedding the field test items in an operational test that is scored and reported, they appear identical to active items. As a result, students are equally motivated to answer field test and active items. On occasion, stand-alone field tests are required. In these instances, test administrators are instructed to encourage students to remain engaged with the test.

Finally, the environment for data collection should be free from the influence of other confounding variables such as cheating or fatigue. Since the field test data are collected within the normal test administration process, which is designed to equalize or minimize the impact of outside influences, the environment is optimal for data collection. The items are administered to sizable samples of students and the data students provide are collected in a manner that motivates the students to work seriously in an environment free from external influences on the data.

These processes have resulted in roughly than 4,750 reading items, 5,050 language usage items, 5,600 mathematics items, 2,150 items in general science topics and 1,450 science concepts and processes items being made available for use in MAP assessments. An additional 4,100 items in reading and mathematics have been made available for use in MAP for Primary Grades assessments.

Item Analysis and Calibration Item calibrations are estimated from the responses of students in a common grade level, using the procedures described below. Sets of responses from the full range of student grade levels are examined in descending order from the highest grade level to the lowest. The first calibration estimate that is based on more than 1,000 responses and meets the calibration criteria below is adopted as the item’s calibration.

The calibration process used to add items to one of the established RIT scales follows the concept of common person equating, first presented by Masters (1985). To initiate the process, student achievement is first estimated from responses to the calibrated items in an operational test containing




field test items. This estimate is used to anchor field test items to the original measurement scale. Using the fixed student achievement estimates as an anchor point, marginal maximum-likelihood is used to obtain a first estimate of the field test item’s difficulty.

To improve this initial estimate, a second calibration step is carried out. In this step responses given by students who have a probability of answering the item correctly that is at or below the nominal chance level minus 5% (based on the initial item difficulty estimate), are treated as missing. This procedure is consistent with the theorem presented by Anderson (2002) and demonstrated by the work of Andrich, Marais & Humphry (2010) to item improve fit and reduce estimation bias. With the low probability responses removed, a second calibration is estimated, using the same person anchor that was used in the first step. These procedures are contained within a proprietary item calibration program designed for the purpose. Since these item difficulty estimates are based on student achievement level estimates from items on the original scale, the new item difficulty estimates are calibrated to the original scale. This procedure allows virtually unlimited expansion of the item banks within the range of difficulty represented by the original items. It also allows for the careful extension of the original measurement scale to include easier and more difficult item content. These procedures have been shown to be robust for short computerized adaptive test data.

Analysis and evaluation of calibrations are carried out using several rules and statistics. Items are left in field test mode if any of the following are observed:

• | provisional calibration – estimated calibration | ≥ 20 • Number of responses < 1000 • correct responses < 40% • correct responses > 60% • The point-measure correlation < .20

Item revision and re-field testing are called for when: • Any answer option receives < 5% of the responses • Any distractor receives a positive point-measure correlation • Any answer option receives a greater percentage of responses than the keyed option • The keyed response has a negative point-measure correlation

The correlation, r, between the observed proportion of correct responses and the total test score for students grouped by their total test score is used as one statistical test. The minimum value of r = .7 has been established for accepting an item. A second and related statistic used to evaluate calibrations is the

2χ value of the count of correct responses of students scoring at each scale point value against the

Rasch model-based expected count at the same scale points. Low 2χ values suggest better fit to the

measurement model. 2χ values are converted to a standardized form suggested by Fisher (1928, cited

by Wilson & Hilferty, 1931), 22 2z χ= − 1df − , where df is the number of scale points (each treated

as a “score category”) observed in the array of correct responses, minus 1. Values of are slightly more conservative test of fit than the solution offered by Wilson and Hilferty (1931). Acceptable fit, values of

are required.

z

1z <

Graphic displays of item response functions are used to further evaluate items with borderline values of r

or 2χ . The item response function is a plot that shows the probability of correct response to an item against the achievement levels of the students who responded to the item. When reviewing an item response display, the empirical item response function is plotted on the same grid as the theoretical


function. When there are large discrepancies between the two curves, there is a lack of fit between the item and the scale. A more comprehensive understanding of item performance can be gained by

reviewing the response functions. If, upon review, it is clear that an item with a borderline value of 2χ , for example (indicating that performance on the item does not track well with increases in achievement), the item is flagged for revision or deletion.

Figures 1 and 2 show the theoretical and empirical response functions for two items. Both items were field tested with more than 4,000 students. In these graphs, the smooth curve shows the theoretical item response function from equation 1, calibrated to the measurement scale based on all students responding. The vertical lines extending from the theoretical curve show the empirical proportion correct for the group of students with any particular final RIT score. Points that are not connected to the theoretical curve via a vertical line are based on very small numbers of students (fewer than 10). The extent to which the empirical results deviate from the theoretical curve provides us with an index of item misfit. If the misfit is great, it might indicate that the item is flawed, or that the model does not completely describe the performance of the item.



Figure 1 shows the results for a difficult mathematics item that has poor fit to the measurement model. Upon review, the item was identified as being vaguely worded and rejected for use in the item banks. While less than 15% of the items in the field testing process are deleted due to poor item fit, this last hurdle ensures that the items that appear in the operational versions of the assessments work well with students. It also allows an opportunity for the item to be reworded and field tested again, to improve both the content and measurement quality of the item prior to being used operationally.

Figure 1: Empirical and theoretical probability of correct response for a mathematics item with

poor model fit.



Figure 2 shows the results from a reading item with good fit to the measurement model. The empirical results match the theoretical curve quite well, except in the extremes of the measurement range. In both the MAP and the MAP for Primary Grades systems, items are targeted to the test taker’s performance, so it is rare that a student would see an item in the extremes of its measurement range. This item met this final field-testing hurdle, and was approved for use in the item banks.

Figure 2: Empirical and theoretical probability of correct response for a reading item with

good model fit.



Item Bank Overview

The following two tables show the detailed content structure of the item banks that are available for use with MAP and MAP for Primary Grades Survey with Goals Tests and test segments. For each primary goal within the assessments, these tables show the sub-goals related to it, the number of items currently in use in the item banks, and the average difficulty and standard deviation of the items for each subgoal. The sets of items summarized in Table 1 are item pools used for NWEA MAP tests in reading, language usage, mathematics, general science topics, and science concepts and processes, respectively. These item pools allow the generic survey with goals tests to provide accurate achievement estimates (standard errors below 3.5 RIT points) for students in grades 2 through 11 in reading, language usage, and mathematics and for students in grades 3 through 8 in science areas. Table 2 provides comparable information for items used in MAP for Primary Grades reading and mathematics tests, respectively. These sets of items allow the Survey with Goals Tests to provide accurate measurement in a RIT range of approximately 130 to 210 in each content area. This spans the range of student performance for students in kindergarten through second grade, and overlaps well with the MAP system in second grade.



Table 1.



Table 1 (cont.)



Table 2.



Differential Item Functioning The fundamental assumption underlying item response theory (IRT) is that the probability of a correct response to a test item is a function of the item’s difficulty and the person’s ability. This function is expected to remain invariant to other person characteristics that are unrelated to ability such as gender, ethnic group membership, family wealth, eye color, or shoe size. Therefore, if two test takers with the same ability respond to the same test item, they are assumed to have an equal probability of answering the item correctly. To test this assumption, responses to test items by test takers sharing a particular aspect of a person characteristic (e.g., ethnic background, gender) are commonly compared to responses to the same test items by other test takers who share a different aspect of the same characteristic. Typically, the group representing test takers in a specific demographic group is referred to as the focal group. The group made up of test takers from outside this group is referred to as the reference group. When IRT’s fundamental assumption does not hold, that is, test takers with the same ability in different groups of interest are shown to have different probabilities of correctly answering an item, the item is said to be functioning differently for the two groups. The accepted term for this effect is differential item functioning (DIF).

The presence of DIF in a test item suggests that the item is functioning unexpectedly, at least with respect to the groups included in the comparison. The cause of the unexpected functioning is not revealed in a DIF analysis. It may be that item content is inadvertently providing an advantage (or disadvantage) to members of one of the two groups. Content experts who also have special knowledge of the group(s) involved are often in a good position to identify a cause of this type. DIF may also result from differential instruction which is closely (but not necessarily perfectly) associated with group membership.

Identifying items that exhibit DIF is generally a straightforward process when the items are presented in a fixed-form test. Several procedures for carrying out DIF analyses have been developed over the past 50 years. Of these, the Mantel-Haenszel (1959) procedure (MH) has been the most often cited and studied.

Detecting Differential Item Functioning (DIF) The MH procedure divides the test takers into two or more groups – one reference and one or more focal groups. Each group is further divided into ability strata that are used to match test takers across the two groups. When data are complete – all test takers respond to all test items on a fixed-form test – the strata can be based on raw scores. Otherwise, scale scores can be used to define ability strata. The larger the number of test takers at each score point, the thinner the strata can be. When data are not complete or as the number of test takers at score points shrinks, MH may not be estimable without widening the strata to use “thick” matching of test takers. This has the effect of making MH less sensitive to performance differences (Linacre, 2009).

The method used to detect DIF for NWEA is based on the work of Linacre & Wright (1989), and implemented by Linacre (2009). While this method will lead to a conclusion that agrees with MH when data are abundant and complete, it is not dependent on the imposition of an arbitrary segmentation and matching scheme that affects the magnitude of the MH statistic (Linacre & Wright, 1989). When executed as part of a Winsteps (Linacre, 2009) analysis, this method entails:

a) Carrying out a joint Rasch analysis of all person-group classifications that anchors all student abilities and item difficulties to a common (theta) scale

b) Carrying out a calibration analysis for the Reference group keeping the student ability estimates and scale structure anchored to produce Reference group item difficulty estimates




c) Carrying out a calibration analysis for the Focal group keeping the student ability estimates and scale structure anchored to produce Focal group item difficulty estimates

d) Computing pair-wise item difficulty differences (Focal group difficulty minus Reference group difficulty). The calibration analyses in steps b and c are computed for each item, as though all items, except the item currently targeted, are anchored at the joint calibration run (step a).

Mathematically, this approach will yield results comparable to the MH approach, when MH works as intended (Luppescu, 1993; Schulz, Perlman, Rice, Wright, 1996). In addition, this IRT approach offers more interpretable DIF estimates in that they are maintained in the original metric of the test rather in a rescaling of the log-odds ratio (Schulz, et. al., 1996).

DIF Analysis Ideally, analyzing items for DIF would be incorporated within the item calibration process. This can prove to be a useful initial screen to identify items that should be subjected to heighted surveillance for DIF. However, the number of responses to an item by members of demographic groups of interest may well be insufficient to yield stable calibration estimates at the group level. This can introduce statistical artifacts as well as Type I errors into DIF analyses. To avoid this, data for analyses are taken from responses to operational tests.

The latest large scale DIF analysis included all reading, language usage, and mathematics test events that were administered during the spring term of 2009 in six states were retrieved from the NWEA Growth Research Database (GRD1). The states included Colorado, Illinois, Michigan, New Mexico, South Carolina, and Washington. Each test record included the student’s recorded ethnic group membership (Native American, Asian, African American, Hispanic, and European/Anglo American), the student’s gender, and their responses to the first 20 items that were presented. The number of students and the number of test items for each content area are provided in Table 3.

1 The GRD was developed and is maintained by the Center for Research on Academic Growth at the Northwest Evaluation Association in Portland, Oregon. It currently holds data for over 170 million test events dating back to the spring of 2002. Roughly 99% of all tests results come from computerized adaptive tests consisting of Rasch calibrated items.


Table 3. Numbers of students and test items included in the DIF analysis.

Content area Items Students Ethnic Group % of Students

Reading 4,935 1,179,313 Native American 1.8

Asian 3.6

African American 18.4

Hispanic 20.4

European/Anglo American 55.8

Language Usage 4,101 538,106 Native American 2.0

Asian 2.4


Hispanic 18.8


Mathematics 6,071 1,156,756 Native American 1.8

Asian 3.5


Hispanic 20.8


Data from all states and all grades were combined for each content area. This aggregation was made because DIF was focused narrowly on how students of the same ability but of different gender or from different ethnic groups respond to test items. The intent was to neutralize, as much as possible, the effects of differential content and instructional emphasis that could potentially influence the DIF analysis. Retaining states and grades as part of the analysis could have lead to conclusions that were tangential to the primary focus.

Winsteps (version 3.69.1.8) was invoked to carry out the analysis as outlined above. Calibrations were retained in their original logit metric. The numbers of items exhibiting DIF for each ethnic focal group are reported in Tables 4, 5, and 6 for reading, language usage, and mathematics, respectively. Similarly, the numbers of items exhibiting gender-specific DIF are reported in Tables 7for reading, language usage and mathematics. The numbers of items reported in these tables are based on a minimum of 500 student responses for each group involved in the comparison, ensuring that each comparison had adequate power to detect DIF. To help in summarizing results, the Educational Testing Service (ETS) delta method of categorizing DIF (Holland & Thayer, 1985) is incorporated into the tables as ETSClass. The delta method allows items exhibiting negligible DIF (difference < .43 logits) to be differentiated from those exhibiting moderate DIF (difference ≥ .43 and < .64 logits) from those exhibiting severe DIF (difference ≥



.63 logits). For categories B and C, there is a further breakdown as “+” (DIF is against the Reference group or against males in gender comparisons) or “-” (DIF is against the Focal group or against females in the gender comparison).

Tables 4, 5, and 6 share three patterns: a) the overwhelming number of items exhibit negligible, if any, DIF; b) the percentages of items favoring the Reference group versus the Focal group are fairly evenly distributed for most all comparisons; and c) the numbers of items falling into categories B and C are far fewer than would be expected by chance. From Tables 7 we can see that DIF related to gender is very rare. The largest percentage of C category DIF was .3%, none of which was in the area of mathematics. Reading had the lowest percentage of items showing negligible DIF (ETSClass = A, 97%).

Table 4. Differential Item Functioning for MAP READING Items (N = 4935)



Table 5. Differential Item Functioning for MAP LANGUAGE USAGE Items (N = 4101)



Table 6. Differential Item Functioning for MAP MATHEMATICS Items (N = 6071)




Table 7. Differential Item Functioning Related to Gender for MAP by Content Area

ETSClass* N Items** % of Items

A 4360 97.0B- 58 1.3B+ 57 1.3C- 6 0.1C+ 12 0.3

A 3725 97.3B- 58 1.5B+ 33 0.9C- 7 0.2C+ 6 0.2

A 5443 99.7B- 10 0.2B+ 6 0.1

* A = |DIF| < .43 logits; B = .43 logits ≤ |DIF| < .64 logits; C = |DIF| ≥ .64 logitsB- and C- = DIF is against FemalesB+ and C+ = DIF is against Males

** The number of items w ith 500 or more responses from the class

Mathematics (N = 6071)

Reading (N = 4935)

Language Usage (N = 4101)

Figure Y provides histograms of item pools in the three content areas with items exhibiting DIF in ETS classes B and C as subsets. This figure suggests that DIF would be expected to only minimally affect performance on a test delivered from these (states-combined) item pools. The percentage of items that exhibit DIF ranges from 5.1% (language usage) to 7.1% (mathematics). Given current test lengths, these percentages translate into a potential of two to four items exhibiting DIF to be presented in tests, assuming that a specific item pool for a specific state test was similar in content structure to the states-combined item pool.


0

20

40

60

80

100

‐8.0

‐7.4

‐6.8

‐6.2

‐5.6

‐5.0

‐4.4

‐3.8

‐3.2

‐2.6

‐2.0

‐1.4

‐0.8

‐0.2 0.4

1.0

1.6

2.2

2.8

3.4

4.0

4.6

5.2

5.8

Num

ber of Item

s

Logits

Reading

All Items

Items with DIF

0

20

40

60

80

100

‐4.5

‐4.1

‐3.7

‐3.3

‐2.9

‐2.5

‐2.1

‐1.7

‐1.3

‐0.9

‐0.5

‐0.1 0.3

0.7

1.1

1.5

1.9

2.3

2.7

3.1

3.5

3.9

4.3

4.7

5.1

5.5

Num

ber of Item

s

Logits

Language Usage

All Items

Items with DIF

Figure 3. Numbers of reading, language usage, and mathematics items exhibiting DIF related to ethnicity in ETS classes B and C by RIT calibration.

0

20

40

60

80

100

‐7.6

‐6.9

‐6.2

‐5.5

‐4.8

‐4.1

‐3.4

‐2.7

‐2.0

‐1.3

‐0.6 0.1

0.8

1.5

2.2

2.9

3.6

4.3

5.0

5.7

6.4

7.1

7.8

8.5

Num

ber of Item

s

Logits

Mathematics

All Items

Items with DIF


46 Technical Manual for Measures of Academic Progress -&- Measures of Academic Progress for Primary

Grades

0

20

40

60

80

100

‐8.0

‐7.4

‐6.8

‐6.2

‐5.6

‐5.0

‐4.4

‐3.8

‐3.2

‐2.6

‐2.0

‐1.4

‐0.8

‐0.2 0.4

1.0

1.6

2.2

2.8

3.4

4.0

4.6

5.2

5.8

Num

ber of Item

s

Logits

Reading

All Items

Items with DIF

Figure 4. Numbers of reading, language usage, and mathematics items exhibiting DIF related to gender in ETS classes B and C by RIT calibration.

0

20

40

60

80

100

‐4.5

‐4.1

‐3.7

‐3.3

‐2.9

‐2.5

‐2.1

‐1.7

‐1.3

‐0.9

‐0.5

‐0.1 0.3

0.7

1.1

1.5

1.9

2.3

2.7

3.1

3.5

3.9

4.3

4.7

5.1

5.5

Num

ber of Item

s

Logits

Language Usage

All Items

Items with DIF

0

20

40

60

80

100

‐7.6

‐7.0

‐6.4

‐5.8

‐5.2

‐4.6

‐4.0

‐3.4

‐2.8

‐2.2

‐1.6

‐1.0

‐0.4 0.2

0.8

1.4

2.0

2.6

3.2

3.8

4.4

5.0

5.6

6.2

6.8

7.4

8.0

8.6

Num

ber of Item

s

Logits

Mathematics

All Items

Items with DIF




All items revealed as exhibiting moderate (B level) DIF are subjected to an extra review by NWEA Content Specialists to identify the source(s) for differential functioning. For each item, these specialists make a judgment to: 1) Remove the item from the item bank, 2) revise the item and re-submit it for field testing, or 3) to retain the item as is. Items exhibiting severe (C level) DIF are removed from the bank. These procedures are consistent with and act to extended periodic Item Quality Reviews which remove or flag items for revision and re-field testing problem items.

Test Construction and Quality Assurance

For MAP and MAP for Primary Grades, test construction entails creation and packaging of several computer files used by the test administration software during the test event. Among these is the database that includes the item pool with the text, response options, and calibrated item difficulty for each of the items in the pool. There are also files containing the test specifications such as the number of items to be administered, the blueprint, graphics, audio files, and reading passage files.

Once the test files are created, NWEA staff members check the test by taking three sample tests, one simulating high performance, one simulating low performance, and one simulating average performance. During these sample tests, the tests’ functionality is thoroughly inspected. Both the item selection algorithm and the goal scoring routine are checked. In addition, the data being collected during the test are examined for completeness and accuracy.

Each MAP test is built to specification of the delivered score(s) and test event for each student. This is analogous to a fixed-form test blueprint. All MAP tests deliver an overall score, and survey with goals tests also deliver a set of goal scores. To support the Survey with Goals Tests, the test blueprint specifies that each student will be administered enough items overall and in each goal area to estimate an overall score and goal scores. Consequently, item pools supporting each blueprint are structured by goal area and must have sufficient depth to cover goals across the achievement continuum. Prior to being made operational, each test is passed through a computer simulation in which 50 low and 50 high ability simulated students “take” the test four times each to ensure that adequate numbers of items of appropriate difficulty are available for students in these ability ranges. These are the ability ranges that the most likely to contain insufficient numbers of items. Upon the successful completion of these reviews and procedures, the test is ready to be administered.

The goal structure of the generic MAP test (Tables 1 and 2) come from a set of general standards representing nationally accepted content concepts. Sets of MAP tests for each state are based on each state’s content standards.


Grades



ADMINISTRATION CHARACTERISTICS OF TESTS

The administration of all MAP and MAP for Primary Grades tests is controlled through the use of three types of scripts. Each script consists of a set of commands that are executed to control elements of a particular aspect of the test’s behavior. Each test first executes an entry script which is followed by an item selection script. A termination script concludes the test event. These scripts can be customized to meet specialized testing requirements and situations. A generic description of each script type in terms of its command and conditions follows. Any of these scripts can accommodate additional commands and/or conditions.

Entry script. These scripts initialize the test event and set some basic parameters to be used by the testing engine and the other two types of scripts. In this script:

• The valid score range for the test is defined. • A default starting item difficulty for the test is defined, typically the grade level median.

This value is only used when the starting point cannot be determined. • A starting point for item difficulties is determined using the criteria:

o Student’s last score in the same domain o If not available look for a score in the next domain o If not available, use the grade level mean for the domain being tested o If not available, use the default constant

• 5 RITs are subtracted from the starting point – use this as the target RIT for the first item.

• Parameters are set regarding what is displayed on the final screen (e.g., a message, total score, goal scores, performance categories)

• The minimum time duration to qualify for a reportable test event is set.

Selection script. These scripts define and initialize variables used in item selection and to monitor the test event. More specifically, this script:

• Captures each item identifier and tracks it throughout the test – to avoid presenting the same item more than once and to build the student’s item history

• Maintains the item count throughout the test • Checks for and adjusts for score divergence • Maintains a count of the items for each goal area • Specifies an item selection strategy and selects items using the following:

o A Bayesian estimate of the student’s ability is calculated after each item response

o Selection of the next test item is based on the most informative items available (Owen, 1975). The most informative items are those for which the difference between the Bayesian estimate of ability and the item’s calibration (RIT)] is in a narrow range (e.g., ±3 RITs).

o The selection strategy includes rules for how specific areas of test content (e.g., goals, sub-goals) are to be treated in the item selection process

Termination script. These scripts define the conditions for ending a test. Currently, all tests are terminated when:

• The standard error is less than a predefined value (commonly, 2.9) and the number of items presented is less than a predefined value (commonly, 5 less than the test’s specified maximum), OR



Grades • The test’s specified maximum number of items is reached, typically 40, 44, or 50 items

for reading, language usage, and mathematics, respectively. Science tests are typically 30 items in length.

This general script structure is used in all MAP and MAP for Primary Grades tests. To accommodate early primary grade students, several features have been added to improve measurement precision and validity. These features include the use of a Test Warm-up, audio directions for each item, and slightly shorter test lengths.

Most pre-kindergarten through beginning 2nd grade students have limited familiarity with computers though they may have very rudimentary computer skills. For this reason, a separate Test Warm-up application is administered prior to the actual test administration to help the students learn how to interact with a computer (mouse and display) plus how to work with the item functionality in the test. Item functionality does not include using the keyboard and there is no “click and drag” functionality in a test. Therefore, the student only needs to know how to move a mouse across the screen, and how to click on a graphical object on the screen.

The Test Warm-up contains sufficient instructions to be used independently by students or in a group setting with the teacher setting the pace and guiding the learning. Both reading and math familiarization items are presented and audio directions are given to guide the student through the various test activities they will have to complete. One or more of the same Test Warm-up items are also presented to the students at the beginning of a test. This helps students recognize what they are expected to do in the various test activities.

During the test all the items (with two exceptions) are read to the student, enabling the measurement of a student’s understanding of various concepts and skills without requiring them to have well-developed reading skills. If the student misses one or more of the directions in the item, they can elect to replay the audio by clicking on a picture or an audio icon. The two exceptions to the rule include items in which 1) number or letter recognition is being sampled, or 2) English reading comprehension is being sampled.

The vast majority of MAP for Primary Grades tests range in length from 25 to 30 items. Most students are able to complete an assessment in 20 to 40 minutes.

Allowable Accommodations for MAP Assessments

The adaptive nature of MAP makes it an appropriate assessment for students with a wide range of skills and needs. Local schools and districts may determine that certain testing accommodations are appropriate for an individual student. These accommodations include, but are not limited to, reading the test directions, providing auditory amplification, testing in alternate settings, dictating responses to a scribe, and so on. Twenty separate accommodations to the test are considered allowable and are listed below. These accommodations impact neither the validity nor the alignment of the assessments; they do not provide assistance in understanding or solving test items. Any and all special program students who are administered MAP or MAP for Primary Grades assessments using one or more of the accommodations listed below are subjected to the same reporting specifications as regular education students.



Allowable Accommodations for MAP and MAP for Primary Grades Assessments: Timing or Scheduling Accommodations

• Extend time

• Offer frequent breaks

• Divide testing over several sessions

• Administer at time of day most beneficial to student

Response Accommodations

• Dictate responses to a scribe*

• Point to responses for a scribe*

Materials or Devices used to Solve or Organize Responses

• Scratch paper

Presentation Accommodations

• Reading the item stems (not answer options) aloud to students for mathematics and science tests only (not reading or language usage tests)

• Use visual magnification devices

• Use auditory amplification devices or noise buffers

• Read or reread directions to students

• Sign directions for the deaf student

• Translate directions orally

• Simplify language in directions

• Clarify directions

• Highlight words in directions

• Masks or markers to limit distractions; for example, the student may use a sticky note, index card, or a blank sheet of paper to move down the screen as he or she is reading

Setting Accommodations

• Test an individual student in a separate setting

• Test a small group of students in a separate, but familiar location; for example, in a Title I room or counselor’s office

• Minimize distractions; for example, use a study carrel

* Scribes, page turners, educational assistants, and other people supporting a student’s test must be neutral in responding to the student during test administration. Assistance in test administration must not be “leading” a student to the correct answer. The student’s response must accurately represent the student’s own choice.

In addition to these accommodations, MAP is compatible with third party software to provide capabilities that address the needs of visually impaired students including magnification, highlight and color contrast.



Grades



TEST AND INFORMATION SECURITY PROCEDURES

As the stakes around tests have increased, so has the need to assure the integrity of test results. Inadequate security procedures pose obvious risks to assessment systems. Violations of test security compromise the integrity of results and call into question the trustworthiness of information from all tests.

A single violation of test security can render entire forms of an assessment useless when fixed forms are used. Well-designed, computerized adaptive tests and other tests that draw from large item pools offer several advantages for assuring test and item security. Within MAP and MAP for Primary Grades system, these advantages include:

• A group of students within a classroom or computer lab is likely to view hundreds of different items in any single administration of the test, making it unlikely that students would see the same content at the same time, or see items that were used as examples in a classroom.

• Once a student has viewed an item, the student will not see that item again for two years.

• Large item pools allow minor security breaches to be addressed by simply removing exposed items from the pool.

• With computerized adaptive tests, students within a program can easily be retested using an entirely new set of items if there are questions about the integrity of their scores.

• The MAP and MAP for Primary Grades systems leverage these inherent security advantages and include additional safeguards.

Test Item Security All MAP and MAP for Primary Grades software applications use login-driven access permission systems and integrate well with local security systems. All test and item data are downloaded using secure HTTPS. Additionally, the data on local servers are partially encrypted (item display data and the correct answer key are encrypted), and are decrypted at runtime, not during the download. These practices make it nearly impossible for individuals to violate test security by intercepting items while they are in the process of transmission over a network or the Internet. In addition, as long as the district/corporation maintains appropriate login and password security, test items are secured against unauthorized viewing.

All score information for a student is kept on file for a minimum of two years, and as long as is necessary to facilitate tracking of growth through the student’s entire academic career. No information relating a score to a student is communicated to anyone but designated representatives of the educational agency responsible for the student.

The most common criticism of test security relative to computerized adaptive tests is that some tests do not use sufficiently large item pools to ensure that the majority of content on the test cannot be “poached” by groups of students or teachers, who memorize large numbers of test items, compile them, and share them. The item pools used in standard MAP tests are large, generally ranging in size from 1,500 to 2,500 items in a subject. The MAP for Primary Grades Survey with Goals Test item pools are slightly smaller, including 1,516 calibrated reading and 1,225 calibrated math items.



Grades


System Security and Confidentiality MAP and MAP for Primary Grades assessments have been successfully managed in school districts with security systems such as Active Directory. Most large school systems have login-driven access permission systems. The test-taking software, TestTaker, works well in these systems and can be effectively “pushed” to workstation machines based on login scripts.

All communication of student information between NWEA and schools over the Internet takes place using Hypertext Transfer Protocol over Secure Socket Layer (HTTPS), Secure Socket Layer (SSL), and/or encrypted file transfer techniques. In addition to security features for transmission of data online, data inside the Network Testing Environment (NTE) server are partially encrypted. Encrypted data include item display data, correct answer key, student score data, proctor login credentials, test license data, and test execution control data.

All test and student data are downloaded using secure HTTPS. Additionally, the item data on the local server are also partially encrypted; the item display data and correct answer key are encrypted.

In addition to the security surrounding each item, the nature of the tests provides added security. Since a particular student will see only a few of the thousands of available items, the amount of test information that can be exposed easily is minimized. Once a student finishes a test, all data are transmitted through a secure site for final scoring and reporting.

All data shared between the district/school and NWEA are exchanged through a secure HTTPS web site in order to meet Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) regulations.


PSYCHOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS OF ASSESSMENTS MAP tests, like most other academic achievement tests, present a number of important characteristics once they are made operational. Examining a common set of these characteristics across tests allows educators to make informed judgments about the strength of a particular test when it is compared to a set of quality specifications or to other tests under consideration for a particular use. Some operational characteristics are test-specific or test-type specific. However, several characteristics have become common focal points of test quality when a test’s scores are to be used for important student-level or program-level decisions. These include certain observed test characteristics (e.g., test design, length, item format, responsiveness to student performance) as well as less obvious characteristics (e.g., various aspects of validity, reliability). The operational characteristics of MAP assessments that are presented in this section include those considered to be the most useful for helping to make decisions about a test’s use and the use of the information it yields.

Reliability

Consistency of MAP and MAP for Primary Grades Tests Across Time The adaptive nature of MAP tests requires reliability to be examined using methods that are different than traditional methods. Test-retest reliability as it has been commonly calculated is not possible, not because the same test cannot be administered to the same student, but because dynamic item selection is an integral part of the test. In a similar vein, parallel forms are restricted to identical item content from a common goal structure, but the difficulties of the items presented are dependent on the student’s responses to the items presented prior to any particular item on the test. In view of these factors, test-retest reliability of MAP tests is more accurately described as a mix between test-retest reliability and a type of parallel forms reliability, both of which are spread across several months – a much longer time frame than the typical two or three weeks. The second test (or retest) is not the same test. Rather, the second test is one that is comparable to the first, by virtue of its content and structure, differing only in the difficulty level of its items. Thus, both temporally-related and parallel forms of reliability are framed here as the consistency of covalent measures taken across time. Green, Bock, Humphreys, Linn, and Reckase (1984) suggested the term “stratified, randomly-parallel form reliability” to characterize this form of reliability (p. 353).

One useful way to express this form of reliability is to frame it in the context of correlations between two tests administered from two different but related item pools and those administered twice but from different item pools. Accordingly, one set of evidence of this type of reliability is taken from the 2008 norms study (NWEA, 2008) and therefore represents the collective reliabilities across test item pools. These reliabilities appear in Tables 8 through 12 for reading, language usage, mathematics, general science, and science concepts and processes, respectively.

A second set of similar evidence comes from the correlations of MAP scores from tests taken in one term (spring or fall 2008) with the same students tested the following fall or spring term. In this case, the items for pairs of tests (e.g., fall and spring), were drawn from the same item pools.



Grades These reliabilities are presented in Tables 13 through 17 for reading, language usage, mathematics, general science, and science concepts and processes, respectively. In Tables 8 through 12 and in Tables 13 through 17, spring-fall correlations appear in Part A, fall-spring correlations appear in Part B, and spring-spring correlations appear in Part C.



Table 8, Part A.

State Grade Spring 2008 Test Fall 2008 Test r NAK 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 Reading Goals Survey 6+ AK V4 0.800 813AR 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 0.842 741AZ 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ AZ V3 0.842 2458CA 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ CA V2 0.820 3747

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Poway Reading Goals Survey 6+ Poway 0.792 2174CO 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 0.797 13946DE 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ DE V2 0.829 2855GA 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 0.736 2014IA 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 College Reading Goals Survey 6+ College 0.813 323

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Eas tern Reading Goals Survey 6+ Eas tern 0.830 1512Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Loess Hills Reading Goals Survey 6+ Loess Hills 0.795 525Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Mid-Iowa Reading Goals Survey 6+ Mid-Iowa 0.813 4923

IL 4 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 0.797 7255 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 0.812 242946 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 0.812 2803

IN 4 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 0.750 4195 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 0.760 170276 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 0.769 315

KS 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KS V2 0.811 16991KY 2 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.852 774

3 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.850 7894 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.818 7225 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.814 894

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.810 40946 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.776 7467 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.790 8898 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.806 9019 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.753 885

MA 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 0.828 1009Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 (P) Reading Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 (P) 0.815 1341

MD 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MD V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MD V3 0.848 9013ME 2 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME V4 0.802 2716

3 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME V4 0.807 74834 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME V4 0.817 7685

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.803 4335 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.807 7748

Reading Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.770 3696 Reading Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.816 84397 Reading Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.809 87268 Reading Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.781 59949 Reading Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.777 4488

MI 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MI V3 0.805 7729MN 4 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 0.799 1253

5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 0.825 30679MO 2 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO V4 0.794 315

3 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO V4 0.827 6194 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO V4 0.780 6665 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4 0.801 6096 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MO V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4 0.789 6367 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MO V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4 0.821 3659 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MO V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4 0.814 305

MT 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MT V2 0.808 2038NC 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NC V3 0.765 1091ND 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 0.785 4724

Spring 2008 - Fall 2008 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP READING Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students



Grades Table 8, Part A (cont.)

State Grade Spring 2008 Test Fall 2008 Test r NNE 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NE V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NE V2 0.780 1072NH 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NH V4 0.808 4921NJ 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 0.797 4662NM 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 0.822 7860

6 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 0.800 494NV 2 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NV V2 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.806 521

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.777 12923 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NV V2 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.822 1055


Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.819 14575 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NV V2 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.808 764

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.802 14066 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NV V2 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.812 890

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.772 14387 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NV V2 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.818 942


Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.777 11559 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.796 1279

NY 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NY V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NY V2 0.805 1479OH 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ OH V3 0.816 1871OK 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ OK V2 0.805 579OR 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OR V4 Reading Goals Survey 6+ OR V4 0.855 489PA 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ PA V2 0.819 1755RI 7 Reading Goals Survey 6+ RI V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ RI V4 0.790 367SC 1 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.784 1655

2 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.811 352723 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.810 370754 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.821 377925 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.834 356

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.815 35976Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.801 5950

6 Reading Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.816 357187 Reading Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.807 352268 Reading Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.786 214059 Reading Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.781 8439

TX 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ TX V3 0.840 1636UT 2 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 UT V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT V4 0.811 796

3 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 UT V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT V4 0.792 8774 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 UT V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT V4 0.840 8935 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 UT V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ UT V4 0.815 8186 Reading Goals Survey 6+ UT V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ UT V4 0.807 6407 Reading Goals Survey 6+ UT V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ UT V4 0.834 5008 Reading Goals Survey 6+ UT V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ UT V4 0.818 305

VA 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 VA V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ VA V2 0.814 509WA 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WA V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ WA V3 0.840 2055

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WA V4 Reading Goals Survey 6+ WA V4 0.836 11436WI 4 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 0.820 442

5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 0.822 14575WY 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 0.797 2725

Spring 2008 - Fall 2008 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP READING Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)



Table 8, Part A Primary

Spring 2008 - Fall 2008 Correlations for MAP for Primary Grades Reading Tests With State-Aligned Item Pool Structures in MAP Reading Tests Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students Grade Spring 2008 Test Fall 2008 Test r N

1 Primary Grades Reading Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 0.710 359 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 0.734 1246 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 0.669 2078 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 0.712 2589 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 0.666 5292 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 0.671 1528 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.682 2095 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 0.725 2779 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 0.706 6927 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 0.716 870 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4 0.685 796 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 0.719 404 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 0.679 1222 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NWEA V4 0.705 623 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3 0.713 1140 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2 0.610 360 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 0.748 649 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WA V4 0.715 719 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 0.719 2018 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 0.657 408 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.704 1088 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.719 11401

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT V4 0.706 742 2 Primary Grades Reading Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 0.711 704

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 0.567 433 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 0.693 1424 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 0.624 421 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 0.643 982 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 0.706 1536 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 0.669 759 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 0.705 326 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 0.687 598 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 0.655 407 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 0.728 2414 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WA V4 0.642 396 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 0.719 1327

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 0.685 350



Grades

Table 8, Part B.

State Grade Fall 2008 Test Spring 2009 Test r NMN 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 0.822 309NV 9 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NV V2 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.757 368

Fall 2008 - Spring 2009 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP READING Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Table 8, Part B Primary

Fall 2008 - Spring 2009 Correlations for MAP for Primary Grades Reading Tests With State-Aligned Item Pool Structures in MAP Reading Tests Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students Grade Fall 2008 Test Spring 2009 Test r N

2 Primary Grades Reading Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 0.612 467 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 0.752 955 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 0.737 1024 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 0.748 572 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 0.721 1175 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 0.752 1429 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 0.763 490




Table 8, Part C.

State Grade Spring 2008 Test Spring 2009 Test r NAK 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 Reading Goals Survey 6+ AK V4 0.754 793AR 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 0.800 549AZ 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ AZ V3 0.811 2324CA 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ CA V2 0.799 3935

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Poway Reading Goals Survey 6+ Poway 0.751 2026CO 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 0.772 15732DE 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ DE V2 0.798 2739GA 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 0.725 2227IA 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 College Reading Goals Survey 6+ College 0.731 315

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Eas tern Reading Goals Survey 6+ Eas tern 0.801 1500Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Loess Hills Reading Goals Survey 6+ Loess Hills 0.751 513Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Mid-Iowa Reading Goals Survey 6+ Mid-Iowa 0.791 5217

ID 5 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ID V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ID V3 0.773 316IL 4 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 0.784 776

5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 0.782 242016 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 0.782 2787

IN 4 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 0.750 5325 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 0.744 171846 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 0.784 508

KS 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KS V2 0.787 14407KY 2 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.819 752

3 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.833 8654 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.806 8265 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.784 819

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.780 40336 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.765 8337 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.752 8508 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.788 8429 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.758 711

MA 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 0.806 579Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 (P) Reading Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 (P) 0.792 871

MD 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MD V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MD V3 0.817 8790ME 2 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME V4 0.763 2640

3 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME V4 0.775 76694 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME V4 0.780 7817

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.783 3955 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.790 8002

Reading Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.764 3566 Reading Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.782 89827 Reading Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.780 90858 Reading Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.759 61049 Reading Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.752 4457

Spring 2008 - Spring 2009 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP READING Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students



Grades Table 8, Part C (cont.)

State Grade Spring 2008 Test Spring 2009 Test r NMI 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MI V3 0.785 9287MN 4 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 0.777 1477

5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 0.800 31197MO 2 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO V4 0.743 317

3 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO V4 0.775 5994 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO V4 0.708 6335 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4 0.777 5886 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MO V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4 0.769 6047 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MO V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4 0.834 340

MT 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ MT V2 0.767 2008NC 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NC V3 0.755 872ND 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 0.782 5796NE 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NE V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NE V2 0.773 1066NH 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NH V4 0.778 7337NJ 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 0.777 3835NM 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 0.793 7788

6 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 0.769 478NV 2 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NV V2 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.742 505



Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.783 14005 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NV V2 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.790 943

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.782 14326 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NV V2 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.792 937



Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.731 10439 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.780 882

NY 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NY V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ NY V2 0.799 1621OH 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ OH V3 0.769 1702OK 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ OK V2 0.753 518OR 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OR V4 Reading Goals Survey 6+ OR V4 0.799 676PA 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ PA V2 0.755 1734SC 1 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.706 1685

2 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.776 343983 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.781 355834 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.787 355015 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.776 32796

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.754 55996 Reading Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.774 312707 Reading Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.756 287188 Reading Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.728 171859 Reading Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.763 4705

TX 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ TX V3 0.786 4088

Spring 2008 - Spring 2009 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP READING Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)



Table 8, Part C (cont.)

State Grade Spring 2008 Test Spring 2009 Test r NUT 2 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 UT V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT V4 0.799 458

3 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 UT V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT V4 0.736 5034 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 UT V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT V4 0.805 5115 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 UT V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ UT V4 0.810 4406 Reading Goals Survey 6+ UT V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ UT V4 0.805 4007 Reading Goals Survey 6+ UT V3 Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ UT V4 0.762 372

VA 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 VA V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ VA V2 0.775 489VT 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 VT V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ VT V2 0.818 330WA 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WA V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ WA V3 0.820 2003

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WA V4 Reading Goals Survey 6+ WA V4 0.811 11776WI 4 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 0.774 538

5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 Reading Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 0.798 18010WY 5 Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 Reading Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 0.776 2621

Spring 2008 - Spring 2009 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP READING Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)



Grades Table 8, Part C Primary

Spring 2008 - Spring 2009 Correlations for MAP for Primary Grades Reading Tests With State-Aligned Item Pool Structures in MAP Reading Tests Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Grade Fall 2008 Test Spring 2009 Test r N

1 Primary Grades Reading Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 0.718 503

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 0.741 1388

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 0.679 2989

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 0.689 711

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 0.680 2839

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 0.699 7956

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 0.640 1775

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.672 2349

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 0.681 3455

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 0.708 8162

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 0.612 300

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 0.674 899

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 0.696 709

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4 0.658 1112

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 0.709 1025

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 0.653 1523

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NWEA V4 0.708 690

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3 0.667 1343

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2 0.600 386

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 0.734 716

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WA V3 0.686 328


Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 0.709 2930


Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.679 1226

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.710 11817

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT V4 0.653 483



Table 8, Part C Primary (cont.)

Spring 2008 - Spring 2009 Correlations for MAP for Primary Grades Reading Tests With State-Aligned Item Pool Structures in MAP Reading Tests Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Grade Fall 2008 Test Spring 2009 Test r N

2 Primary Grades Reading Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 0.689 698

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 0.643 440

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 0.710 1494

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 0.606 456

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 0.615 912

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 0.718 562

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 0.711 1634

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 0.644 765

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4 0.667 335

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 0.698 425

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 0.637 600

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 0.668 425

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 0.675 2412


Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 0.698 1401



Grades Table 9, Part A.



Table 9, Part B.

Table 9, Part C.




State Grade Spring 2008 Test Fall 2008 Test r NAK 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 Math Goals Survey 6+ AK V4 0.872 817AR 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 0.873 747AZ 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ AZ V3 0.897 2508CA 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ CA V2 0.885 4457

Math Goals Survey 3-5 Poway Math Goals Survey 6-8 Poway 0.887 22267 Math Goals Survey 6-8 Poway NWEA Algebra I V2 0.741 532

Math Goals Survey 6+ CA V2 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.873 1100CO 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 0.877 14367DE 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ DE V2 0.900 2788GA 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 0.817 2236IA 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 College Math Goals Survey 6+ College 0.847 319

Math Goals Survey 2-5 Eas tern Iowa Math Goals Survey 6+ Eas tern Iowa 0.853 1510Math Goals Survey 2-5 Loess Hills V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ Loess Hills V2 0.815 520Math Goals Survey 2-5 Mid-Iowa Math Goals Survey 6+ Mid-Iowa 0.853 5044

ID 4 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-4 ID V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 5+ ID V3 0.799 330IL 4 Math Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 0.887 787

5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 0.886 246086 Math Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 0.880 27077 Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.821 410

IN 4 Math Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 0.898 4665 Math Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 0.854 180676 Math Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 0.906 3338 Math Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.799 326

KS 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ KS V2 0.867 16840KY 2 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.843 820

3 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.843 9194 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.875 7165 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.892 740

Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.846 40676 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.878 7437 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.894 6938 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.899 8859 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.897 869

MA 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 0.886 2522ME 2 Math Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME V4 0.784 3224

3 Math Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME V4 0.821 79954 Math Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME V4 0.857 7995

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.872 3995 Math Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.866 7737

Math Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.864 3676 Math Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.885 84277 Math Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.898 86688 Math Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.888 53979 Math Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.902 3495

MI 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ MI V3 0.862 7699MN 4 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 0.854 1337

5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 0.870 30539

Spring 2008 - Fall 2008 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP MATHEMATICS Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students



Table 10, Part A (cont.)

State Grade Spring 2008 Test Fall 2008 Test r NMO 2 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO V4 0.815 362

3 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO V4 0.825 5924 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO V4 0.831 6825 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4 0.857 6176 Math Goals Survey 6+ MO V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4 0.859 6417 Math Goals Survey 6+ MO V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4 0.892 3679 Math Goals Survey 6+ MO V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4 0.914 365

MT 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ MT V2 0.865 2076NC 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ NC V3 0.837 1124ND 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 0.851 4817NE 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NE V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ NE V2 0.855 1091NH 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4 Math Goals Survey 6+ NH V4 0.856 4843NJ 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 0.869 5135

7 Math Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.861 889NM 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 0.869 7710

6 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 0.870 5247 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 0.868 3088 Math Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.840 329

NV 2 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V2 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.783 566Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.804 1397

3 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V2 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.859 1069Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.819 1487

4 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V2 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.851 968Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.806 1470

5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V2 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.856 747Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.834 1515

6 Math Goals Survey 6+ NV V2 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.900 1008Math Goals Survey 6+ NV V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.839 1531



9 Math Goals Survey 6+ NV V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 0.857 1196NY 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NY V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ NY V2 0.861 1770OH 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ OH V3 0.859 1890OK 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ OK V2 0.858 589OR 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 OR V4 Math Goals Survey 6+ OR V4 0.855 504PA 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ PA V2 0.879 1920RI 7 Math Goals Survey 6+ RI V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ RI V4 0.910 313SC 1 Math Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.780 1208

2 Math Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.813 373413 Math Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.840 383744 Math Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.864 383965 Math Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.873 36638

Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.843 58966 Math Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.888 365987 Math Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.891 361458 Math Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.878 20812

NWEA Algebra I V2 0.842 8979 Math Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.874 8685

10 Math Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 0.775 363

Spring 2008 - Fall 2008 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP MATHEMATICS Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)




State Grade Spring 2008 Test Fall 2008 Test r NTX 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ TX V3 0.877 765UT 2 Math Goals Survey 2-5 UT V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT V4 0.776 829

3 Math Goals Survey 2-5 UT V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT V4 0.809 9044 Math Goals Survey 2-5 UT V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT V4 0.862 9045 Math Goals Survey 2-5 UT V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ UT V4 0.860 8406 Math Goals Survey 6+ UT V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ UT V4 0.882 7697 Math Goals Survey 6+ UT V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ UT V4 0.889 6498 Math Goals Survey 6+ UT V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ UT V4 0.880 3689 Math Goals Survey 6+ UT V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ UT V4 0.902 321

VA 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 VA V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ VA V2 0.856 524VT 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 VT V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ VT V2 0.862 337WA 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 WA V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ WA V3 0.889 2025

Math Goals Survey 2-5 WA V4 Math Goals Survey 6+ WA V4 0.879 11509WI 4 Math Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 0.875 466

5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 0.866 14805WY 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 0.848 2696

Spring 2008 - Fall 2008 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP MATHEMATICS Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)



Table 10, Part A Primary

Spring 2008 - Fall 2008 Correlations for MAP for Primary Grades Mathematics Tests With State-Aligned Item Pool Structures in MAP Mathematics Tests Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Grade Spring 2008 Test Fall 2008 Test r N

1 Primary Grades Math Math Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 0.698 479

Math Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 0.722 1184

Math Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 0.736 2801

Math Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 0.766 2593

Math Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 0.712 6880

Math Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 0.723 1790

Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.740 2483

Math Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 0.730 3138

Math Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 0.730 8062

Math Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 0.726 927

Math Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4 0.699 863

Math Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 0.725 465

Math Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 0.707 1534

Math Goals Survey 2-5 NWEA V4 0.792 779

Math Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3 0.725 1259

Math Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2 0.698 396

Math Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 0.730 739

Math Goals Survey 2-5 WA V3 0.756 339


Math Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 0.726 2409

Math Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 0.629 403

Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.720 1259

Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.733 12671

Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT V4 0.683 802



Grades Table 10, Part A Primary (cont.)

Spring 2008 - Fall 2008 Correlations for MAP for Primary Grades Mathematics Tests With State-Aligned Item Pool Structures in MAP Mathematics Tests Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students


2 Primary Grades Math Math Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 0.787 919






Math Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 0.760 847






Math Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 0.768 2790






Table 10, Part B.

State Grade Fall 2008 Test Spring 2009 Test r NIL 9 Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.735 521

NWEA Geom etry V2 0.832 32410 Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 NWEA Geom etry V2 0.814 519

IN 9 Math Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.780 307ME 9 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.798 886MN 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 0.879 308

7 Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.747 4168 Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.838 10349 Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.780 1203

WA 8 Math Goals Survey 6+ WA V4 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.825 452

Fall 2008 - Spring 2009 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP MATHEMATICS Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Table 10, Part B Primary

Fall 2008 - Spring 2009 Correlations for MAP for Primary Grades Mathematics Tests With State-Aligned Item Pool Structures in MAP Mathematics Tests Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students


2 Primary Grades Math Math Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 0.713 548










Grades

Table 10, Part C.

State Grade Spring 2008 Test Spring 2009 Test r NAK 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 Math Goals Survey 6+ AK V4 0.844 789AR 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 0.870 591AZ 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ AZ V3 0.886 2347CA 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ CA V2 0.873 3951

Math Goals Survey 3-5 Poway Math Goals Survey 6-8 Poway 0.863 21407 Math Goals Survey 6+ CA V2 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.816 833

CO 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 0.856 15737DE 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ DE V2 0.874 2716GA 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 0.797 2387IA 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 College Math Goals Survey 6+ College 0.847 314

Math Goals Survey 2-5 Eas tern Iowa Math Goals Survey 6+ Eas tern Iowa 0.847 1514Math Goals Survey 2-5 Loess Hills V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ Loess Hills V2 0.793 506Math Goals Survey 2-5 Mid-Iowa Math Goals Survey 6+ Mid-Iowa 0.837 5156

ID 4 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-4 ID V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 5+ ID V3 0.786 354IL 4 Math Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 0.898 907

5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 0.872 244306 Math Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 0.862 27117 Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.848 436

IN 4 Math Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 0.872 6155 Math Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 0.850 180746 Math Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 0.885 4588 Math Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.773 987

KS 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ KS V2 0.839 14340KY 2 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.813 818

3 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.831 8884 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.849 8325 Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.850 860

Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.823 40366 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.879 8837 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.866 8668 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.895 799

Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.803 3039 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 0.895 728

MA 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 0.881 667ME 2 Math Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME V4 0.754 3080

3 Math Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME V4 0.803 79904 Math Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME V4 0.824 7920

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.855 3855 Math Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.837 7841

Math Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.864 3536 Math Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.868 89347 Math Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.879 90858 Math Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.882 4444

NWEA Algebra I V2 0.748 11009 Math Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 0.887 3499

MI 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ MI V3 0.856 9546

Spring 2008 - Spring 2009 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP MATHEMATICS Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students



Table 10. Part C (cont.)

State Grade Spring 2008 Test Spring 2009 Test r NMN 4 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 0.868 1505

5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 0.852 311206 Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.705 5527 Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.839 13898 Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.772 1275

MO 2 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO V4 0.780 3503 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO V4 0.787 5894 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO V4 0.758 6485 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MO V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4 0.858 5886 Math Goals Survey 6+ MO V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4 0.848 6147 Math Goals Survey 6+ MO V3 Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4 0.910 365

MT 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ MT V2 0.831 2016NC 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ NC V3 0.788 880ND 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 0.839 5923NE 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NE V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ NE V2 0.837 1084NH 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4 Math Goals Survey 6+ NH V4 0.839 7139

7 Math Goals Survey 6+ NH V4 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.730 346NJ 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 0.856 4157

7 Math Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.858 956NM 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 0.842 7601

6 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 0.847 5108 Math Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 NWEA Algebra I V2 0.795 341

NV 2 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V2 Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.728 543Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V3 Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.759 1377

3 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V2 Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.802 1057Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V3 Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.762 1447

4 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V2 Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.813 898Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V3 Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.784 1408

5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V2 Math Survey w / Goals 6+ NV V4 0.834 902Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V3 Math Survey w / Goals 6+ NV V4 0.829 1530

6 Math Goals Survey 6+ NV V2 Math Survey w / Goals 6+ NV V4 0.889 1001Math Goals Survey 6+ NV V3 Math Survey w / Goals 6+ NV V4 0.792 1420



9 Math Goals Survey 6+ NV V3 Math Survey w / Goals 6+ NV V4 0.830 861NY 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 NY V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ NY V2 0.836 1815OH 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3 Math Goals Survey 6+ OH V3 0.835 1671OK 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ OK V2 0.865 537OR 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 OR V4 Math Goals Survey 6+ OR V4 0.865 709PA 5 Math Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 Math Goals Survey 6+ PA V2 0.847 1884SC 1 Math Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.729 1240

2 Math Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.782 363433 Math Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.816 367544 Math Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.840 361995 Math Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Math Survey w / Goals 6+ SC V5 0.861 34279

Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 SC V5 Math Survey w / Goals 6+ SC V5 0.829 5778

Spring 2008 - Spring 2009 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP MATHEMATICS Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)



Table 10, Part C Primary



1 Primary Grades Math Math Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 0.726 515

Math Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 0.730 1199


Math Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 0.728 759




Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 0.737 2584



Math Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 0.649 312

Math Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 0.736 919





Math Goals Survey 2-5 NWEA V4 0.765 794

Math Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3 0.718 1296







Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 0.714 1280

Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 0.758 12844

Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT V4 0.641 486



Grades

Table 10, Part C Primary (cont.)



2 Primary Grades Math Math Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 0.763 883

















Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME V4 0.706 302



Table 11, Part A.

State Grade Spring 2008 Test Fall 2008 Test r NSC 3 SC 3 General Science V2 SC 4 General Science V2 0.652 2808

SC General Science V1 SC 4 General Science V2 0.582 4874 SC 4 General Science V2 SC 5 General Science V2 0.715 3641




SC General Science V1 SC 8 General Science V2 0.700 6658 SC 8 General Science V2 SC Phys ical Science Pretes t V2 0.613 453

Spring 2008 - Fall 2008 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP General Science Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Table 11, Part B

State Grade Fall 2008 Test Spring 2009 Test r NWA 5 NWEA General Scinece V4 NWEA General Science V4 (32) 0.710 306

Fall 2008 - Spring 2009 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP General Science Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Table 11, Part C.

State Grade Spring 2008 Test Spring 2009 Test r NSC 3 SC 3 General Science V2 SC 4 General Science V2 0.657 2872

4 SC 4 General Science V2 SC 5 General Science V2 0.698 36305 SC 5 General Science V2 SC 6 General Science V2 0.679 47136 SC 6 General Science V2 SC 7 General Science V2 0.709 4527


SC General Science V1 SC 8 General Science V2 0.695 444TX 5 TX Science 2-5 - General Science V1 TX Science 6-8 - General Science V1 0.701 489

Spring 2008 - Spring 2009 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP General Science Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students




State Grade Spring 2008 Test Fall 2008 Test r NSC 3 0.725 3334

SC Science - Concepts /Processes V1 0.592 515

4 0.725 3758


5 0.720 4845


6 0.734 4738


7 0.729 4672


8 0.687 475

Spring 2008 - Fall 2008 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP CONCEPTS AND PROCESSES Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

SC 3 Science - Concepts /Processes V2






SC 4 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 4 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 5 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 5 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 6 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 6 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 7 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 7 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 8 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 8 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC Concepts & Processes for Phys ical Science Pretes t V2

Table 12, Part B.

State Grade Fall 2008 Test Spring 2009 Test r NWA 5 0.731 339

Fall 2008 - Spring 2009 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP CONCEPTS AND PROCESSES Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

NWEA Science - Concepts /Processes V4

NWEA Science - Concepts and Processes V4 (32)



Table 12, Part C.

State Grade Spring 2008 Test Spring 2009 Test r NSC 3 0.693 3366

4 0.696 3749

5 0.697 4797

6 0.719 4577

0.699 403

7 0.707 4177

0.630 446

TX 5 0.671 494

WA 7 0.725 300


SC Science - Concepts /Processes V1

TX Science 2-5 - Concepts /Processes V1NWEA Science - Concepts /Processes V4

SC 3 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 4 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 5 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 6 Science - Concepts /Processes V2


Spring 2008 - Spring 2009 Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP CONCEPTS AND PROCESSES Tests With Different Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

SC 4 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 5 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 6 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 7 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 7 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 8 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 8 Science - Concepts /Processes V2TX Science 6-8 - Concepts /Processes V1NWEA Science - Concepts and Processes V4 (32)




State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

AK Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 r 0.757 0.766 0.805N 501 773 802

Reading Goals Survey 6+ AK V4 r 0.830 0.794 0.785N 833 764 514

AR Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 r 0.756 0.782 0.816N 821 959 825

Reading Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 r 0.823 0.847 0.825N 698 678 454

AZ Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 r 0.795 0.815 0.848N 1710 2896 2771

Reading Goals Survey 6+ AZ V3 r 0.850 0.835 0.826 0.804N 2513 2615 877 414

CA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 r 0.788 0.799 0.812N 4475 5064 5466

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 r 0.791 0.799 0.805N 2090 2268 2299

Reading Goals Survey 6+ CA V2 r 0.808 0.802 0.754 0.736 0.715N 3220 3422 1520 1812 596

Reading Goals Survey 6+ Poway r 0.804 0.795 0.766N 2219 2181 478

CO Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CO r 0.772 0.794 0.806N 12327 16298 16828

Reading Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 r 0.805 0.799 0.773 0.769N 12547 12143 8064 6805

CT Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CT V3 r 0.811 0.834N 448 401

DE Reading Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2 r 0.814 0.811 0.830N 2461 2563 3127

Reading Goals Survey 6+ DE V2 r 0.809 0.816 0.795 0.795N 3358 3161 1715 1682

GA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 r 0.713 0.741 0.741N 2558 2692 2831

Reading Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 r 0.739 0.735N 1722 2169

IA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 r 0.806N 301



Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Mid- r 0.793 0.807 0.804N 2279 4991 4847

Reading Goals Survey 6+ r 0.773N 302

Reading Goals Survey 6+ r 0.823 0.802 0.800 0.795N 1521 1577 1168 1379

Reading Goals Survey 6+ Loess r 0.824 0.802N 524 570

Reading Goals Survey 6+ Mid- r 0.815 0.810 0.807 0.787N 4955 5433 4921 4781

Spring 2008 to Fall 2008 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP Reading Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Spring 2008 Grade




State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

ID Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ID r 0.763 0.780 0.767N 311 328 346

IL Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 r 0.790 0.801 0.814 0.823N 18661 25251 25247 2919

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 r 0.770 0.789N 431 422

Reading Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 r 0.809 0.815 0.813 0.803 0.824N 744 24781 27682 6755 4017

Reading Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 r 0.839 0.767N 405 396

IN Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 r 0.743 0.748 0.755 0.835N 17117 18915 19238 405

Reading Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 r 0.758 0.774 0.772 0.751 0.715N 580 17656 17082 11837 3327

KS Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 r 0.790 0.805 0.807N 8220 16561 16289

Reading Goals Survey 6+ KS V2 r 0.810 0.819 0.797 0.809N 14385 13622 12047 10787

KY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 r 0.805 0.798 0.816N 3779 4135 4576

Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 r 0.830 0.824 0.809 0.772N 3628 3189 2799 2843

MA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 r 0.703 0.788 0.805N 359 964 1155

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 r 0.790 0.782 0.815N 1320 1349 1396

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 r 0.821 0.820 0.838 0.810N 1063 1011 411 654


MD Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MD r 0.856 0.855N 8908 9176

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MD V3 r 0.853 0.840 0.847 0.816N 9403 9286 2462 1254

MI Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 r 0.793 0.798 0.807N 6594 7922 7968

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MI V3 r 0.815 0.810 0.802 0.812N 7668 7703 2907 1794

MN Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN r 0.799 0.818 0.822 0.850N 28000 32960 32264 330

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 r 0.810 0.823 0.817 0.810 0.812N 774 27399 24962 15021 9232

MT Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 r 0.778 0.785 0.802N 1094 2273 2228

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MT V2 r 0.776 0.798 0.769 0.782N 2118 2121 1028 857

Spring 2008 to Fall 2008 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP Reading Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)

Spring 2008 Grade



Grades



State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10NC Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NC r 0.784 0.789 0.805

N 1385 1486 1445Reading Goals Survey 6+ NC V3 r 0.802 0.805 0.770

N 1385 1351 970ND Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ND r 0.777 0.785 0.783

N 2738 4693 5100Reading Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 r 0.789 0.800 0.788 0.780

N 4572 4730 4654 3867NE Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NE V2 r 0.804 0.799 0.789

N 719 1078 1121Reading Goals Survey 6+ NE V2 r 0.812 0.804 0.801 0.785

N 1151 1061 785 546NH Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NH r 0.801 0.801 0.791

N 3648 5807 5631Reading Goals Survey 6+ NH V4 r 0.807 0.804 0.796 0.752

N 5206 5260 2227 1450NJ Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 r 0.757 0.782 0.783

N 2070 4544 5021Reading Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 r 0.798 0.791 0.811 0.754

N 4129 3707 320 786NM Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NM r 0.781 0.814 0.820

N 5123 7870 7907Reading Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 r 0.818 0.818 0.796 0.794

N 9035 9211 7301 6206NV Reading Goals Survey 6+ NV V2 r 0

N 3N

.73260

Y Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NY V2 r 0.800 0.774 0.823N 701 1027 929

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NY V2 r 0.802 0.817N 2079 2008

OH Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OH r 0.755 0.787 0.793N 1992 2029 2062

Reading Goals Survey 6+ OH V3 r 0.798 0.807 0.811 0.785N 1878 1637 1036 2319

OK Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2 r 0.781 0.800N 690 778

Reading Goals Survey 6+ OK V2 r 0.814 0.812N 680 366

OR Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OR r 0.768 0.826 0.842N 342 555 636

Reading Goals Survey 6+ OR V4 r 0.826 0.810 0.842N 524 484 359

PA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 r 0.775 0.821 0.817N 1380 2006 2031

Reading Goals Survey 6+ PA V2 r 0.783 0.792 0.787 0.783N 1508 1597 1600 1599

SC Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC r 0.774 0.804 0.809N 4866 5696 6144

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC r 0.793 0.791 0.767 0.751N 6651 6151 3281 853


Spring 2008 Grade



State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

TX Reading Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 r 0.824 0.822N 4046 3931

Reading Goals Survey 6+ TX V3 r 0.807 0.791 0.815 0.799N 898 935 555 545

VA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 VA V2 r 0.822 0.790N 546 555

Reading Goals Survey 6+ VA V2 r 0.847 0.823 0.775N 560 567 317

VT Reading Goals Survey 2-5 VT V2 r 0.791 0.810N 324 357

Reading Goals Survey 6+ VT V2 r 0.812 0.834 0.792N 314 404 320

WA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WA r 0.815 0.825 0.831N 639 2084 2159

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WA r 0.804 0.822 0.835N 6721 11353 11746

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WA V3 r 0.837 0.818 0.792 0.835N 2139 2041 1674 1097


WI Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 r 0.814 0.820 0.827N 10473 14555 14538

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 r 0.820 0.822 0.810 0.806 0.783N 434 15512 14287 10115 4475

WY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WY r 0.782 0.779 0.801N 1938 2564 2559

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 r 0.802 0.798 0.806 0.770N 2665 2661 2143 1784


Spring 2008 Grade



Grades Table 13, Part B.

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

AK Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 r 0.771 0.754 0.769 0.798N 329 727 911 950

Reading Goals Survey 6+ AK V4 r 0.756 0.802 0.771 0.769N 974 1027 1026 462

AR Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 r 0.765 0.731 0.760 0.792N 615 1017 1053 744

Reading Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 r 0.835 0.830 0.817 0.779 0.806N 513 565 493 442 377

AZ Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 r 0.749 0.798 0.814 0.806N 1422 2173 3120 3018

Reading Goals Survey 6+ AZ V3 r 0.830 0.832 0.817 0.841 0.798N 2674 2725 2543 831 302

CA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 r 0.719 0.756 0.777 0.791N 2856 5792 6413 6333


Reading Goals Survey 2-5 r 0.748 0.767 0.775 0.783N 1911 2212 2357 2338

Reading Goals Survey 6+ Poway r 0.776 0.785 0.756N 2194 1778 1675

CO Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CO r 0.696 0.751 0.784 0.791N 8148 18199 19455 19183

Reading Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 r 0.796 0.785 0.776 0.769 0.751N 16241 14874 14119 9026 6698

CT Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CT V3 r 0.784 0.807 0.819N 731 810 303

Reading Goals Survey 6+ CT V3 r 0.703N 349

DE Reading Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2 r 0.750 0.795 0.804 0.820N 2381 2879 3663 3576

Reading Goals Survey 6+ DE V2 r 0.808 0.800 0.788 0.764 0.737N 3822 3833 3507 1927 1607

GA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 r 0.721 0.685 0.749 0.748N 2648 2984 3136 3262

Reading Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 r 0.756 0.735 0.720N 1938 1753 1485

HI Reading Goals Survey 2-5 HI V2 r 0.767N 356

Reading Goals Survey 6+ HI V2 r 0.823 0.811 0.816N 403 416 350

IA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 r 0.806 0.830N 337 315

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 r 0.750 0.780 0.792 0.801N 382 1558 1675 1677


Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Mid- r 0.762 0.777 0.790 0.808N 825 5128 5460 5597

Fall 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP READING Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Fall 2008 Grade



Table 13, Part B (cont.)

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

IA Reading Goals Survey 6+ r 0.826 0.764(cont.) N 339 317

Reading Goals Survey 6+ r 0.818 0.806 0.783 0.796 0.746N 1615 1734 1627 1403 1324

Reading Goals Survey 6+ Loess r 0.801 0.813 0.811N 573 553 554

Reading Goals Survey 6+ Mid- r 0.812 0.819 0.798 0.800 0.766N 5544 5825 5763 5080 4800

ID Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ID r 0.785 0.802 0.769 0.754N 327 351 338 368

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ID r 0.753N 307

IL Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 r 0.740 0.773 0.786 0.798 0.807N 14843 29470 35403 33779 3361

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 r 0.744 0.762N 455 427

Reading Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 r 0.779 0.804 0.798 0.797 0.794 0.800N 765 34545 36046 34972 10354 5759

Reading Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 r 0.770 0.787 0.770N 402 414 436

IN Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 r 0.705 0.717 0.731 0.747 0.780N 8677 17468 18772 18356 345

Reading Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 r 0.776 0.773 0.760 0.766 0.753 0.744N 410 17170 16893 15830 10611 3030

KS Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 r 0.718 0.767 0.783 0.793N 5494 16404 16057 16014

Reading Goals Survey 6+ KS V2 r 0.806 0.815 0.810 0.796 0.793N 16694 16689 16160 11740 9476

KY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 r 0.757 0.782 0.791 0.800N 3247 6908 7254 7098

Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 r 0.796 0.800 0.786 0.800 0.756N 6014 5212 5296 5245 3782

LA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 LA V2 r 0.744 0.782 0.767N 361 397 486

Reading Goals Survey 6+ LA V2 r 0.739 0.754 0.725N 588 531 508

MA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 r 0.707 0.710 0.767 0.788N 664 1072 1272 1128

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 r 0.750 0.761 0.790 0.812N 922 1084 1094 1038

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 r 0.792 0.806 0.811N 1193 1173 701

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 r 0.794 0.783 0.786 0.756 0.728N 918 570 601 675 442

MD Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MD r 0.826 0.836 0.834N 9111 9293 9391

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MD V3 r 0.838 0.825 0.818 0.822 0.831N 9372 9578 9388 951 775

Fall 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP READING Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)

Fall 2008 Grade



Grades Table 13, Part B (cont.)

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

ME Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME r 0.728 0.783 0.787 0.803N 2066 8501 9277 9535

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME r 0.797 0.799 0.802 0.795 0.785 0.765N 331 9605 9571 9451 6275 4035

MI Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 r 0.740 0.766 0.780 0.798N 4394 9251 9847 9937

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MI V3 r 0.795 0.799 0.784 0.788 0.772N 8845 8901 7695 3031 2257

MN Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN r 0.745 0.773 0.797 0.808N 20061 33838 36832 35658

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 r 0.779 0.810 0.803 0.801 0.791 0.813N 1277 33738 30778 26568 15345 6721

MO Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO r 0.764 0.778 0.793 0.740N 309 989 944 887

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO r 0.788 0.772 0.747 0.833 0.814N 890 808 748 360 305

MS Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MS r 0.731 0.749 0.780N 1315 1249 987

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ MS r 0.753 0.783 0.751 0.656N 889 917 891 597

MT Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 r 0.710 0.738 0.767 0.779N 808 3758 4052 4004

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MT V2 r 0.777 0.781 0.786 0.773 0.745N 3870 3836 3338 1218 907

NC Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NC r 0.739 0.784 0.778N 1318 1245 1263

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NC V3 r 0.781 0.752 0.771 0.757 0.727N 1397 1420 1263 1382 754

ND Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ND r 0.732 0.752 0.774 0.789N 1810 4133 5194 5535

Reading Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 r 0.789 0.786 0.785 0.776 0.771N 5028 5052 4905 4869 3978

NE Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NE V2 r 0.733 0.740 0.776 0.781N 689 1249 1269 1287

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NE V2 r 0.811 0.817 0.804 0.803 0.809N 1262 1346 1250 1013 707

NH Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NH r 0.756 0.758 0.776 0.777N 2424 5294 5806 5601

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NH V4 r 0.795 0.805 0.783 0.789 0.762N 5018 5387 4187 1968 1391

NJ Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 r 0.720 0.743 0.773 0.779N 1002 5016 5429 5488

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 r 0.789 0.785 0.793 0.779 0.729N 4264 4088 2494 1387 1046

NM Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NM r 0.731 0.769 0.797 0.799N 2969 8563 10055 10058

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 r 0.803 0.801 0.803 0.788 0.781N 10817 10503 10226 7752 6127


Fall 2008 Grade




State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

NV Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV r 0.742 0.766 0.791 0.795N 776 2715 3064 2965

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV r 0.801 0.782 0.777 0.751 0.801N 2907 2689 2664 1761 851

NY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NY V2 r 0.772 0.787 0.777 0.808N 824 1073 1442 1570

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NY V2 r 0.815 0.791 0.772 0.780 0.820N 2708 2620 2082 550 386

OH Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OH r 0.752 0.752 0.765 0.786N 912 3249 3024 3159

Reading Goals Survey 6+ OH V3 r 0.795 0.789 0.772 0.792 0.745N 3775 3034 2753 3103 1340

OK Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2 r 0.767 0.772 0.807N 422 698 778

Reading Goals Survey 6+ OK V2 r 0.795 0.778 0.774N 812 666 330

OR Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OR r 0.764 0.789 0.785 0.809N 1410 770 494 467

Reading Goals Survey 6+ OR V4 r 0.823 0.808 0.813 0.823N 488 542 470 497

PA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 r 0.772 0.762 0.788 0.775N 576 2227 3124 2985

Reading Goals Survey 6+ PA V2 r 0.806 0.784 0.762 0.762 0.751N 3407 3033 2769 2796 2247

RI Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 RI r 0.766 0.779 0.785 0.791N 24368 616 748 929

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ RI r 0.753 0.749 0.787 0.788N 975 898 1093 656

SC Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC r 0.732 0.793 0.803 0.803N 10195 46143 46407 45141

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC r 0.795 0.787 0.775 0.754 0.786N 42354 41062 37492 21101 5438

TX Reading Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 r 0.703 0.817 0.800 0.790N 395 3378 7519 7108

Reading Goals Survey 6+ TX V3 r 0.812 0.817 0.787 0.729 0.769N 3232 4347 1933 658 510

UT Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT r 0.807 0.805 0.796N 584 726 587

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ UT r 0.809 0.766 0.789 0.804N 500 676 393 330

VA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 VA V2 r 0.820 0.787 0.788N 820 767 667

Reading Goals Survey 6+ VA V2 r 0.814 0.803 0.807 0.760N 555 569 539 325

Fall 2008 Grade





State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

VT Reading Goals Survey 2-5 VT V2 r 0.728 0.721 0.764 0.774N 4334 300 363 409

Reading Goals Survey 6+ VT V2 r 0.785 0.834 0.763N 462 438 469



Reading Goals Survey 6+ WA V3 r 0.822 0.814 0.799 0.789 0.758N 2165 2091 1980 1668 886


WI Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 r 0.759 0.785 0.799 0.810N 8820 15676 16631 17512

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 r 0.820 0.808 0.803 0.795 0.788 0.759N 456 18671 18464 15821 12687 5192

WY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WY r 0.733 0.742 0.772 0.781N 641 3690 3864 3876

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 r 0.797 0.779 0.769 0.798 0.756N 4027 3983 3769 2915 2450

Fall 2008 Grade




Table 13, Part C.

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

AK Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 r 0.717 0.770 0.771N 518 787 777

Reading Goals Survey 6+ AK V4 r 0.801 0.754 0.729N 799 737 346

AR Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 r 0.740 0.773 0.793N 720 834 577

Reading Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 r 0.809 0.819 0.781N 529 537 510

AZ Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 r 0.770 0.793 0.819N 1589 2750 2616

Reading Goals Survey 6+ AZ V3 r 0.815 0.799 0.802 0.749N 2385 2305 649 453

CA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 r 0.741 0.772 0.800N 4114 4674 4654


Reading Goals Survey 6+ CA V2 r 0.793 0.752 0.761 0.719N 3915 3767 2152 1699

Reading Goals Survey 6+ Poway r 0.767 0.748N 1655 1546

CO Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CO r 0.734 0.769 0.777N 13437 17306 17061

Reading Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 r 0.765 0.750 0.721 0.723N 14788 12628 7682 6138

CT Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CT V3 r 0.743N 304

DE Reading Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2 r 0.784 0.798 0.810N 2527 2592 3046

Reading Goals Survey 6+ DE V2 r 0.783 0.768 0.777 0.750N 3183 2958 1739 1568

GA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 r 0.649 0.718 0.705N 2945 3100 3294

Reading Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 r 0.715 0.728N 1990 1612

IA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 r 0.784N 302



Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Mid- r 0.765 0.781 0.780N 2289 5027 4963

Reading Goals Survey 6+ r 0.797 0.769 0.787 0.745N 1500 1540 1484 1415

Reading Goals Survey 6+ Loess r 0.769 0.813N 510 554

Reading Goals Survey 6+ Mid- r 0.796 0.788 0.784 0.754N 5136 5581 4911 4591

Spring 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP Reading Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Spring 2009 Grade




State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

ID Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ID r 0.751 0.728N 364 371

IL Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 r 0.764 0.774 0.790 0.791N 19093 25325 24047 2850

Reading Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 r 0.771 0.787 0.783 0.778 0.784N 730 24473 24889 6339 3574

IN Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 r 0.710 0.728 0.732 0.789N 17567 19032 19255 500

Reading Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 r 0.703 0.748 0.750 0.721 0.703N 557 17557 16864 10228 3114

KS Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 r 0.733 0.772 0.778N 7090 15748 15640

Reading Goals Survey 6+ KS V2 r 0.780 0.789 0.768 0.771N 11877 11618 9585 8668

KY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 r 0.771 0.776 0.787N 3840 4142 4508


MA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 r 0.769 0.764N 553 676

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 r 0.729 0.749 0.796N 1001 1017 994

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 r 0.752 0.743N 607 443


MD Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MD r 0.826 0.827N 8784 8916

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MD V3 r 0.819 0.808 0.804 0.806N 9082 8978 1277 325

MI Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 r 0.766 0.783 0.794N 7570 9616 9792

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MI V3 r 0.789 0.779 0.775 0.745N 9606 8456 3492 2029

MN Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN r 0.769 0.795 0.799N 29766 34550 33298

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 r 0.812 0.796 0.795 0.783 0.794N 1314 29131 28741 14018 6548

MT Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 r 0.719 0.736 0.768N 1090 2262 2164

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MT V2 r 0.746 0.777 0.728 0.774N 2014 1849 990 699

NC Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NC r 0.746 0.764 0.779N 1007 1039 1012

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NC V3 r 0.760 0.750 0.685N 1074 1060 768

Spring 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP Reading Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)

Spring 2009 Grade




State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9ND Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ND r 0.744 0.767 0.767

N 3360 5418 5747Reading Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 r 0.774 0.781 0.764 0.773

N 5745 5978 5364 4938NE Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NE V2 r 0.766 0.768 0.772

N 766 1110 1140Reading Goals Survey 6+ NE V2 r 0.792 0.800 0.779 0.764

N 1170 1072 852 603NH Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NH r 0.752 0.774 0.760

N 4662 7009 7039Reading Goals Survey 6+ NH V4 r 0.781 0.775 0.746 0.719

N 7281 7142 3937 2276NJ Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 r 0.732 0.763 0.765

N 2246 4438 4723Reading Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 r 0.770 0.788 0.723 0.733

N 3179 1878 477 915NM Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NM r 0.745 0.779 0.790

N 5163 7793 7813Reading Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 r 0.781 0.784 0.752 0.743

N 8647 8720 6556 5303NY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NY V2 r 0.757 0.782 0.803

N 845 1148 1130Reading Goals Survey 6+ NY V2 r 0.791 0.777

N 2109 1442OH Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OH r 0.724 0.761 0.753

N 1845 1850 1896Reading Goals Survey 6+ OH V3 r 0.769 0.765 0.742 0.730

N 1622 1378 962 1666OK Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2 r 0.758 0.774

N 645 718Reading Goals Survey 6+ OK V2 r 0.768

N 588OR Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OR r 0.792 0.782

N 767 715Reading Goals Survey 6+ OR V4 r 0.804 0.779

N 763 661PA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 r 0.711 0.754 0.775

N 1268 2000 2021Reading Goals Survey 6+ PA V2 r 0.748 0.764 0.758 0.741

N 1806 1935 1523 1460SC Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC r 0.733 0.777 0.755

N 4859 5574 5878Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC r 0.752 0.738 0.710 0.804

N 6187 5494 2535 571


Spring 2009 Grade




State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

TX Reading Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 r 0.780 0.775N 4073 3882

Reading Goals Survey 6+ TX V3 r 0.775 0.727 0.804 0.683N 3426 3066 447 416

VA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 VA V2 r 0.794 0.772N 540 535

Reading Goals Survey 6+ VA V2 r 0.803 0.758 0.710N 532 498 344


Reading Goals Survey 6+ VT V2 r 0.776 0.769N 328 382





WI Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 r 0.772 0.789 0.798N 13009 17278 16944

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 r 0.792 0.795 0.776 0.772 0.728N 480 18868 18478 11177 4702

WY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WY r 0.744 0.773 0.784N 1964 2686 2660

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 r 0.770 0.753 0.773 0.735N 2601 2540 1884 1449

Spring 2009 Grade




Table 13, Part D

First Admin Second Admin K 1 2Sprg 2008 Fall 2008 r 0.824 0.863 0.824

N 43248 21146 542Fall 2008 Sprg 2009 r 0.712 0.779 0.795

N 45467 105065 29904Sprg 2008 Sprg 2009 r 0.749 0.802 0.772

N 43213 15957 595

Grade at First Administration

Test-Retest Correlations of MAP for Primary Grades Reading Tests Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students in Two Terms



Grades


Table 14, Part A.

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9AK Language Goals Survey AK V4 r 0.751 0.783 0.808 0.798 0.822 0.785 0.816

N 479 785 815 814 801 763 466AR Language Goals Survey AR V2 r 0.771 0.791 0.810 0.811 0.830

N 484 812 499 388 434AZ Language Goals Survey AZ V3 r 0.781 0.818 0.836 0.850 0.872 0.839

N 358 833 767 681 823 944CA Language Goals Survey CA V2 r 0.777 0.802 0.808 0.821 0.797 0.795 0.758 0.774 0.705

N 2892 3680 3812 3136 2820 2721 1072 1004 384Language Goals Survey Poway r 0.791 0.797 0.821 0.800 0.818 0.805

N 2049 2258 2298 2180 2149 2097CO Language Goals Survey CO V2 r 0.782 0.801 0.811 0.807 0.815 0.814 0.806 0.804

N 7167 10463 11034 9310 8147 7847 5185 4969CT Language Goals Survey CT V3 r 0.823 0.797

N 418 413GA Language Goals Survey GA V2 r 0.752 0.781 0.753 0.767 0.754 0.714

N 2526 2722 2807 2126 1913 2210IA Language Goals Survey College r 0.783

N 311Language Goals Survey Eas tern r 0.778 0.794 0.795 0.832 0.828 0.822 0.823

N 557 463 682 858 949 654 913Language Goals Survey Mid- r 0.765 0.798 0.797 0.813 0.822 0.819 0.814 0.797

N 1287 3615 3641 3620 3510 3650 3206 3357ID Language Survey w/ Goals ID V3 r 0.785 0.808 0.818

N 303 326 349IL Language Goals Survey IL V2 r 0.797 0.816 0.838 0.827 0.826 0.825 0.799 0.819

N 4949 8178 9300 9095 9190 9698 1286 1469Language Goals Survey IL V2 r 0.771 0.817 0.809 0.819 0.821

N 431 434 398 405 434IN Language Goals Survey IN V3 r 0.778 0.797 0.802 0.803 0.812 0.822 0.803 0.787

N 17160 18886 19443 17981 17824 17330 11247 2878KS Language Goals Survey KS V2 r 0.754 0.779 0.794 0.803 0.797 0.812 0.790 0.787

N 2323 4447 4704 4598 4659 4734 3398 3237K

10

Y Language Goals Survey KY V4 r 0.782 0.798 0.795 0.820 0.809 0.824 0.837 0.778N 1965 2409 2660 2342 2216 1721 1225 845

MA Language Goals Survey MA V3 r 0.830N 304

MI Language Goals Survey MI V3 r 0.779 0.800 0.816 0.826 0.824 0.828 0.819 0.807N 4779 6230 6203 5800 5991 5743 1749 1193

MN Language Goals Survey MN V4 r 0.795 0.807 0.823 0.831 0.822 0.823 0.819 0.828N 7085 8568 8382 7280 7280 6546 3724 2201

MT Language Goals Survey MT V2 r 0.796 0.775 0.794 0.794 0.766 0.810 0.792 0.785N 691 1794 1966 1404 1268 1312 754 695

NC Language Goals Survey NC V3 r 0.782 0.777 0.801 0.776 0.784 0.781 0.752N 468 551 570 715 395 384 869

ND Language Goals Survey ND V2 r 0.762 0.782 0.783 0.794 0.816 0.814 0.810 0.800N 1543 3223 3676 3410 3163 3256 3096 2761

NE Language Goals Survey NE V2 r 0.771 0.799 0.777 0.766 0.814 0.777 0.763N 615 668 648 720 645 574 355

Spring 2008 to Fall 2008 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP LANGUAGE Usage Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Spring 2008 Grade




Table 14, Part B.

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9NH Language Goals Survey NH V4 r 0.785 0.787 0.802 0.809 0.803 0.815 0.804 0.809

N 1810 3312 3407 3339 3052 2953 892 745NJ Language Goals Survey NJ V3 r 0.763 0.783 0.796 0.785 0.790 0.806 0.761

N 1455 2361 2602 2678 2257 2330 839NM Language Goals Survey NM V3 r 0.763 0.781 0.795 0.818 0.799 0.819 0.797 0.786

N 2996 5311 5528 5310 5200 4861 4092 3830N

10

Y Language Goals Survey NY V2 r 0.767 0.782 0.811 0.786 0.793 0.816N 509 639 633 511 807 776

OH Language Goals Survey OH V3 r 0.755 0.786 0.803 0.815 0.833 0.820 0.832 0.819N 975 1326 1207 1134 1016 1020 306 715

SC Language Survey w/ Goals SC r 0.738 0.794 0.796 0.786 0.777 0.770 0.782 0.769N 2090 2673 3169 3183 3827 3935 2282 503

TX Language Goals Survey TX V3 r 0.825 0.811 0.869 0.805 0.786 0.841 0.813N 886 478 526 439 349 348 352

VA Language Goals Survey VA V2 r 0.841 0.819 0.844 0.866 0.828 0.801N 409 442 411 572 570 316

VT Language Goals Survey VT V2 r 0.791 0.799 0.833 0.797 0.815 0.821N 327 360 349 398 412 332

WA Language Goals Survey WA V3 r 0N 3

Language Goals Survey WA V4 r 0.769 0.808 0.788 0.795 0.822 0.836 0.808 0.826N 403 786 898 760 1250 1207 705 463

WI Language Goals Survey WI V2 r 0.788 0.795 0.803 0.821 0.815 0.816 0.812 0.816N 4554 6607 6485 7470 8250 8262 3288 2742

W

.78442

Y Language Goals Survey WY V3 r 0.712 0.739 0.767 0.767 0.771 0.773 0.778 0.765N 947 1381 1565 1678 1648 1668 1453 1184

Spring 2008 Grade

Spring 2008 to Fall 2008 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP LANGUAGE Usage Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10AK Language Goals Survey AK V4 r 0.668 0.745 0.737 0.805 0.788 0.801 0.783 0.804

N 505 885 950 977 972 1036 1046 403AR Language Goals Survey AR V2 r 0.738 0.775 0.771 0.817 0.845 0.849 0.849 0.802

N 417 827 850 697 411 471 427 405AZ Language Goals Survey AZ V3 r 0.750 0.765 0.806 0.847 0.820 0.827 0.819

N 378 850 940 979 1061 969 981CA Language Goals Survey CA V2 r 0.747 0.759 0.785 0.803 0.811 0.793 0.781 0.771 0.746

N 2803 4510 4633 4405 3760 3264 2373 1079 718Language Goals Survey Poway r 0.761 0.783 0.801 0.801 0.770 0.796 0.753

N 1956 2135 2334 2305 1847 1814 1761CO Language Goals Survey CO V2 r 0.735 0.765 0.798 0.807 0.812 0.808 0.805 0.796 0.775

N 6265 12242 12753 12899 11071 9380 8847 5521 4866CT Language Goals Survey CT V3 r 0.794 0.810

N 360 325GA Language Goals Survey GA V2 r 0.747 0.746 0.773 0.775 0.752 0.739 0.739

N 2580 2902 3057 3096 1890 1694 1324

Fall 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP LANGUAGE USAGE Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Fall 2008 Grade


Grades


State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10IA Language Goals Survey College r 0.826 0.793

N 341 312Language Goals Survey Eas tern r 0.792 0.805 0.783 0.793 0.804 0.796 0.807 0.810

N 671 700 751 953 1028 1006 968 867Language Goals Survey Mid- r 0.751 0.791 0.809 0.809 0.817 0.799 0.813 0.772

N 3653 3825 3855 4143 3980 3980 3498 3261ID Language Survey w/ Goals ID V3 r 0.762 0.762 0.820 0.801 0.697

N 309 346 336 369 306IL Language Goals Survey IL V2 r 0.754 0.796 0.808 0.822 0.821 0.816 0.820 0.803 0.792

N 4911 11821 13691 13315 12905 13189 13040 3445 2233Language Goals Survey IL V2 r 0.782 0.774 0.781 0.820 0.841

N 505 457 451 411 415IN Language Goals Survey IN V3 r 0.728 0.758 0.784 0.795 0.802 0.804 0.808 0.800 0.781

N 13910 18436 19093 19081 17863 17290 16341 9456 2594KS Language Goals Survey KS V2 r 0.741 0.752 0.781 0.785 0.802 0.794 0.798 0.778 0.784

N 2201 4529 4655 4724 4537 4484 4363 3669 3161KY Language Goals Survey KY V4 r 0.744 0.774 0.780 0.814 0.817 0.812 0.815 0.824 0.797

N 2431 3878 4184 4278 3327 2689 2845 2103 1483ME Language Survey w/ Goals ME r 0.742 0.784 0.780 0.787 0.809 0.805 0.809 0.799 0.805

N 962 3422 4103 4342 4777 5101 4759 2415 1250MI Language Goals Survey MI V3 r 0.712 0.765 0.783 0.793 0.807 0.811 0.819 0.795 0.786

N 4878 7225 7860 7718 7158 6316 5469 2003 1522MN Language Goals Survey MN V4 r 0.748 0.779 0.801 0.820 0.827 0.824 0.822 0.814 0.804

N 6148 9404 9117 9859 8527 8574 6847 4521 1714MO Language Survey w/ Goals MO r 0.685 0.766 0.763 0.722 0.794 0.782 0.773 0.845 0.854

N 395 951 899 945 870 757 695 372 307MS Language Survey w/ Goals MS r 0.768 0.782 0.786 0.805 0.797 0.744 0.734

N 1046 991 986 659 931 888 370MT Language Goals Survey MT V2 r 0.720 0.755 0.757 0.778 0.771 0.801 0.788 0.795 0.794

N 624 2949 3201 3380 2989 2865 2752 916 673NC Language Goals Survey NC V3 r 0.758 0.795 0.801 0.818 0.776 0.751 0.744 0.745

N 376 485 496 456 511 427 1181 571ND Language Goals Survey ND V2 r 0.741 0.749 0.772 0.793 0.803 0.806 0.804 0.797 0.793

N 935 3300 3773 4141 3804 3537 3428 3122 3036NE Language Goals Survey NE V2 r 0.748 0.790 0.802 0.792 0.790 0.799 0.737 0.702

N 770 793 840 839 899 802 793 519NH Language Goals Survey NH V4 r 0.708 0.761 0.763 0.782 0.801 0.811 0.809 0.804 0.783

N 1241 3033 3291 3326 3122 2908 2739 964 584NJ Language Goals Survey NJ V3 r 0.704 0.777 0.788 0.776 0.786 0.774 0.827 0.785 0.755

N 499 2303 2265 2457 2392 2164 611 959 798NM Language Goals Survey NM V3 r 0.707 0.750 0.770 0.792 0.799 0.799 0.805 0.789 0.778

N 2484 5524 5981 6197 6079 5597 5316 5216 3922NV Language Survey w/ Goals NV r 0.679 0.745 0.778 0.794 0.808 0.775 0.782 0.765

N 668 1407 1697 1799 1565 1186 1140 680NY Language Goals Survey NY V2 r 0.739 0.768 0.773 0.810 0.792 0.765 0.760 0.830

N 455 618 763 787 1111 969 626 317OH Language Goals Survey OH V3 r 0.715 0.747 0.788 0.793 0.807 0.824 0.785 0.799

N 703 1619 1694 1797 1866 1532 1037 1263RI Language Survey w/ Goals RI V4 r 0.799 0.838 0.815 0.770 0.813 0.809

N 383 554 388 340 374 539

Fall 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP LANGUAGE USAGE Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)

Fall 2008 Grade





Table 14, Part C.

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10SC Language Survey w/ Goals SC r 0.744 0.787 0.799 0.803 0.790 0.788 0.773 0.735 0.793

N 17099 25858 26324 26128 28122 27588 25097 12223 2226TX Language Goals Survey TX V3 r 0.807 0.798 0.818 0.824 0.829 0.829 0.789

N 4864 4742 4186 1539 1321 964 370UT Language Survey w/ Goals UT r 0.744 0.780 0.801 0.820 0.830 0.813 0.823 0.737

N 462 560 720 595 537 693 393 344VA Language Goals Survey VA V2 r 0.828 0.784 0.789 0.820 0.802 0.784 0.799

N 648 732 742 570 573 541 313VT Language Goals Survey VT V2 r 0.791 0.741 0.811 0.833 0.800 0.836 0.801

N 301 372 393 400 482 476 500WA Language Goals Survey WA V3 r 0

N 4Language Goals Survey WA V4 r 0.755 0.793 0.808 0.860 0.829 0.841 0.803 0.858

N 764 924 922 909 1415 1172 1069 462WI Language Goals Survey WI V2 r 0.757 0.779 0.789 0.801 0.808 0.811 0.811 0.803 0.785

N 4852 7666 7663 8464 11417 11581 9346 5934 3365W

.82233

Y Language Goals Survey WY V3 r 0.604 0.720 0.738 0.745 0.764 0.747 0.750 0.756 0.751N 388 2281 2602 2844 3025 2985 2806 2322 1863

Fall 2008 Grade

Fall 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP LANGUAGE USAGE Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

AK Language Goals Survey AK V4 r 0.700 0.727 0.772 0.738 0.788 0.726N 517 798 794 793 775 725

AR Language Goals Survey AR V2 r 0.713 0.781 0.787 0.781 0.839N 401 693 449 380 320

AZ Language Goals Survey AZ V3 r 0.791 0.778 0.826 0.817 0.835 0.793 0.731N 321 729 661 672 755 808 364

CA Language Goals Survey CA V2 r 0.744 0.779 0.792 0.798 0.765 0.767 0.722 0.693N 2541 3296 3006 2829 3086 2654 370 618

Language Goals Survey Poway r 0.771 0.759 0.775 0.770 0.753 0.731N 1980 2180 2179 1709 1661 1651

CO Language Goals Survey CO V2 r 0.753 0.778 0.782 0.778 0.794 0.786 0.770 0.742N 7713 11127 11318 10071 9058 8458 4836 4242

GA Language Goals Survey GA V2 r 0.712 0.750 0.720 0.736 0.724 0.694N 2888 3084 3156 2187 1896 1461

IA Language Goals Survey Eas tern r 0.767 0.804 0.813 0.834 0.801 0.784 0.773N 659 542 754 921 938 697 873

Language Goals Survey Mid- r 0.745 0.777 0.772 0.792 0.788 0.778 0.789 0.755N 1277 3474 3547 3617 3469 3571 3117 3135

ID Language Survey w/ Goals ID V3 r 0.799 0.748 0.710N 366 371 316

Spring 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP LANGUAGE USAGE Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Spring 2008 Grade



State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

IL Language Goals Survey IL V2 r 0.775 0.797 0.806 0.802 0.801 0.796 0.765 0.765N 5093 8092 8862 8749 8661 8927 1040 957

Language Goals Survey IL V2 r 0.763 0.782 0.770 0.785N 434 430 389 387

IN Language Goals Survey IN V3 r 0.757 0.777 0.786 0.799 0.794 0.797 0.764 0.765N 17957 19444 20009 18428 18596 17758 9605 2506

KS Language Goals Survey KS V2 r 0.720 0.759 0.780 0.779 0.775 0.783 0.756 0.751N 2015 3914 3945 3769 3924 3694 2772 2401

KY Language Goals Survey KY V4 r 0.760 0.783 0.789 0.793 0.783 0.781 0.801 0.754N 2013 2280 2530 2461 1823 1494 1182 813

MI Language Goals Survey MI V3 r 0.770 0.791 0.802 0.806 0.805 0.810 0.785 0.782N 5273 7375 7475 6723 6939 5803 2166 1170

MN Language Goals Survey MN V4 r 0.767 0.786 0.813 0.809 0.803 0.809 0.780 0.790N 6258 7861 7585 6862 6600 5929 3033 1830

MT Language Goals Survey MT V2 r 0.700 0.732 0.766 0.786 0.749 0.776 0.744 0.807N 648 1676 1849 1299 1208 1181 690 546

NC Language Goals Survey NC V3 r 0.785 0.714 0.786 0.734 0.693N 365 375 355 305 695

ND Language Goals Survey ND V2 r 0.750 0.763 0.769 0.784 0.793 0.791 0.776 0.783N 1912 3751 4163 3664 3389 3498 3165 2832

NE Language Goals Survey NE V2 r 0.766 0.715 0.788 0.748 0.753 0.801 0.724 0.747N 346 692 734 714 777 688 700 449

NH Language Goals Survey NH V4 r 0.759 0.768 0.776 0.774 0.790 0.786 0.786 0.782N 2725 4183 4216 5270 5293 5076 2398 1848

NJ Language Goals Survey NJ V3 r 0.756 0.772 0.768 0.753 0.760 0.850 0.807 0.769N 966 1579 1837 1745 1655 340 311 742

NM Language Goals Survey NM V3 r 0.724 0.744 0.766 0.775 0.780 0.792 0.778 0.744N 2917 5115 5326 5103 4984 4559 3570 3200

NY Language Goals Survey NY V2 r 0.733 0.736 0.799 0.739 0.748 0.768N 497 610 596 472 699 403

OH Language Goals Survey OH V3 r 0.775 0.760 0.762 0.791 0.775 0.811 0.830N 819 1082 946 872 638 619 443

SC Language Survey w/ Goals SC r 0.723 0.762 0.741 0.735 0.737 0.701 0.719 0.770N 2148 2640 3074 3086 3564 3358 2039 328

TX Language Goals Survey TX V3 r 0.797 0.770 0.807 0.823 0.788 0.734N 995 558 664 787 633 329


VT Language Goals Survey VT V2 r 0.755 0.732 0.798 0.782 0.807N 347 327 349 377 399

Spring 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP LANGUAGE USAGE Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)

Spring 2008 Grade




State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9WA Language Goals Survey WA V4 r 0.740 0.798 0.778 0.805 0.823 0.811 0.762 0.833

N 394 653 728 472 1064 1079 694 396WI Language Goals Survey WI V2 r 0.757 0.771 0.787 0.797 0.801 0.797 0.771 0.765

N 6637 8471 8577 9446 11463 11313 4081 3117WY Language Goals Survey WY V3 r 0.697 0.701 0.751 0.750 0.745 0.752 0.765 0.748

N 1103 1493 1659 1677 1659 1698 1240 963

Spring 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP LANGUAGE USAGE Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)

Spring 2008 Grade




State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

AK Math Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 r 0.807 0.817 0.846N 597 818 818

Math Goals Survey 6+ AK V4 r 0.900 0.871 0.904N 832 794 377

AR Math Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 r 0.807 0.830 0.880N 883 998 868

Math Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 r 0.922 0.873 0.903N 717 629 325

AZ Math Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 r 0.814 0.862 0.890N 1745 2969 2789

Math Goals Survey 6+ AZ V3 r 0.914 0.915 0.882 0.907N 2545 2635 825 402

CA Math Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 r 0.796 0.840 0.879N 4578 4717 5115

Math Goals Survey 6+ CA V2 r 0.857 0.884 0.874 0.862 0.841 0.811N 335 3734 3117 1276 1899 575

Math Goals Survey 3-5 Poway r 0.839 0.860 0.878N 2105 2287 2308

Math Goals Survey 6-8 Poway r 0.884 0.905N 2019 1031

CO Math Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 r 0.821 0.849 0.873N 13965 17543 17476

Math Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 r 0.896 0.904 0.898 0.894N 13803 13319 9129 7133

DE Math Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2 r 0.835 0.852 0.877N 2490 2567 3142

Math Goals Survey 6+ DE V2 r 0.899 0.905 0.892 0.884N 3428 3347 2049 1818

GA Math Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 r 0.775 0.808 0.823N 2834 2982 3006

Math Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 r 0.839 0.863N 2107 2473

HI Math Goals Survey 6+ HI V2 r 0.925N 320

IA Math Goals Survey 2-5 College r 0.850 0.850N 324 309

Math Goals Survey 6+ College r 0.887N 310

Math Goals Survey 2-5 Eastern r 0.793 0.822 0.857N 626 1513 1404

Math Goals Survey 6+ Eas tern r 0.877 0.895 0.894 0.889N 1539 1599 1176 1367

Math Goals Survey 2-5 Loess r 0.796 0.803 0.822N 350 494 443

Spring 2008 to Fall 2008 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP MATHEMATICS Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Spring 2008 Grade




State Test 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

IA Math Goals Survey 6+ Loess r 0.862 0.880(cont.) N 512 574

Math Goals Survey 2-5 Mid-Iowa r 0.772 0.806 0.828N 2317 5054 4844

Math Goals Survey 6+ Mid-Iowa r 0.874 0.885 0.896 0.900N 5222 5535 4897 4687

ID Math Survey w/ Goals 2-4 ID V3 r 0.796 0.749N 308 319

Math Survey w/ Goals 5+ ID V3 r 0.830N 303

IL Math Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 r 0.831 0.863 0.882 0.894N 19781 26507 25905 2931

Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 r 0.906 0.902 0.906 0.897 0.909N 872 24724 27460 5632 3638

IN Math Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 r 0.779 0.818 0.842 0.896N 19473 20713 20108 425

Math Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 r 0.903 0.875 0.890 0.886 0.877N 504 18457 18410 11233 2966

KS Math Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 r 0.810 0.842 0.862N 8701 16924 16472

Math Goals Survey 6+ KS V2 r 0.880 0.892 0.884 0.900N 14736 13919 12504 10949

KY Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 r 0.821 0.822 0.854N 4008 4317 4637

Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 r 0.887 0.885 0.884 0.879N 3701 3162 2636 2612

MA Math Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 r 0.785 0.818 0.842N 2091 2508 2672

Math Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 r 0.901 0.907 0.901 0.915N 2307 2463 1558 1432

MI Math Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 r 0.802 0.816 0.850N 6974 8004 8050

Math Goals Survey 6+ MI V3 r 0.887 0.900 0.887 0.891N 7960 7662 2859 1709

MN Math Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 r 0.830 0.815 0.844 0.866 0.891N 334 29916 33947 32539 341

Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 r 0.894 0.891 0.897 0.895 0.904N 888 27408 24858 14793 7252

MT Math Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 r 0.795 0.802 0.842N 1284 2394 2264

Math Goals Survey 6+ MT V2 r 0.861 0.886 0.880 0.881N 2150 2225 1445 1212

Spring 2008 to Fall 2008 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP MATHEMATICS Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)

Spring 2008 Grade




State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10NC Math Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 r 0.770 0.798 0.839

N 1446 1505 1469Math Goals Survey 6+ NC V3 r 0.865 0.874 0.794

N 1320 1239 468ND Math Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 r 0.781 0.810 0.829

N 2762 4800 5095Math Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 r 0.866 0.883 0.885 0.895

N 4642 4828 4545 3344NE Math Goals Survey 2-5 NE V2 r 0.794 0.818 0.823

N 738 1095 1121Math Goals Survey 6+ NE V2 r 0.885 0.897 0.887 0.892

N 1181 1096 768 535NH Math Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4 r 0.779 0.814 0.840

N 3732 5800 5866Math Goals Survey 6+ NH V4 r 0.858 0.869 0.889 0.893 0.881

N 332 5185 5360 2186 1444NJ Math Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 r 0.804 0.850 0.864

N 2840 5438 5560Math Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 r 0.895 0.905 0.889 0.869

N 4476 3606 387 891NM Math Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 r 0.778 0.825 0.857

N 5085 7791 7717Math Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 r 0.868 0.892 0.878 0.866

N 9290 9798 7698 6631NY Math Goals Survey 2-5 NY V2 r 0.801 0.817 0.851

N 1050 1306 1237Math Goals Survey 6+ NY V2 r 0.868 0.887 0.881

N 2183 2097 595OH Math Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3 r 0.795 0.823 0.849

N 2034 2168 2057Math Goals Survey 6+ OH V3 r 0.875 0.891 0.895 0.882

N 1966 1903 1055 2042OK Math Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2 r 0.783 0.858

N 697 772Math Goals Survey 6+ OK V2 r 0.861 0.879

N 696 373OR Math Goals Survey 2-5 OR V4 r 0.806 0.794 0.851

N 358 526 598Math Goals Survey 6+ OR V4 r 0.879 0.884 0.927

N 567 531 444PA Math Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 r 0.806 0.836 0.859

N 1481 2058 2103Math Goals Survey 6+ PA V2 r 0.899 0.895 0.876 0.883

N 1515 1570 1560 1537


Spring 2008 Grade




State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

SC Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 r 0.788 0.833 0.848

N 4994 5663 6023Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 r 0.874 0.875 0.870 0.873

N 6712 5962 3210 796TX Math Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 r 0.858 0.855

N 891 1154Math Goals Survey 6+ TX V3 r 0.902 0.881 0.852 0.858

N 655 679 537 499VA Math Goals Survey 2-5 VA V2 r 0.837 0.852

N 572 571Math Goals Survey 6+ VA V2 r 0.892 0.880 0.892

N 576 558 332VT Math Goals Survey 2-5 VT V2 r 0.797 0.841

N 383 397Math Goals Survey 6+ VT V2 r 0.887 0.906 0.906

N 324 403 338WA Math Goals Survey 2-5 WA V3 r 0.844 0.861 0.886

N 645 2148 2151Math Goals Survey 2-5 WA V4 r 0.821 0.853 0.877

N 6759 12812 12911Math Goals Survey 6+ WA V3 r 0.900 0.917 0.906 0.916

N 2163 2065 1689 993Math Goals Survey 6+ WA V4 r 0.898 0.901 0.900 0.899

N 12546 12727 8237 5129WI Math Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 r 0.809 0.838 0.855

N 10809 15283 14990Math Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 r 0.861 0.895 0.899 0.901 0.896

N 465 15621 14716 9496 4897WY Math Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 r 0.783 0.815 0.841

N 2023 2778 2792Math Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 r 0.862 0.877 0.876 0.873

N 2536 2296 1434 1217

Spring 2008 Grade





State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

AK Math Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 r 0.745 0.777 0.810 0.837N 838 813 971 944

Math Goals Survey 6+ AK V4 r 0.861 0.886 0.870N 993 1062 1057

AR Math Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 r 0.777 0.813 0.819 0.873N 780 1132 1098 861

Math Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 r 0.890 0.902 0.872 0.899N 639 695 556 383

AZ Math Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 r 0.769 0.796 0.847 0.875N 1533 2936 3168 2977


CA Math Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 r 0.765 0.799 0.837 0.853N 4836 6482 6761 6596

Math Goals Survey 6+ CA V2 r 0.882 0.882 0.861 0.857 0.845N 5752 4414 3339 1994 1414

Math Goals Survey 3-5 Poway r 0.798 0.824 0.841 0.876N 1954 2241 2393 2403


CO Math Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 r 0.777 0.811 0.846 0.861N 12746 20461 20456 19659

Math Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 r 0.871 0.891 0.892 0.895 0.885N 17081 15727 14789 9840 7076

CT Math Goals Survey 2-5 CT V3 r 0.811 0.827N 326 310

Math Goals Survey 6+ CT V3 r 0.872N 361

DE Math Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2 r 0.755 0.823 0.843 0.864N 2597 2902 3682 3500

Math Goals Survey 6+ DE V2 r 0.881 0.889 0.888 0.876 0.858N 3888 3986 3778 2276 1838

GA Math Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 r 0.761 0.773 0.804 0.804N 2959 3223 3153 3316

Math Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 r 0.831 0.852 0.863N 2056 1829 1601

HI Math Goals Survey 2-5 HI V2 r 0.772 0.861 0.835N 333 359 451

Math Goals Survey 6+ HI V2 r 0.863 0.904 0.871N 391 420 313

Fall 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP Mathematics Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Fall 2008 Grade




State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

IA Math Goals Survey 2-5 College r 0.796 0.833 0.856N 311 342 321

Math Goals Survey 2-5 Eastern r 0.741 0.797 0.831 0.842N 462 1589 1698 1601


Math Goals Survey 2-5 Mid-Iowa r 0.736 0.775 0.801 0.843N 942 4960 5367 5696

Math Goals Survey 6+ College r 0.854 0.904 0.898N 338 304 325

Math Goals Survey 6+ Eas tern r 0.859 0.878 0.884 0.879 0.870N 1657 1797 1649 1333 1272

Math Goals Survey 6+ Loess r 0.847 0.877 0.888N 571 531 573

Math Goals Survey 6+ Mid-Iowa r 0.856 0.880 0.887 0.891 0.887N 5760 5892 5835 5000 4823

ID Math Survey w/ Goals 2-4 ID V3 r 0.734 0.800 0.741N 322 345 327

Math Survey w/ Goals 5+ ID V3 r 0.828 0.844N 375 329

IL Math Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 r 0.780 0.814 0.849 0.870 0.878N 20429 33964 37386 34904 3295

Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 r 0.879 0.887 0.891 0.898 0.892 0.894N 845 35654 36523 34555 8544 4739

IN Math Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 r 0.737 0.771 0.813 0.831 0.856N 16898 19477 20000 19083 351

Math Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 r 0.886 0.859 0.870 0.883 0.877 0.869N 456 17891 17764 16869 9161 2499

KS Math Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 r 0.766 0.812 0.827 0.851N 8465 16564 16347 15941

Math Goals Survey 6+ KS V2 r 0.867 0.886 0.894 0.891 0.885N 16595 17214 16474 11949 8374

KY Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 r 0.761 0.790 0.814 0.833N 6078 7259 7477 7111

Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 r 0.844 0.876 0.879 0.893 0.869N 5919 5320 5120 4908 3690

LA Math Goals Survey 2-5 LA V2 r 0.793 0.808 0.813N 416 393 504

Math Goals Survey 6+ LA V2 r 0.778 0.856 0.846N 614 580 521

MA Math Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 r 0.751 0.810 0.804 0.866N 1345 1522 1497 1216

Math Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 r 0.879 0.898 0.868 0.892 0.896N 893 921 597 731 557

Fall 2008 Grade

Fall 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP Mathematics Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)




State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

ME Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME V4 r 0.723 0.795 0.820 0.849

N 2580 9012 9344 9497Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4 r 0.876 0.870 0.883 0.894 0.903 0.895

N 356 9557 9531 9417 4412 3073MI Math Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 r 0.750 0.778 0.810 0.836

N 7743 9355 9791 9799Math Goals Survey 6+ MI V3 r 0.869 0.881 0.897 0.886 0.892

N 9207 9043 7755 3009 2195MN Math Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 r 0.761 0.800 0.839 0.854

N 30613 35303 37675 35773Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 r 0.867 0.873 0.883 0.892 0.895 0.902

N 1336 34535 31243 25268 13485 6259

MO Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO V4 r 0.783 0.793 0.806 0.830

N 447 1079 968 910Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4 r 0.855 0.876 0.898 0.913 0.908

N 931 823 744 397 342

MS Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MS V3 r 0.795 0.798 0.811

N 1333 1271 994Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ MS V3 r 0.870 0.860 0.820 0.822

N 939 910 902 462MT Math Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 r 0.706 0.762 0.802 0.835

N 918 3099 4274 4128Math Goals Survey 6+ MT V2 r 0.849 0.867 0.880 0.879 0.878

N 3966 4165 3670 1859 1204NC Math Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 r 0.744 0.759 0.816 0.837

N 1268 1428 1400 1382Math Goals Survey 6+ NC V3 r 0.826 0.849 0.854 0.832 0.814

N 1429 1386 1134 960 492NCNSP HS Math V1 r 0.847

N 505ND Math Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 r 0.739 0.771 0.804 0.834

N 1871 4937 5332 5496Math Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 r 0.855 0.870 0.881 0.888 0.895

N 5166 5106 5035 4669 3459NE Math Goals Survey 2-5 NE V2 r 0.723 0.755 0.803 0.827

N 733 1262 1294 1299Math Goals Survey 6+ NE V2 r 0.861 0.875 0.893 0.878 0.874

N 1283 1353 1230 979 670NH Math Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4 r 0.712 0.768 0.798 0.831

N 3469 5330 5748 5665Math Goals Survey 6+ NH V4 r 0.860 0.872 0.884 0.867 0.864

N 5086 5299 4203 2002 1238

Fall 2008 Grade





State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

NJ Math Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 r 0.773 0.803 0.837 0.849N 1601 5556 5605 5428

Math Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 r 0.870 0.882 0.914 0.880 0.876N 4610 4113 1565 1521 1070

NM Math Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 r 0.703 0.785 0.821 0.843N 4925 8787 10032 9956

Math Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 r 0.854 0.862 0.881 0.872 0.874N 11402 10817 10617 8409 6457

NV Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4 r 0.739 0.790 0.815 0.829N 2110 2845 3088 2818

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4 r 0.850 0.869 0.876 0.882 0.875N 2998 2996 2885 2000 810

NY Math Goals Survey 2-5 NY V2 r 0.800 0.827 0.835 0.856N 1267 1433 1695 1754

Math Goals Survey 6+ NY V2 r 0.872 0.871 0.886 0.869 0.889N 3163 2463 2182 968 376

OH Math Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3 r 0.737 0.779 0.816 0.831N 2541 3430 3215 3133

Math Goals Survey 6+ OH V3 r 0.857 0.882 0.887 0.890 0.862N 3827 3139 2768 2501 1235

OK Math Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2 r 0.704 0.787 0.783 0.832N 364 376 690 750

Math Goals Survey 6+ OK V2 r 0.869 0.878 0.852N 829 693 325

OR Math Goals Survey 2-5 OR V4 r 0.780 0.804 0.852N 710 470 442

Math Goals Survey 6+ OR V4 r 0.873 0.870 0.882 0.903N 522 566 520 610

PA Math Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 r 0.783 0.806 0.830 0.856N 2245 2637 3209 3019

Math Goals Survey 6+ PA V2 r 0.874 0.882 0.863 0.877 0.864N 3446 3026 2699 2615 2245

RI Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 RI V4 r 0.722 0.783 0.820 0.840N 617 663 837 957

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ RI V4 r 0.844 0.827 0.889 0.895N 1048 954 1102 539

SC Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 r 0.747 0.799 0.836 0.851

N 38329 47622 47348 46286Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 r 0.875 0.882 0.880 0.869 0.892

N 44623 43688 40406 21995 6361TX Math Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 r 0.810 0.856 0.817 0.808

N 685 5680 7365 6260Math Goals Survey 6+ TX V3 r 0.882 0.886 0.884 0.871 0.901

N 2953 3882 1598 1103 696


Fall 2008 Grade




State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

UT Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT V4 r 0.730 0.826 0.823 0.821N 436 583 694 556

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ UT V4 r 0.877 0.889 0.841 0.883N 481 711 334 314

VA Math Goals Survey 2-5 VA V2 r 0.847 0.858 0.851N 830 796 759

Math Goals Survey 6+ VA V2 r 0.886 0.893 0.891 0.888N 576 579 554 329

VT Math Goals Survey 2-5 VT V2 r 0.728 0.810 0.842N 370 421 448

Math Goals Survey 6+ VT V2 r 0.861 0.873 0.894 0.878N 351 477 466 440

WA Math Goals Survey 2-5 WA V3 r 0.830 0.828 0.858 0.858N 644 2176 2202 2185

Math Goals Survey 6+ WA V3 r 0.889 0.897 0.903 0.869 0.883N 2127 1993 1902 1724 866

Math Goals Survey 2-5 WA V4 r 0.759 0.800 0.842 0.849N 5957 12523 14823 14432

Math Goals Survey 6+ WA V4 r 0.884 0.895 0.891 0.894 0.880N 14494 13471 12785 7733 4014

WI Math Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 r 0.749 0.795 0.828 0.842N 12270 17806 17072 17517

Math Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 r 0.872 0.877 0.890 0.897 0.899 0.885N 464 18895 18561 16232 11307 5372

WY Math Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 r 0.733 0.773 0.799 0.832N 1090 4046 4099 3968

Math Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 r 0.841 0.857 0.871 0.877 0.854N 3959 3791 3161 2208 1943


Fall 2008 Grade




Table 15, Part C.

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

AK Math Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 r 0.789 0.775 0.812N 600 823 781

Math Goals Survey 6+ AK V4 r 0.876 0.858N 809 769

AR Math Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 r 0.788 0.800 0.871N 776 876 603

Math Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 r 0.886 0.866 0.893N 575 511 400

AZ Math Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 r 0.779 0.840 0.873N 1602 2778 2629


CA Math Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 r 0.754 0.817 0.853N 3914 4290 4243

Math Goals Survey 6+ CA V2 r 0.859 0.866 0.863 0.825 0.819N 340 3301 2517 808 1307


Math Goals Survey 6-8 Poway r 0.846 0.883N 1868 985

CO Math Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 r 0.794 0.833 0.850N 14683 18140 17437

Math Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 r 0.879 0.885 0.875 0.874N 15994 13657 8615 6688

DE Math Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2 r 0.807 0.832 0.851N 2442 2548 3008

Math Goals Survey 6+ DE V2 r 0.867 0.883 0.868 0.850N 3293 3159 1926 1626

GA Math Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 r 0.735 0.782 0.780N 3300 3315 3433

Math Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 r 0.838 0.852N 2096 1696

IA Math Goals Survey 2-5 College r 0.826 0.814N 323 307

Math Goals Survey 6+ College r 0N 3


Math Goals Survey 6+ Loess r 0.841 0.884N 500 563

Math Goals Survey 2-5 Mid-Iowa r 0.760 0.783 0.804N 2288 5082 4920

Math Goals Survey 6+ Mid-Iowa r 0.853 0.873 0.883 0.891N 5376 5662 4908 4564

Spring 2008 Grade

Spring 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP Mathematics Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

.85405



State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

IA Math Goals Survey 2-5 Eastern r 0.776 0.795 0.833(cont.) N 613 1546 1444

Math Goals Survey 6+ Eas tern r 0.872 0.879 0.880 0.862N 1526 1567 1395 1343

ID Math Survey w/ Goals 2-4 ID V3 r 0.773N 353

Math Survey w/ Goals 5+ ID V3 r 0.804N 336

IL Math Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 r 0.809 0.844 0.859 0.867N 19678 26234 24431 2815

Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 r 0.890 0.883 0.888 0.871 0.881N 842 24321 24896 5677 3673

IN Math Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 r 0.768 0.804 0.824 0.843N 19276 20399 20137 494

Math Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 r 0.894 0.869 0.883 0.868 0.878N 498 18566 18149 8694 2412

KS Math Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 r 0.772 0.815 0.838N 7165 15913 15544

Math Goals Survey 6+ KS V2 r 0.860 0.875 0.869 0.881N 12351 12045 9720 7796

KY Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 r 0.786 0.784 0.808N 4018 4283 4485

Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 r 0.854 0.864 0.876 0.856N 3787 3525 3044 2893

MA Math Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 r 0.738 0.740 0.844N 717 980 884

Math Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 r 0.858 0.868 0.905 0.909N 848 592 685 542

MI Math Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 r 0.768 0.818 0.833N 7742 9676 9842

Math Goals Survey 6+ MI V3 r 0.877 0.888 0.878 0.871N 9822 8358 3161 2034

MN Math Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 r 0.790 0.830 0.841 0.879N 31126 35135 33276 361

Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 r 0.899 0.875 0.884 0.889 0.890N 1416 29057 27355 11902 6877

MT Math Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 r 0.746 0.771 0.823N 1245 2323 2198

Math Goals Survey 6+ MT V2 r 0.846 0.844 0.853 0.856N 2067 2013 1375 1023

NC Math Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 r 0.729 0.772 0.795N 1101 1128 1089

Math Goals Survey 6+ NC V3 r 0.847 0.834 0.806N 1008 886 354

Spring 2008 Grade

Spring 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP Mathematics Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)




State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

TX Math Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 r 0.840 0.802N 979 1227

Math Goals Survey 6+ TX V3 r 0.870 0.843 0.835 0.818N 3568 3407 2351 312

VA Math Goals Survey 2-5 VA V2 r 0.832 0.825N 556 559

Math Goals Survey 6+ VA V2 r 0.880 0.858 0.879N 538 508 370

VT Math Goals Survey 2-5 VT V2 r 0.806 0.817N 387 380

Math Goals Survey 6+ VT V2 r 0.825 0.893N 333 403

WA Math Goals Survey 2-5 WA V3 r 0.806 0.839 0.845N 634 2051 2034

Math Goals Survey 6+ WA V3 r 0.884 0.881 0.871 0.891N 1852 1742 1584 820

Math Goals Survey 2-5 WA V4 r 0.778 0.821 0.838N 6812 12528 12248

Math Goals Survey 6+ WA V4 r 0.884 0.888 0.879 0.862N 12168 12227 7499 3897

WI Math Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 r 0.782 0.813 0.835N 13401 17917 17315

Math Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 r 0.847 0.883 0.890 0.890 0.871N 515 19347 18907 10719 5046

WY Math Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 r 0.751 0.786 0.832N 2034 2730 2628

Math Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 r 0.837 0.863 0.873 0.854N 2548 2202 1424 1221

Spring 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP Mathematics Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)

Spring 2008 Grade

Table 15, Part D.

First Admin Second Admin K 1 2Sprg 2008 Fall 2008 r 0.815 0.870 0.823

N 40976 21031 414Fall 2008 Sprg 2009 r 0.705 0.786 0.817

N 45297 108579 32897Sprg 2008 Sprg 2009 r 0.759 0.821 0.776

N 42205 16694 398

Grade at First Administration

Test-Retest Correlations of MAP for Primary Grades Mathematics Tests Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students in Two Terms




Table 16, Part A.

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9CO r 0.711 0.747 0.733 0.712 0.747 0.755 0.760

N 684 977 1119 1178 1333 895 726r 0.692 0.713 0.715 0.716 0.744 0.716 0.711N 537 616 661 881 1174 612 396

IL r 0.712 0.704 0.729N 733 911 374

IN r 0.740 0.727N 1372 1439

KS r 0.631 0.648 0.693 0.694 0.715 0.683 0.728N 544 564 617 840 936 825 840

KY r 0.648 0.683 0.671 0.657 0.705 0.708 0.710 0.709N 782 1564 1296 1294 1311 1134 748 716

ME r 0.662 0.649 0.670 0.685 0.693 0.705 0.698N 479 383 733 853 1178 791 670

MI r 0.645 0.689 0.728 0.717 0.724 0.726 0.702 0.689N 345 572 789 543 697 741 330 417

MN r 0.654 0.709 0.711 0.717 0.746 0.745 0.762N 834 885 1096 1200 1604 586 400

MT r 0.753N 3

ND r 0.633 0.695 0.679 0.694 0.712 0.697 0.735 0.748N 317 506 595 614 678 738 930 695

NH r 0.684 0.690 0.636N 532 557 508

NJ r 0.672N 8

NM r 0.612 0.655 0.671 0.711 0.711 0.712 0.734 0.746N 1103 1904 2125 2080 2160 2244 1425 1623

NV r 0.700 0.729 0.699 0.713N 320 628 729 385

OH r 0.643 0.708 0.760 0.748 0.756 0.764 0.733N 464 568 695 617 819 499 1259

SC r 0.667 0.666 0.699 0.703 0.719 0.741N 1402 2088 2190 1403 2523 2694

TX r 0.691 0.716N 326 430

UT r 0.757N 3

WA r 0.719 0.722 0.652 0.682N 768 919 711 601

WI r 0.675 0.702 0.692 0.665 0.690 0.729 0.733 0.723N 674 1087 1065 1110 1563 1793 1316 1038

Spring 2008 to Fall 2008 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP GENERAL SCIENCE Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Spring 2008 Grade

CO Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1CO Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2IL Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1IN Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1KS Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1KY Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2ME Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2MI Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1MN Science Part 2 of 2- General Science V1MT Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2ND Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1NH Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2NJ Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1NM Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1NV Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1OH Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1SC Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1TX Science 2-5 Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1Utah Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1WA Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1WI Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1

80

56

04


Grades


Table 16, Part B.

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10CO r 0.650 0.684 0.747 0.715 0.728 0.732 0.750 0.753

N 737 1027 1604 1801 2281 2355 955 681r 0.638 0.699 0.696 0.721 0.722 0.722 0.705 0.708N 592 668 1103 1024 1385 1209 1290 884

IL r 0.664 0.661 0.671 0.700 0.706 0.721N 381 723 611 1242 1484 1423

IN r 0.730 0.685 0.677N 425 526 410

KS r 0.645 0.672 0.653 0.703 0.698 0.719 0.697 0.737N 514 981 687 904 1377 1077 1285 1240

KY r 0.621 0.643 0.643 0.653 0.685 0.694 0.723 0.734 0.697N 329 1585 2114 1419 1753 1810 1232 880 792

ME r 0.629 0.658 0.689 0.700 0.701 0.699 0.693 0.693N 532 777 1072 1359 1487 1513 1077 757

MI r 0.526 0.648 0.698 0.721 0.716 0.730 0.724 0.725 0.737N 360 708 1756 1031 1051 1902 980 792 670

MN r 0.726 0.681 0.711 0.723 0.739 0.738 0.707 0.759N 707 1376 1523 1335 1295 1567 686 560

MT r 0.653 0.679 0.706 0.710 0.642N 354 358 533 561 323

ND r 0.646 0.684 0.736 0.691 0.754 0.709 0.727 0.746N 573 680 720 760 872 853 979 905

NE r 0.661 0.692 0.682 0.672N 332 568 309 335

NH r 0.687 0.611 0.704 0.672N 335 474 469 361

NJ r 0.676 0.670N 773 472

NM r 0.575 0.631 0.657 0.687 0.706 0.703 0.714 0.719 0.723N 1017 2243 2454 2570 2463 2567 2642 1932 1732

NV r 0.667 0.690 0.706 0.724 0.699N 731 1016 1142 518 312

OH r 0.681 0.716 0.744 0.726 0.758 0.754 0.752 0.770N 442 591 1379 1037 1139 1206 1996 709

SC r 0.661N 3898r 0.714N 4485r 0.704N 4539r 0.726N 6234r 0.736N 6668r 0N 6576r 0.657 0.698 0.713 0.727 0.720 0.730 0.746 0.709N 1198 1905 2028 1971 2520 2700 2833 492

Fall 2008 Grade

Fall 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP GENERAL SCIENCE Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

CO Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1CO Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2IL Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1IN Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1KS Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1KY Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2ME Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2MI Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1MN Science Part 2 of 2- General Science V1MT Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2ND Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1NE Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1NH Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2NJ Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1NM Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1NV Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1OH Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1SC 3 Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2SC 4 Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2SC 5 Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2SC 6 Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2SC 7 Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2SC 8 Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2SC Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1

.757




Table 16, Part C.

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

TX r 0.635 0.672 0.693 0.698N 457 4412 6815 6715r 0.695 0.732 0.725N 2848 4543 2581r 0.682 0.760N 562 558

WA r 0.694 0.721 0.761 0.709 0.695 0.673N 985 893 1210 1001 920 486

WI r 0.560 0.609 0.681 0.686 0.718 0.737 0.723 0.730 0.716N 590 1378 1309 1155 1801 2371 1903 2419 1265

WY r 0.634 0.701 0.658 0.701 0.680 0.722 0.668N 325 301 517 481 485 575 531

Fall 2008 Grade

Fall 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP GENERAL SCIENCE Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)

WA Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1WI Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1WY Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1

TX Science 2-5 Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1TX Science 6-8 Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1TX Science 9+ Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9CO CO General Science V1 r 0.659 0.721 0.697 0.706 0.714 0.723 0.740

N 689 900 1190 1166 1443 997 678CO General Science V2 r 0.664 0.670 0.677 0.698 0.704 0.705 0.730

N 455 677 797 1047 1168 600 370GA GA General Science V1 r 0.669 0.646 0.695 0.715 0.713

N 572 584 517 582 487IL IL General Science V1 r 0.689 0.691

N 824 939IN IN General Science V1 r 0.686 0.629

N 486 417KS KS General Science V1 r 0.582 0.649 0.678 0.666 0.685 0.695 0.742

N 440 466 482 693 713 649 647KY KY General Science V2 r 0.609 0.616 0.647 0.638 0.705 0.691 0.681 0.679

N 785 1458 1274 1252 1225 1069 725 666ME ME General Science V2 r 0.612 0.679 0.660 0.631 0.672 0.635 0.680

N 358 340 791 938 1104 721 870MI MI General Science V1 r 0.675 0.625 0.672 0.651 0.704 0.707 0.664 0.707

N 382 938 1103 974 1272 1280 807 805MN MN General Science V1 r 0.632 0.703 0.690 0.707 0.709 0.713 0.682

N 787 813 1064 999 1352 636 427MT MT General Science V2 r 0

N 3ND ND General Science V1 r 0.596 0.670 0.653 0.711 0.711 0.713 0.721 0.723

N 315 507 616 674 885 1102 905 629

Spring 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP GENERAL SCIENCE Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Spring 2009 Grade

.69255



State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

NE NE General Science V1 r 0.655 0.669N 354 345

NH NH General Science V2 r 0.616 0.656 0.681 0.760N 417 491 391 359

NM NM General Science V1 r 0.536 0.597 0.645 0.686 0.680 0.708 0.671 0.711N 1082 1883 2047 1931 2180 1963 1347 1440

NV NV General Science V1 r 0.718 0.699 0.679 0.712N 312 369 495 531

OH OH General Science V1 r 0.650 0.683 0.715 0.718 0.765 0.724N 374 420 317 505 484 570

SC SC General Science V1 r 0.636 0.625 0.663 0.686 0.711 0.732N 1102 1674 1682 1298 2224 2373

TX r 0.719 0.655N 316 415r 0.704 0.722N 3267 3287r 0.750N 986

WA WA General Science V1 r 0.680 0.732 0.714 0.721 0.669N 351 939 1116 913 634

WI WI General Science V1 r 0.601 0.646 0.654 0.678 0.690 0.707 0.718 0.706N 668 1237 1234 1383 1647 1970 1320 931

Spring 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP GENERAL SCIENCE Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)

Spring 2009 Grade

TX Science 2-5 - General Science V1TX Science 6-8 - General Science V1TX Science 9+ - General Science V1




Table 17, Part A.

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9CO r 0.698 0.744 0.690 0.702 0.727 0.741 0.746

N 699 1015 1145 1179 1376 908 725r 0.684 0.698 0.708 0.713 0.730 0.729 0.666N 561 634 670 893 1184 631 403

IL r 0.709 0.672 0.651N 741 927 372

IN r 0.717 0.725N 1380 1465

KS r 0.662 0.685 0.672 0.702 0.716 0.685 0.679N 527 561 618 836 933 830 831

KY r 0.580 0.606 0.676 0.665 0.691 0.673 0.668 0.669N 626 1457 1268 1266 1280 1115 701 671

ME r 0.645 0.661 0.660 0.721 0.704 0.664 0.698N 478 381 732 840 1195 809 638

MI r 0.662 0.647 0.714 0.660 0.735 0.684 0.697 0.694N 353 593 804 539 687 755 329 433

MN r 0.645 0.639 0.674 0.690 0.698 0.737 0.679N 727 812 1048 1172 1554 564 371

MT r 0.701N 3

ND r 0.671 0.700 0.682 0.698 0.681 0.689 0.718 0.741N 324 510 598 618 698 745 935 703

NH r 0.655 0.755 0.713N 529 550 517

NJ r 0.682N 8

NM r 0.638 0.647 0.678 0.707 0.711 0.703 0.690 0.724N 1140 1931 2160 2119 2177 2276 1449 1633

NV r 0.689 0.727 0.701 0.571N 317 630 734 394

OH r 0.679 0.670 0.720 0.645 0.697 0.696 0.724N 334 444 589 552 746 466 1171

SC r 0.670 0.699 0.715 0.692 0.732 0.736N 1498 2186 2233 1434 2550 2709

TX r 0.687 0.663N 348 441r 0.707 0.735N 307 304

UT r 0.667N 3

WA r 0.734 0.729 0.649 0.659N 763 906 723 623

WI r 0.668 0.706 0.695 0.674 0.706 0.722 0.715 0.712N 691 1115 1076 1127 1555 1793 1343 1055

MN Science - Conce

76

54

01

pts /Processes V1MT Science - Concepts /Processes V2ND Science - Concepts /Processes V1NH Science - Concepts /Processes V2

IN Science - Concepts /Processes V1KS Science - Concepts /Processes V1KY Science - Concepts /Processes V2ME Science - Concepts /Processes V2MI Science - Concepts /Processes V1

Spring 2008 to Fall 2008 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP CONCEPTS AND PROCESSES Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Spring 2008 Grade

CO Science - Concepts /Processes V1CO Science Part 1of 2 - Concepts /Processes V2IL Science - Concepts /Processes V1

NJ Science - Concepts /Processes V1NM Science - Concepts /Processes V1NV Science - Concepts /Processes V1OH Science - Concepts /Processes V1SC Science - Concepts /Processes V1TX Science 2-5 - Concepts /Processes V1TX Science 6-8 - Concepts /Processes V1UT Science - Concepts /Processes V1WA Science - Concepts /Processes V1WI Science - Concepts /Processes V1



State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10CO r 0.664 0.703 0.742 0.719 0.712 0.735 0.735 0.693

N 731 1027 1597 1833 2307 2375 973 683r 0.656 0.658 0.695 0.709 0.724 0.703 0.685 0.691N 611 663 1112 1064 1394 1241 1297 880

IL r 0.672 0.689 0.672 0.698 0.697 0.687N 366 733 609 1248 1487 1435

IN r 0.708 0.704 0.709N 433 527 415

KS r 0.632 0.654 0.665 0.670 0.705 0.711 0.704 0.668N 466 959 679 918 1375 1066 1300 1238

KY r 0.590 0.621 0.606 0.669 0.648 0.606 0.614 0.627N 1288 1967 1377 1734 1747 1172 791 723

ME r 0.659 0.627 0.694 0.698 0.689 0.670 0.664 0.672N 540 772 1072 1345 1485 1522 1092 759

MI r 0.528 0.666 0.695 0.678 0.716 0.704 0.701 0.711 0.661N 380 720 1788 1034 1065 1933 993 800 677

MN r 0.649 0.678 0.692 0.713 0.697 0.698 0.685 0.681N 576 1231 1412 1285 1263 1515 669 524

MT r 0.695 0.649 0.638 0.684 0.672N 350 362 524 559 333

ND r 0.647 0.676 0.712 0.706 0.700 0.737 0.706 0.713N 586 684 720 766 883 863 989 883

NE r 0.716 0.711 0.671 0.654N 337 563 314 332

NH r 0.695 0.673 0.712 0.627N 337 477 464 367

NJ r 0.656 0.653N 777 483

NM r 0.533 0.634 0.631 0.663 0.707 0.707 0.702 0.702 0.676N 1032 2112 2395 2544 2466 2570 2690 1997 1747

NV r 0.681 0.680 0.690 0.677 0.637N 729 1028 1146 514 323

OH r 0.622 0.716 0.714 0.707 0.699 0.722 0.713N 438 1179 955 1079 1121 1960 640

SC r 0.686 0.668 0.706 0.717 0.711 0.736 0.733 0.717N 1279 1894 1996 1979 2572 2718 2837 492r 0.703N 4182r 0.711N 4566r 0.728N 4567r 0.724N 6287r 0.746N 6692r 0.735N 6550

MN Science - Concepts /Processes V1MT Science - Concepts /Processes V2ND Science - Concepts /Processes V1NE Science - Concepts /Processes V1

IN Science - Concepts /Processes V1KS Science - Concepts /Processes V1KY Science - Concepts /Processes V2ME Science - Concepts /Processes V2MI Science - Concepts /Processes V1

Fall 2008 Grade

Fall 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP CONCEPTS AND PROCESSES Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

CO Science - Concepts /Processes V1CO Science - Concepts /Processes V2IL Science - Concepts /Processes V1

NH Science - Concepts /Processes V2NJ Science - Concepts /Processes V1NM Science - Concepts /Processes V1NV Science - Concepts /Processes V1OH Science - Concepts /Processes V1SC Science - Concepts /Processes V1SC 3 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 4 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 5 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 6 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 7 Science - Concepts /Processes V2SC 8 Science - Concepts /Processes V2




State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

TX r 0.708 0.673 0.696 0.691N 502 4449 6839 6718r 0.690 0.715 0.710N 2931 4631 2714r 0.716 0.752N 601 614

UT r 0.703 0.661 0.676N 390 332 351

WA r 0.735 0.725 0.749 0.705 0.689 0.603N 994 876 1198 993 934 488

WI r 0.651 0.626 0.674 0.677 0.699 0.721 0.733 0.726 0.690N 613 1379 1342 1169 1811 2360 1917 2461 1273

WY r 0.644 0.688 0.643 0.687 0.727 0.661N 321 517 493 483 575 526

TX Science 2-5 - Concepts /Processes V1TX Science 6-8 - Concepts /Processes V1TX Science 9+ - Concepts /Processes V1UT Science - Concepts /Processes V1WA Science - Concepts /Processes V1WI Science - Concepts /Processes V1WY Science - Concepts /Processes V1

Fall 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP CONCEPTS AND PROCESSES Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students (cont.)

Fall 2008 Grade



Grades


Table 17, Part C.

Internal Consistency of MAP and MAP for Primary Grades Tests Determining internal consistency of MAP and MAP for Primary Grades tests is also challenging because traditional methods depend on all test takers to take a common test consisting of the same test items. Application of these methods to adaptive tests is both statistically cumbersome

State Test 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9CO r 0.676 0.699 0.682 0.689 0.692 0.705 0.717

N 730 937 1211 1184 1481 1008 660r 0.641 0.653 0.663 0.705 0.693 0.703 0.660N 475 702 824 1070 1175 600 383

GA r 0.708 0.659 0.707 0.690 0.683N 584 582 530 578 488

IL r 0.689 0.666N 831 960

IN r 0.684 0.690N 491 419

KS r 0.621 0.651 0.701 0.657 0.671 0.691 0.643N 435 459 488 690 720 645 627

KY r 0.549 0.588 0.625 0.623 0.611 0.618 0.596 0.518N 676 1406 1248 1228 1165 1019 645 602

ME r 0.587 0.653 0.648 0.640 0.676 0.661 0.653N 351 341 788 930 1111 729 824

MI r 0.610 0.643 0.684 0.635 0.677 0.668 0.630 0.637N 397 966 1122 980 1285 1288 816 808

MN r 0.610 0.636 0.673 0.634 0.686 0.688 0.633N 698 760 1046 981 1316 616 412

MT r 0.652N 3

ND r 0.566 0.677 0.692 0.708 0.694 0.688 0.713 0.727N 318 524 628 688 904 1126 905 628

NE r 0.685 0.637N 343 337

NH r 0.690 0.686 0.627 0.721N 414 489 392 377

NM r 0.581 0.629 0.635 0.700 0.670 0.715 0.620 0.691N 1142 1968 2109 1975 2214 1998 1355 1436

NV r 0.627 0.697 0.668 0.694N 309 365 492 561

OH r 0.682 0.666 0.647 0.662N 353 444 438 492

SC r 0.650 0.681 0.695 0.674 0.717 0.702N 1199 1751 1715 1321 2263 2405

TX r 0.657 0.667N 328 435r 0.704 0.663N 3312 3326r 0.711N 1050

WA r 0.716 0.705 0.685 0.636 0.612N 345 915 1081 897 618

WI r 0.588 0.643 0.692 0.662 0.671 0.682 0.684 0.661N 697 1264 1252 1403 1640 1974 1328 950

Spring 2008 to Spring 2009 Test-Retest Correlations for State Content Aligned MAP CONCEPTS AND PROCESSES Tests with Common Item Pool Structures Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students

Spring 2008 Grade

CO Science - Conce

53

pts /Processes V1CO Science - Concepts /Processes V2GA Science - Concepts /Processes V1IL Science - Concepts /Processes V1IN Science - Concepts /Processes V1KS Science - Concepts /Processes V1KY Science - Concepts /Processes V2ME Science - Concepts /Processes V2MI Science - Concepts /Processes V1MN Science - Concepts /Processes V1MT Science - Concepts /Processes V2ND Science - Concepts /Processes V1NE Science - Concepts /Processes V1NH Science - Concepts /Processes V2NM Science - Concepts /Processes V1NV Science - Concepts /Processes V1

WA Science - Concepts /Processes V1WI Science - Concepts /Processes V1

OH Science - Concepts /Processes V1SC Science - Concepts /Processes V1TX Science 2-5 - Concepts /Processes V1TX Science 6-8 - Concepts /Processes V1TX Science 9+ - Concepts /Processes V1


and inaccurate. Fortunately, an equally valid alternative is available in the marginal reliability coefficient (Samejima, 1977, 1994). This coefficient incorporates measurement error as a function of the test score. In effect, it is the result of combining measurement error estimated at different points on the achievement scale into a single index. This method of calculating internal

consistency, θρ , yields results that are nearly identical to coefficient alpha when both methods

are applied to the same fixed-form tests. The approach taken here was suggested by Wright (1999) and is given by:

ρθ =σθ

2 −Msθ

2

σθ2 (3)

where: σθ2 is the observed error variance of the achievement estimates, θ, (the RIT score) and

Msθ

2 is the observed mean of the score’s conditional error variances at each value of θ.

These estimates may be made from the pooled results of covalent assessments administered from the same item pools. While the vast majority of MAP tests administered are aligned to specific state content standards, generic content area tests are also widely administered. These include MAP for Primary Grades tests, end-of-course mathematics tests in Algebra 1, Algebra 2, and Geometry as well as mathematics tests with Spanish audio.

Table 18 below contains the marginal reliabilities for the MAP for Primary Grades tests. Further estimates of this type of reliability are provided for other generic MAP tests in Tables 19. These tables reveal that marginal reliabilities are consistently in the low to mid .90’s. These high levels of reliability are expected due to the adaptive delivery of the tests and the large item pools supporting them. It will be noted that the marginal reliabilities for general science and for science concepts and processes are somewhat lower than they are for the other content areas. This is also the case for the state content-aligned versions presented later (Tables 23 and 24). These differences are due to the shorter test lengths of the science tests. They are 30 items in length, 25% fewer items than reading tests and 40% fewer than mathematics tests.



Grades Table 18

Marginal Reliabilities of MAP for Primary Grades Survey With Goals Tests in Reading and Mathematics

Grade

Content Area K 1 2

Reading r 0.949 0.969 0.963

N 202160 355698 106732

Mathematics r 0.918 0.933 0.924

N 196835 361851 112659



Table 19

Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 V4 r 0.950 0.945 0.936 0.933

N 6847 11959 11966 11731

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ V4 r 0.944 0.944 0.939 0.955 0.958

N 13420 13353 11243 6918 4911

Language Survey w/ Goals V4 r 0.960 0.956 0.943 0.934 0.941 0.944 0.941 0.951 0.960

N 2484 5590 5842 5313 6720 5718 5297 3526 2122

Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 V4 r 0.946 0.947 0.952 0.958

N 6478 9933 9803 9594

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ V4 r 0.965 0.968 0.970 0.974 0.976

N 11196 11173 9875 6674 4688

Algebra I V2 r 0.950 0.963 0.964 0.968

N 5227 23661 25985 6939

Algebra II V2 r 0.958 0.965 0.949

N 304 1108 3452

Geometry V2 r 0.944 0.951 0.962

N 1758 5458 8986

Integrated Math I and II V2 r 0.976 0.967

N 1017 707

Integrated Math III V2 r 0.971

N 310

Math Spanish Sound Survey w/ Goals 2-5 r 0.915 0.932 0.939 0.952

N 4760 6440 5830 4194

Math Spanish Sound Survey w/ Goals 6+ r 0.967 0.969 0.970 0.975 0.974

N 3769 3457 3157 1252 562

General Science Survey w/ Goals r 0.877 0.880 0.868 0.873 0.899 0.890 0.882 0.913 0.925

N 353 971 1045 1386 1112 1180 1040 1201 1118

General Science Survey w/ Goals V4 r 0.912 0.896 0.903 0.894 0.896 0.905 0.903 0.907 0.919

N 650 2766 3336 3027 3486 3905 3631 2789 2757

Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science r 0.807 0.824 0.826 0.840 0.868 0.864 0.868 0.879 0.892

N 563 573 616 640 619 535 563 565 346

Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V4 r 0.849 0.838 0.831 0.845 0.850 0.868 0.867 0.881 0.885

N 1333 5457 6464 7481 8199 10837 13072 9201 9225

Concepts and Processes Survey w/ Goals r 0.902 0.878 0.888 0.890 0.910 0.907 0.906 0.906 0.920

N 402 951 1569 1177 2105 3331 1897 1682 1799

Science Part 1 of 2 - Concepts/Processes r 0.823 0.793 0.808 0.802 0.862 0.839 0.854 0.874 0.886

N 564 573 615 640 620 536 563 569 346

Science Part 1 of 2 - Concepts/Processes r 0.834 0.824 0.816 0.827 0.831 0.851 0.854 0.870 0.876

N 1335 5461 6477 7599 8253 10868 13116 9284 9295

Grade

Marginal Reliabilities for Northwest Evaluation Association Generic Tests Administered to a Minimum of 300 Students in Spring and Fall 2008 and Spring 2009



Grades Tables 20 through 24 provide additional estimates for MAP state content-aligned tests in reading, language usage, mathematics, general science topics, and science concepts and processes, respectively. All estimates in Tables 20 through 24 are based only on the performance of MAP tests administered from the same state content-aligned item pools. These results are consistent with those based on estimates from tests administered across item pools. In both cases, measurement error is shown to be a minimal portion of the overall score variance of MAP tests. The tests referenced in Tables 20 through 24 are also referenced in Tables 25 through 29. In the later set of tables, marginal reliability estimates are provided for goal level scores. At the goal score level, marginal reliabilities are noticeably lower than for the overall test scores. These reliability estimates will always be smaller in magnitude than the corresponding estimates for the overall test; goal scores are based on many fewer items and are therefore less precise than overall scores.



Table 20

State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10AK Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 r 0.933 0.936 0.94 0.94

N 2219 3061 3069 3102Reading Goals Survey 6+ AK V4 r 0.938 0.94 0.935 0.943

N 3202 3267 3349 1542AR Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 r 0.938 0.936 0.942 0.948

N 3289 3930 4002 3489Reading Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 r 0.954 0.952 0.954 0.954 0.954

N 2885 2920 2734 1842 1416AZ Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 r 0.944 0.946 0.948 0.949

N 6130 10027 10472 10279Reading Goals Survey 6+ AZ V3 r 0.953 0.954 0.95 0.956 0.955

N 9454 9431 8982 3975 2160CA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 r 0.945 0.942 0.943 0.942

N 19264 23546 24794 24450r 0.949 0.936 0.934 0.931N 6577 7072 7388 7278


Reading Goals Survey 6+ Pow ay r 0.931 0.929 0.923N 7105 6723 6420

CO r 0.934 0.935 0.937 0.938N 46332 64608 66136 65284

Reading Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 r 0.944 0.946 0.945 0.95 0.95N 60362 56677 51894 37729 30130

CT Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CT V3 r 0.947 0.943 0.945N 2289 2451 1592

DE Reading Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2 r 0.949 0.943 0.94 0.94N 8655 9390 11283 11029

Reading Goals Survey 6+ DE V2 r 0.942 0.94 0.938 0.951 0.946N 12111 12269 11659 7822 6354

FL Reading Goals Survey 2-5 FL V3 r 0.921 0.927 0.925 0.928N 1205 1303 1232 1276

Reading Goals Survey 6+ FL V3 r 0.945 0.944 0.943 0.95 0.943N 5720 5472 5118 2346 1963

GA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 r 0.919 0.916 0.92 0.925N 11242 11994 12165 12529

Reading Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 r 0.936 0.937 0.936 0.936N 9833 9096 8920 3121

HI Reading Goals Survey 2-5 HI V2 r 0.949N 1274

Reading Goals Survey 6+ HI V2 r 0.954 0.953 0.944N 1290 1304 1258

IA r 0.938 0.932 0.93 0.924N 1896 5135 5187 5345r 0.94 0.938 0.929N 1640 1685 1637r 0.934 0.935 0.93 0.932N 6032 17060 17190 17882

Marginal Reliabilities for State Content Aligned MAP READING Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in the Spring and Fall of 2008 and Spring of 2009

Grade

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Pow ay

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Eastern Iow a V2Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Loess Hills V2Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Mid-Iow a Consortium V2



Grades Table 20 (cont.)

State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10IA r 0.934 0.927 0.924 0.927 0.924

(cont.) N 5224 5497 5340 5109 4389r 0.938 0.934 0.924N 1761 1808 1779r 0.935 0.931 0.931 0.931 0.932N 17813 18932 19199 17385 17016

ID r 0.934 0.922 0.919N 3843 3912 3790r 0.92 0.921 0.922N 3462 3482 3167

IL Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 r 0.939 0.937 0.938 0.937 0.933N 65114 95190 106235 105238 10287

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 r 0.937 0.932 0.927N 1513 1388 1317

Reading Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 r 0.932 0.939 0.938 0.935 0.945 0.949N 2569 101453 108090 104810 31956 19750

Reading Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 r 0.933 0.931N 1277 1290

IN Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 r 0.929 0.92 0.92 0.917 0.929N 64073 72687 75244 74144 1941

Reading Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 r 0.928 0.928 0.928 0.927 0.929 0.939N 1731 71539 70064 66944 44068 13187

KS Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 r 0.936 0.937 0.931 0.928N 28376 60736 59590 58583

Reading Goals Survey 6+ KS V2 r 0.935 0.939 0.936 0.939 0.939N 55301 55103 54693 51607 40347

KY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 r 0.943 0.943 0.939 0.938N 1285 1482 1475 1567

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 r 0.947 0.945 0.941 0.941N 16725 20217 21253 20870


Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 r 0.942 0.943 0.94 0.946 0.947N 18457 16374 16282 19538 13092

LA Reading Goals Survey 6+ LA V2 r 0.953 0.955 0.95N 1636 1559 1391

MA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 r 0.929 0.94 0.942 0.945N 2351 4647 5438 4859

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 (P) r 0.94 0.935 0.943 0.945N 3889 4252 4262 4146

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 r 0.95 0.954 0.957 0.961 0.953N 5157 4623 3824 2927 1836

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 (P) r 0.942 0.95 0.95 0.954 0.959N 3957 3418 3388 3615 2238

MD r 0.95 0.949 0.947N 29139 29232 29617

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MD V3 r 0.95 0.947 0.944 0.951 0.953N 30128 30540 29874 8117 5898

Reading Goals Survey 6+ Eastern Iow a V2Reading Goals Survey 6+ Loess Hills V2Reading Goals Survey 6+ Mid-Iow a Consortium V2

Grade

Marginal Reliabilities for State Content Aligned MAP READING Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in the Spring and Fall of 2008 and Spring of 2009 (cont.)

Reading Survey w / Goals 2-5 ID V3

Reading Survey w / Goals 6+ ID V3

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MD V3



Table 20 (cont.)

State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10ME Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 r 0.936 0.937 0.933 0.932

N 2952 8368 8856 8967Reading Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 r 0.937 0.936 0.933 0.935 0.941

N 9930 10232 10076 7770 6452r 0.948 0.944 0.939 0.937N 6345 19021 20255 20746r 0.937 0.938 0.936 0.936 0.941N 21445 21584 21496 15428 11015

MI Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 r 0.948 0.942 0.939 0.937N 27138 34179 35350 36078

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MI V3 r 0.94 0.938 0.935 0.944 0.95N 34056 34382 31209 14920 9956

MN r 0.946 0.94 0.938 0.936 0.957N 98331 118528 121254 117532 1221

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 r 0.937 0.937 0.937 0.935 0.938 0.946N 4676 116457 111189 102369 59934 32677

MO r 0.95 0.946 0.945 0.937N 1421 2721 2595 2591r 0.944 0.943 0.946N 2570 2388 2264

MS r 0.927 0.927 0.925 0.93N 1259 3730 3473 3146r 0.935 0.941 0.939 0.93N 2209 2341 2322 1679

MT Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 r 0.934 0.936 0.931 0.929N 4450 11194 11532 11230

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MT V2 r 0.929 0.929 0.928 0.931 0.934N 10848 11014 9442 3970 3207

NC r 0.948 0.942 0.939 0.939N 4295 5158 5030 4886

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NC V3 r 0.933 0.935 0.939 0.928 0.927N 6210 6236 5675 6551 3728

ND r 0.937 0.931 0.927 0.924N 10074 17119 18057 18768

Reading Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 r 0.927 0.928 0.928 0.93 0.926N 18150 18570 18525 17793 16169

NE Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NE V2 r 0.938 0.933 0.931 0.928N 2808 4322 4274 4242

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NE V2 r 0.936 0.941 0.935 0.941 0.942N 4299 4346 4210 3561 2542

NH r 0.947 0.937 0.93 0.926N 14039 21499 22516 23128

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NH V4 r 0.931 0.933 0.931 0.94 0.943N 24809 25980 22257 12761 8822

NJ Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 r 0.925 0.926 0.926 0.926N 9050 18451 19381 19815

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 r 0.931 0.93 0.932 0.929 0.928N 18229 15207 12680 6290 4301

Reading Survey w / Goals 2-5 MO V4

Reading Survey w / Goals 6+ MO V4

Reading Survey w / Goals 2-5 MS V3

Reading Survey w / Goals 6+ MS V3

Reading Survey w / Goals 2-5 ME V4

Reading Survey w / Goals 6+ ME V4


Grade

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4




State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10NM r 0.94 0.942 0.945 0.945

N 17325 29308 31019 31012Reading Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 r 0.947 0.95 0.949 0.953 0.953

N 34122 33300 33465 28314 22016NV Reading Goals Survey 6+ NV V2 r 0.937 0.914

N 1309 1301r 0.937 0.935 0.932 0.933N 1559 1745 1827 1658r 0.946 0.944 0.942 0.937N 4678 6661 7039 6645r 0.937 0.941 0.938 0.938N 1857 1606 1546 1725r 0.941 0.942 0.942 0.941 0.947N 6686 6397 6280 5396 2790

NY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NY V2 r 0.95 0.947 0.941 0.939N 3725 4431 5033 6313

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NY V2 r 0.941 0.938 0.937 0.948 0.955N 9262 8980 7155 2167 1314

OH r 0.945 0.944 0.946 0.945N 7461 10188 9769 10055

Reading Goals Survey 6+ OH V3 r 0.941 0.947 0.944 0.954 0.953N 11751 10060 9596 14946 10160

OK Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2 r 0.938 0.941 0.942 0.945N 1454 2479 2623 2628

Reading Goals Survey 6+ OK V2 r 0.948 0.945 0.946N 3014 2570 1424

OR r 0.951 0.951 0.943 0.935N 1211 3245 3027 2976

Reading Goals Survey 6+ OR V4 r 0.934 0.928 0.936 0.937N 3005 3222 2894 2812

PA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 r 0.948 0.944 0.941 0.934N 6067 7967 8915 8722

Reading Goals Survey 6+ PA V2 r 0.939 0.934 0.927 0.932 0.931N 9618 9401 8640 9094 7603

RI r 0.948 0.938 0.93 0.932N 1324 1396 1699 2200r 0.932 0.928 0.921 0.933N 2123 2063 2574 1774

SC Reading Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 r 0.938 0.934 0.935 0.934N 37944 39340 40090 39044

Reading Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 r 0.942 0.94 0.939 0.948 0.954N 38420 38283 36681 22766 7388r 0.948 0.946 0.945 0.942N 85340 106248 105938 103936r 0.944 0.945 0.944 0.947 0.953N 101646 99869 95525 66749 22408

Reading Survey w / Goals 2-5 RI V4

Reading Survey w / Goals 6+ RI V4

Reading Survey w / Goals 2-5 SC V5

Reading Survey w / Goals 6+ SC V5

Reading Survey w / Goals 2-5 NV V4

Reading Survey w / Goals 6+ NV V3

Reading Survey w / Goals 6+ NV V4

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OR V4


Grade

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3

Reading Survey w / Goals 2-5 NV V3



Table 20 (cont.)

State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10TN Reading Goals Survey 2-5 TN V4 r 0.915 0.923 0.918 0.921

N 2492 2723 2617 2505Reading Goals Survey 6+ TN V4 r 0.929

N 2383TX Reading Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 r 0.947 0.945 0.937 0.933

N 3614 16866 20507 20609Reading Goals Survey 6+ TX V3 r 0.945 0.946 0.945 0.966 0.966

N 15933 18374 12952 4390 3369UT r 0.948 0.95 0.948 0.945

N 1640 1985 2275 1948r 0.943 0.945 0.948N 1784 2174 1562 1349

VA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 VA V2 r 0.95 0.95 0.941 0.938N 1283 2444 2343 2148

Reading Goals Survey 6+ VA V2 r 0.945 0.938 0.941 0.952N 2049 2055 1780 1298


Reading Goals Survey 6+ VT V2 r 0.938 0.938 0.942 0.94N 1253 1698 1510 1774

WA r 0.949 0.944 0.939 0.943N 2178 7033 7058 7120r 0.944 0.944 0.944 0.944N 22842 40004 44325 46370



WI Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 r 0.946 0.941 0.938 0.936N 41467 57539 58291 59917

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 r 0.941 0.938 0.937 0.934 0.935 0.942N 1596 64396 64058 59702 45228 18278

WY r 0.943 0.942 0.936 0.937N 5895 11860 11786 11659

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 r 0.936 0.938 0.934 0.94 0.937N 11790 11618 11357 9325 8007

Reading Survey w / Goals 2-5 UT V4

Reading Survey w / Goals 6+ UT V4

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WA V3

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WA V4

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3


Grade



Grades Table 21.

State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10AK Language Goals Survey AK V4 r 0.944 0.945 0.947 0.942 0.939 0.94 0.935 0.946

N 1998 3076 3148 3139 3162 3257 3267 1515AR Language Goals Survey AR V2 r 0.95 0.949 0.948 0.952 0.958 0.956 0.957 0.951

N 2123 3335 3374 2685 1931 2464 2315 1576AZ Language Goals Survey AZ V3 r 0.952 0.953 0.957 0.958 0.956 0.955 0.952 0.957 0.955

N 1689 3389 3540 3734 5040 4833 4607 1719 1441CA Language Goals Survey CA V2 r 0.954 0.949 0.948 0.947 0.949 0.949 0.948 0.948 0.946

N 13824 18539 19231 18792 18218 15592 13776 7442 5328Language Goals Survey Pow ay r 0.953 0.937 0.934 0.93 0.92 0.92 0.912

N 6452 6973 7356 7257 6656 6665 6361CO Language Goals Survey CO V2 r 0.953 0.952 0.951 0.948 0.949 0.949 0.949 0.953 0.953

N 27759 44192 45000 45531 40306 35502 33877 24202 21689CT Language Goals Survey CT V3 r 0.948 0.944

N 1240 1295GA Language Goals Survey GA V2 r 0.937 0.934 0.934 0.934 0.936 0.933 0.93 0.93

N 10940 11777 12019 12214 9833 9156 8589 3039IA Language Goals Survey Eastern r 0.945 0.936 0.933 0.936 0.934 0.932 0.93 0.929

N 2222 2174 2492 3147 3323 3239 3464 3019r 0.943 0.94 0.931 0.929 0.93 0.928 0.927 0.929 0.928N 2904 11871 12273 12206 12993 13108 13444 11975 11573

ID r 0.936 0.929 0.906N 1702 1798 1764

IL Language Goals Survey IL V2 r 0.95 0.949 0.948 0.946 0.945 0.943 0.94 0.947 0.951N 18277 36189 42873 44324 41771 43522 41494 10729 7735

Language Goals Survey IL V2 r 0.946 0.937 0.934 0.931 0.927N 1515 1397 1348 1278 1328

IN Language Goals Survey IN V3 r 0.95 0.944 0.941 0.938 0.938 0.94 0.938 0.942 0.952N 64296 72285 73955 74654 71943 69921 66962 39809 11016

KS Language Goals Survey KS V2 r 0.944 0.94 0.934 0.928 0.929 0.931 0.927 0.928 0.933N 8652 16369 16764 17276 18477 18581 18363 14852 13473

KY Language Goals Survey KY V4 r 0.947 0.947 0.945 0.944 0.943 0.946 0.941 0.949 0.948N 8464 11659 13032 13899 12704 9756 10086 8011 5599

MA Language Goals Survey MA V3 r 0.944 0.943N 1269 1312

ME Language Goals Survey ME V3 r 0.935 0.939 0.934 0.938 0.936 0.932 0.933 0.932 0.935N 1205 3727 4251 4471 5156 5861 5542 4214 3148r 0.948 0.949 0.943 0.937 0.937 0.934 0.933 0.939 0.947N 2957 7513 9169 9713 10720 11527 10984 6888 4480

MI Language Goals Survey MI V3 r 0.949 0.946 0.943 0.94 0.94 0.936 0.934 0.94 0.944N 19608 26826 28188 28295 27222 25681 23007 10092 6807

MN Language Goals Survey MN V4 r 0.952 0.946 0.942 0.939 0.937 0.936 0.935 0.941 0.947N 24576 35676 34338 36311 33056 31201 26329 17712 8656

MO r 0.952 0.948 0.941 0.949 0.943 0.941N 2372 2222 2328 2521 2307 2189

MS r 0.945 0.952 0.946 0.948 0.948 0.948 0.951N 1238 3103 2915 3194 2230 2298 2267

Grade

Marginal Reliabilities for State Content Aligned MAP LANGUAGE USAGE Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in the Spring and Fall of 2008 and Spring of 2009

Language Goals Survey Mid-Iow a Consortium V2Language Survey w / Goals ID V3

Language Survey w / Goals ME V4

Language Survey w / Goals MO V4

Language Survey w / Goals MS V3



Table 21 (cont.)

State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10MT Language Goals Survey MT V2 r 0.943 0.945 0.939 0.937 0.934 0.932 0.929 0.933 0.939

N 3091 9074 9609 9740 8438 7839 7722 3202 2624NC Language Goals Survey NC V3 r 0.949 0.947 0.939 0.936 0.945 0.941 0.938 0.929 0.919

N 2090 2448 2464 2359 2303 2443 1799 6199 3311ND Language Goals Survey ND V2 r 0.942 0.938 0.931 0.928 0.927 0.931 0.931 0.93 0.925

N 5656 12118 13249 14145 13012 12099 12019 11102 10873NE Language Goals Survey NE V2 r 0.938 0.938 0.936 0.935 0.931 0.933 0.93 0.93 0.935

N 1657 3097 3135 3148 3215 3254 3088 2909 1966NH Language Goals Survey NH V4 r 0.95 0.943 0.934 0.929 0.928 0.93 0.928 0.94 0.944

N 8039 13221 14320 16075 16824 16318 15120 8265 6070NJ Language Goals Survey NJ V3 r 0.937 0.937 0.935 0.934 0.932 0.93 0.935 0.941 0.944

N 4064 9499 9825 10514 9976 9322 6650 4753 3671NM Language Goals Survey NM V3 r 0.943 0.948 0.948 0.947 0.945 0.948 0.946 0.951 0.948

N 10489 19211 19895 20192 19975 18368 17621 18513 14512NV r 0.927 0.929 0.934 0.934 0.935 0.934

N 1352 1471 1499 1607 1228 1254r 0.946 0.944 0.943 0.936 0.941 0.938 0.939 0.942N 1781 3420 4002 4108 3734 3520 3412 2542

NY Language Goals Survey NY V2 r 0.943 0.935 0.937 0.942 0.935 0.931 0.931N 1740 2128 2502 2920 3620 3367 2079

OH Language Goals Survey OH V3 r 0.948 0.948 0.95 0.949 0.947 0.948 0.947 0.952 0.957N 3106 5973 5974 6042 6008 5616 4335 5277 2681

RI r 0.925N 1336

SC Language Goals Survey SC V4 r 0.942 0.94 0.941 0.938 0.942 0.941 0.939 0.945 0.952N 22000 22923 22899 22329 24299 23613 23105 12799 4068r 0.947 0.95 0.949 0.947 0.947 0.946 0.945 0.948 0.956N 46728 63834 64281 63577 68369 68461 65999 39741 11199

TX Language Goals Survey TX V3 r 0.953 0.947 0.945 0.955 0.955 0.956 0.965 0.969N 11777 11043 10581 7412 7387 6373 2661 1876

UT r 0.95 0.95 0.948 0.949 0.942 0.948 0.944 0.932N 1574 1954 2258 1969 1829 2186 1565 1366


VT Language Goals Survey VT V2 r 0.939 0.938 0.938 0.934 0.939 0.944N 1239 1417 1527 1691 1563 1775

WA Language Goals Survey WA V3 r 0.938N 1513

Language Goals Survey WA V4 r 0.953 0.954 0.952 0.951 0.953 0.947 0.945 0.949 0.957N 1555 3516 4199 4858 5596 6580 5585 5610 3027

WI Language Goals Survey WI V2 r 0.947 0.942 0.936 0.934 0.934 0.932 0.928 0.931 0.937N 21103 29621 30516 32638 40846 43649 37662 23265 12339

WY Language Goals Survey WY V3 r 0.91 0.923 0.923 0.925 0.927 0.928 0.928 0.929 0.931N 3152 7401 8149 8770 9022 9030 8752 7490 5980

Marginal Reliabilities for State Content Aligned MAP LANGUAGE USAGE Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in the Spring and Fall of 2008 and Spring of 2009 (cont.)

Grade

Language Survey w / Goals NV V3

Language Survey w / Goals NV V4

Language Survey w / Goals RI V4

Language Survey w / Goals SC V5

Language Survey w / Goals UT V4



Grades Table 22.

State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10AK Math Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 r 0.946 0.951 0.955 0.96

N 2689 3302 3187 3111Math Goals Survey 6+ AK V4 r 0.961 0.961 0.963 0.964

N 3230 3344 3411 1218AR Math Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 r 0.94 0.951 0.955 0.963

N 3680 4117 4074 3690Math Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 r 0.97 0.971 0.974 0.974

N 3147 3193 2830 1544AZ Math Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 r 0.941 0.951 0.957 0.964

N 6280 10270 10558 10250Math Goals Survey 6+ AZ V3 r 0.969 0.972 0.973 0.971 0.973

N 9530 9501 9118 3827 2214CA Math Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 r 0.947 0.947 0.956 0.963

N 20472 24298 24968 24756Math Goals Survey 3-5 Pow ay r 0.949 0.952 0.956 0.961

N 6647 7124 7439 7399Math Goals Survey 6-8 Pow ay r 0.962 0.96 0.965

N 7257 6460 3691Math Goals Survey 6+ CA V2 r 0.969 0.97 0.972 0.973 0.971

N 23475 19653 15742 12797 11353CO Math Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 r 0.948 0.954 0.959 0.961

N 51896 69474 68449 66251Math Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 r 0.965 0.97 0.971 0.973 0.974

N 62183 58563 53293 40042 30529CT Math Goals Survey 2-5 CT V3 r 0.961

N 1441Math Goals Survey 6+ CT V3 r 0.965

N 1230DC AIR Math V1 r 0.895

N 7875DE Math Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2 r 0.948 0.949 0.955 0.962

N 8782 9371 11283 10781Math Goals Survey 6+ DE V2 r 0.964 0.968 0.97 0.975 0.973

N 12312 12573 12210 8323 6871FL Math Goals Survey 2-5 FL V3 r 0.914 0.934 0.941 0.957

N 1283 1390 1275 1280Math Goals Survey 6+ FL V3 r 0.961 0.964 0.967 0.971 0.97

N 5726 5599 5253 2342 1977GA Math Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 r 0.93 0.935 0.941 0.949

N 12172 12594 12422 12636Math Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 r 0.957 0.96 0.962 0.967

N 10438 9732 9663 3287HI Math Goals Survey 2-5 HI V2 r 0.959 0.964

N 1221 1423Math Goals Survey 6+ HI V2 r 0.966 0.967

N 1311 1343

Grade

Marginal Reliabilities for State Content Aligned MAP MATHEMATICS Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in the Spring and Fall of 2008 and Spring of 2009



Table 22 (cont.)

State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10IA Math Goals Survey 2-5 Eastern r 0.936 0.944 0.947 0.954

N 1979 5202 5213 5256Math Goals Survey 2-5 Loess Hills r 0.926 0.938 0.94

N 1705 1723 1627Math Goals Survey 2-5 Mid-Iow a r 0.927 0.933 0.938 0.95

N 6129 16862 16880 17926Math Goals Survey 6+ Eastern Iow a r 0.957 0.961 0.963 0.963 0.965

N 5263 5575 5392 4965 4301Math Goals Survey 6+ Loess Hills r 0.957 0.962 0.961

N 1772 1751 1808Math Goals Survey 6+ Mid-Iow a r 0.955 0.96 0.963 0.966 0.967

N 18318 19038 19304 16818 16849ID Math Survey w / Goals 2-4 ID V3 r 0.933 0.932

N 3894 3862Math Survey w / Goals 5+ ID V3 r 0.942 0.954 0.958 0.961

N 3809 3514 3531 3259IL Math Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 r 0.947 0.952 0.957 0.962 0.963

N 70194 101008 109621 107558 10311Math Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 r 0.949 0.957 0.96

N 1516 1416 1335Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 r 0.966 0.964 0.966 0.968 0.972 0.973

N 2896 103573 110274 103843 28435 18373Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 (NSAE) r 0.958

N 1240IN Math Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 r 0.941 0.942 0.948 0.956 0.965

N 72108 77787 77842 76116 1922Math Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 r 0.962 0.96 0.964 0.966 0.967 0.972

N 1763 73322 72665 70001 38200 10913KS Math Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 r 0.942 0.947 0.954 0.959

N 30791 62380 60232 58344Math Goals Survey 6+ KS V2 r 0.958 0.964 0.966 0.969 0.97

N 55465 55939 55335 52218 39122KY Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 r 0.932 0.936 0.94 0.956

N 1344 1529 1382 1525Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 r 0.944 0.949 0.95 0.956

N 18120 20904 21580 20895Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 r 0.961 0.963 0.967 0.969 0.968

N 1376 1468 1371 1326 1319Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 r 0.959 0.964 0.967 0.97 0.97

N 18474 16592 16132 17645 12505LA Math Goals Survey 6+ LA V2 r 0.962 0.969 0.97

N 1647 1647 1378MA Math Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 r 0.94 0.951 0.96 0.965

N 6615 8555 9114 8129Math Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 r 0.968 0.973 0.975 0.977 0.975

N 8051 7282 6560 6833 4467

Marginal Reliabilities for State Content Aligned MAP MATHEMATICS Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in the Spring and Fall of 2008 and Spring of 2009 (cont.)

Grade




State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10ME Math Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 r 0.93 0.94 0.952 0.959

N 3446 8826 9127 8973Math Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 r 0.962 0.965 0.966 0.971 0.974

N 10076 10247 9986 6415 5390Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 ME V4 r 0.94 0.946 0.951 0.956

N 7521 19908 20380 20710Math Survey w / Goals 6+ ME V4 r 0.96 0.963 0.967 0.968 0.971

N 21344 21223 21113 13058 9844MI Math Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 r 0.945 0.946 0.951 0.957

N 28172 34472 35463 36057Math Goals Survey 6+ MI V3 r 0.964 0.967 0.968 0.972 0.973

N 34753 34593 31101 14461 9484MN Math Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 r 0.949 0.951 0.956 0.961 0.973

N 105427 121904 122899 117515 1341Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 r 0.966 0.962 0.965 0.966 0.969 0.973

N 4915 117541 111196 99748 55650 30932MO Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 MO V4 r 0.948 0.947 0.949 0.954

N 1690 2867 2641 2632Math Survey w / Goals 6+ MO V4 r 0.96 0.965 0.967

N 2644 2365 2295MS Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 MS V3 r 0.923 0.94 0.947 0.957

N 1210 3675 3398 3085Math Survey w / Goals 6+ MS V3 r 0.957 0.96 0.965 0.963

N 2422 2536 2343 1421MT Math Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 r 0.937 0.944 0.948 0.956

N 4976 9966 11867 11442Math Goals Survey 6+ MT V2 r 0.955 0.96 0.963 0.964 0.968

N 11055 11813 10609 5951 4171NC Math Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 r 0.94 0.946 0.949 0.956

N 4628 5320 5271 5005Math Goals Survey 6+ NC V3 r 0.96 0.962 0.968 0.957 0.952

N 6292 6197 5482 3974 2062NCNSP HS Math V1 r 0.97 0.967

N 2626 1582ND Math Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 r 0.934 0.936 0.943 0.951

N 10312 17275 18281 18795Math Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 r 0.955 0.958 0.962 0.965 0.967

N 18412 18689 18811 18088 15703NE Math Goals Survey 2-5 NE V2 r 0.928 0.935 0.947 0.951

N 2898 4358 4311 4281Math Goals Survey 6+ NE V2 r 0.956 0.963 0.964 0.969 0.967

N 4335 4397 4192 3520 2459NH Math Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4 r 0.943 0.942 0.947 0.955

N 14906 21863 22787 23308Math Goals Survey 6+ NH V4 r 0.957 0.961 0.962 0.968 0.971

N 24192 25680 21476 12670 8815

Grade




Table 22 (cont.)

State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10NJ Math Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 r 0.939 0.948 0.958 0.963

N 10570 19208 19754 20477Math Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 r 0.965 0.97 0.971 0.969 0.971

N 19898 16728 9980 6660 4552NM Math Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 r 0.936 0.949 0.954 0.959

N 18355 29587 30822 30796Math Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 r 0.961 0.966 0.968 0.969 0.97

N 35925 34980 35369 30431 23875NV Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V3 r 0.92 0.927 0.935 0.954

N 1627 1705 1837 1764Math Goals Survey 6+ NV V2 r 0.96

N 1321Math Goals Survey 6+ NV V3 r 0.952 0.958 0.961 0.963

N 1748 1534 1487 1673Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 NV V4 r 0.939 0.945 0.948 0.953

N 5228 6854 7091 6464Math Survey w / Goals 6+ NV V4 r 0.956 0.963 0.966 0.967 0.967

N 6791 6783 6610 5749 2715NY Math Goals Survey 2-5 NY V2 r 0.943 0.947 0.951 0.957

N 5166 5830 6069 7571Math Goals Survey 6+ NY V2 r 0.963 0.966 0.967 0.969 0.973

N 10413 9167 7348 3271 1224OH Math Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3 r 0.941 0.952 0.959 0.963

N 8375 10545 10073 10028Math Goals Survey 6+ OH V3 r 0.965 0.969 0.972 0.976 0.975

N 11723 10484 9398 13432 9639OK Math Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2 r 0.935 0.943 0.948 0.954

N 1525 2536 2639 2628Math Goals Survey 6+ OK V2 r 0.962 0.963 0.965

N 3058 2607 1424OR Math Goals Survey 2-5 OR V4 r 0.945 0.958 0.961 0.964

N 1648 3087 3001 2981Math Goals Survey 6+ OR V4 r 0.968 0.97 0.971 0.974 0.971

N 3150 3424 3210 3021 1256PA Math Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 r 0.946 0.949 0.952 0.959

N 6453 8226 9086 8942Math Goals Survey 6+ PA V2 r 0.965 0.963 0.964 0.966 0.964

N 9653 9262 8492 8873 7776RI Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 RI V4 r 0.941 0.944 0.951 0.961

N 1389 1449 1800 2236Math Survey w / Goals 6+ RI V4 r 0.955 0.958 0.963 0.966

N 2203 2128 2585 1465SC Math Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 r 0.928 0.939 0.95 0.96

N 39913 40493 40450 39346Math Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 r 0.962 0.965 0.968 0.969 0.974

N 39037 39316 38048 22774 8010


Grade




State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10SC Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 SC V5 r 0.941 0.947 0.952 0.961

(cont.) N 92356 108527 107177 105238Math Survey w / Goals 6+ SC V5 r 0.962 0.967 0.967 0.968 0.971

N 104267 102426 98336 65406 23893TN Math Goals Survey 2-5 TN V4 r 0.913 0.939 0.95 0.959

N 2513 2733 2678 2544Math Goals Survey 6+ TN V4 r 0.963

N 2440TX Math Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 r 0.948 0.957 0.951 0.957

N 3896 13421 17464 16084Math Goals Survey 6+ TX V3 r 0.969 0.972 0.973 0.978 0.981

N 15662 18263 12604 8972 3624UT Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 UT V4 r 0.942 0.95 0.954 0.961

N 1746 2009 2252 1941Math Survey w / Goals 6+ UT V4 r 0.96 0.964 0.966 0.967 0.969

N 1765 2210 1512 1258 1232VA Math Goals Survey 2-5 VA V2 r 0.948 0.952 0.953 0.96

N 1272 2510 2410 2994Math Goals Survey 6+ VA V2 r 0.963 0.961 0.967 0.969

N 2723 2081 1815 1352VT Math Goals Survey 2-5 VT V2 r 0.937 0.943 0.951

N 1250 1343 1521Math Goals Survey 6+ VT V2 r 0.955 0.964 0.971 0.97

N 1410 1723 1559 1520WA Math Goals Survey 2-5 WA V3 r 0.951 0.954 0.958 0.963

N 2331 7268 7183 7150Math Goals Survey 2-5 WA V4 r 0.942 0.949 0.956 0.959

N 24289 44445 49105 49668Math Goals Survey 6+ WA V3 r 0.966 0.969 0.97 0.972 0.974

N 7071 6947 6698 6345 3755Math Goals Survey 6+ WA V4 r 0.965 0.967 0.969 0.97 0.971

N 52316 51361 49848 33088 18159WI Math Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 r 0.945 0.946 0.95 0.955

N 43864 59676 59665 60055Math Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 r 0.96 0.96 0.963 0.965 0.969 0.97

N 1664 65151 64641 60597 41861 18729WY Math Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 r 0.94 0.946 0.947 0.952

N 6123 12059 12078 11734Math Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 r 0.954 0.96 0.964 0.966 0.966

N 11721 11280 9872 7217 6597

Grade




Table 23.

State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10AZ r 0.856 0.906

N 2125 1922CO r 0.855 0.864 0.88 0.879 0.885 0.892 0.907 0.908

N 3079 4427 6597 6573 8626 8055 4145 3328r 0.85 0.856 0.869 0.879 0.888 0.893 0.906 0.905N 2316 2908 4687 4874 6330 5926 5671 3928

DE r 0.84 0.869 0.881 0.904N 1316 1301 1491 1309

GA r 0.831 0.846 0.867 0.88 0.893 0.888N 2044 2078 2034 3233 3016 3083

IL r 0.858 0.859 0.871 0.865 0.877 0.865 0.857 0.876N 1582 3067 2291 4695 5198 4821 2099 1427

IN r 0.803 0.831 0.843 0.866 0.881 0.889N 1552 2401 1826 3605 4245 4050

KS r 0.809 0.836 0.835 0.852 0.865 0.866 0.876 0.886N 2405 4179 2540 3644 5381 4240 4892 5068

KY r 0.806 0.839 0.865 0.842 0.864 0.88 0.881 0.891 0.893N 1939 5317 6982 4774 6422 6264 4373 4185 3676

ME r 0.832 0.834 0.838 0.85 0.86 0.863 0.86 0.876N 2235 2446 3901 4673 5622 6089 4471 3598

MI r 0.841 0.842 0.857 0.862 0.871 0.878 0.873 0.892 0.898N 1647 3300 7701 4319 4981 8686 5381 4433 3469

MN r 0.85 0.855 0.862 0.875 0.887 0.89 0.884 0.904N 5577 7415 8563 5796 5584 6183 2892 2393

MT r 0.873 0.868N 1673 1829

ND r 0.836 0.852 0.864 0.869 0.871 0.88 0.886 0.882N 1927 2316 2462 2989 3822 3768 3230 3102

NE r 0.854 0.864 0.858N 1732 1502 1438

NH r 0.842 0.857 0.851 0.861 0.879N 1607 1966 1957 1690 1829

NJ r 0.847 0.862 0.87N 2816 2111 1217

NM r 0.805 0.841 0.857 0.871 0.883 0.886 0.892 0.9 0.904N 4430 8091 8594 8803 8916 9177 9285 7324 6413

NV r 0.883 0.873 0.882 0.88 0.884N 2209 3566 4047 3018 2124

OH r 0.867 0.883 0.887 0.898 0.903 0.894 0.917 0.915N 2138 2665 5509 4113 4531 5175 10548 6875

SC r 0.869N 18167r 0.876N 20192r 0.876N 19847r 0.894N 22985

Marginal Reliabilities for State Content Aligned MAP GENERAL SCIENCE Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in the Spring and Fall of 2008 and Spring of 2009

Grade

AZ Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1CO Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1CO Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2DE Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1GA Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1IL Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1IN Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1KS Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1KY Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2ME Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2MI Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1MN Science Part 2 of 2- General Science V1MT Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2ND Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1NE Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1NH Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2NJ Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1NM Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1NV Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1OH Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1SC 3 Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2SC 4 Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2SC 5 Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2SC 6 Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2




State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10SC r 0.901

(cont.) N 23852r 0.9N 24646r 0.904N 2668r 0.903N 1778r 0.845 0.846 0.862 0.865 0.883 0.891 0.899 0.904N 5712 8433 8915 9239 10453 11499 11878 1969

TX r 0.867 0.861 0.87N 10119 15132 16030r 0.887 0.896 0.906N 13765 17644 13344r 0.926 0.916N 3549 7497

WA r 0.862 0.864 0.872 0.873 0.878 0.888N 3345 4270 5475 5408 4489 2607

WI r 0.829 0.837 0.849 0.851 0.864 0.873 0.873 0.88 0.887N 2719 4857 4841 4617 7057 9610 7669 7679 4124

WY r 0.857 0.867 0.863 0.882 0.872N 1605 1648 1740 1949 1747

Marginal Reliabilities for State Content Aligned MAP GENERAL SCIENCE Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in the Spring and Fall of 2008 and Spring of 2009 (cont.)

Grade

SC 7 Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2SC 8 Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V2SC Science - Physical Science EOC V2

WA Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1WI Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1WY Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1

SC Science - Physical Science Pretest V2SC Science Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1TX Science 2-5 Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1TX Science 6-8 Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1TX Science 9+ Part 2 of 2 - General Science V1




Table 24.

State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10AZ r 0.839 0.887

N 2085 1920CO r 0.841 0.851 0.867 0.861 0.872 0.879 0.89 0.89

N 3103 4500 6623 6659 8721 8109 4175 3330r 0.845 0.843 0.852 0.866 0.875 0.878 0.889 0.89N 2404 2953 4725 4955 6376 6001 5729 3921

DE r 0.837 0.862 0.879 0.89N 1336 1360 1516 1300

GA r 0.838 0.845 0.854 0.862 0.874 0.877N 2095 2101 2058 3234 3028 3107

IL r 0.837 0.833 0.845 0.846 0.859 0.854 0.853 0.84N 1556 3093 2276 4705 5221 4846 2086 1396

IN r 0.797 0.811 0.819 0.851 0.862 0.873N 1596 2428 1841 3617 4264 4078

KS r 0.8 0.826 0.828 0.838 0.855 0.849 0.854 0.87N 2324 4147 2527 3667 5359 4241 4898 5046

KY r 0.73 0.778 0.813 0.805 0.829 0.838 0.837 0.854 0.85N 1677 4856 6768 4701 6353 6167 4241 4033 3485

ME r 0.829 0.815 0.819 0.839 0.85 0.847 0.844 0.86N 2259 2435 3906 4654 5628 6107 4406 3595

MI r 0.83 0.823 0.835 0.841 0.851 0.852 0.852 0.872 0.88N 1721 3361 7781 4330 5003 8771 5434 4446 3486

MN r 0.797 0.813 0.826 0.85 0.851 0.85 0.844 0.86N 4962 6979 8323 5678 5510 6070 2837 2286

MT r 0.865 0.855N 1669 1825

ND r 0.825 0.819 0.832 0.831 0.846 0.855 0.867 0.85N 1962 2333 2462 3021 3867 3773 3256 3096

NE r 0.834 0.857 0.85N 1729 1505 1437

NH r 0.832 0.839 0.85 0.849 0.862N 1610 1962 1949 1689 1844

NJ r 0.825 0.847 0.842N 2810 2109 1226

NM r 0.79 0.817 0.832 0.844 0.864 0.867 0.875 0.887 0.89N 4571 7970 8568 8815 8938 9232 9299 7442 6404

NV r 0.861 0.859 0.873 0.853 0.85N 2199 3589 4065 3062 2140

OH r 0.807 0.837 0.847 0.862 0.871 0.869 0.892 0.88N 1723 2318 5111 3856 4350 5000 10429 6700

SC r 0.848N 19516r 0.846N 20476r 0.849N 19943r 0.867N 23099r 0.878N 23914r 0N 24644

Marginal Reliabilities for State Content Aligned MAP CONCEPTS & PROCESSES Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in the Spring and Fall of 2008 and Spring of 2009

Grade

AZ Science - Conce

.88

pts/Processes V1CO Science - Concepts/Processes V1CO Science Part 1of 2 - Concepts/Processes V2DE Science - Concepts/Processes V1GA Science - Concepts/Processes V1IL Science - Concepts/Processes V1IN Science - Concepts/Processes V1KS Science - Concepts/Processes V1KY Science - Concepts/Processes V2ME Science - Concepts/Processes V2MI Science - Concepts/Processes V1MN Science Part 1 of 2- Concepts/Processes V1MT Science - Concepts/Processes V2ND Science - Concepts/Processes V1NE Science - Concepts/Processes V1NH Science - Concepts/Processes V2NJ Science - Concepts/Processes V1NM Science - Concepts/Processes V1NV Science - Concepts/Processes V1OH Science - Concepts/Processes V1SC 3 Science - Concepts/Processes V2SC 4 Science - Concepts/Processes V2SC 5 Science - Concepts/Processes V2SC 6 Science - Concepts/Processes V2SC 7 Science - Concepts/Processes V2SC 8 Science - Concepts/Processes V2



State Test Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10SC r 0.879

(cont.) N 2738r 0.883N 1842r 0.84 0.828 0.839 0.849 0.87 0.876 0.884 0.875N 6027 8590 8949 9304 10574 11573 11908 1978

TX r 0.857 0.845 0.847N 10224 15195 16067r 0.876 0.879 0.882N 13945 17821 13540r 0.907 0.89N 3654 8207

UT r 0.832 0.828 0.846N 1290 1214 1207

WA r 0.869 0.864 0.863 0.861 0.864 0.87N 3342 4238 5456 5340 4543 2614

WI r 0.83 0.824 0.835 0.829 0.842 0.853 0.855 0.865 0.88N 2792 4892 4924 4668 7082 9626 7730 7749 4133

WY r 0.846 0.845 0.841 0.884 0.87N 1605 1660 1741 1930 1750

Marginal Reliabilities for State Content Aligned MAP CONCEPTS & PROCESSES Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in the Spring and Fall of 2008 and Spring of 2009 (cont.)

Grade

SC Concepts & Processes for Physical Science EOC V2

UT Science - Concepts/Processes V1WA Science - Concepts/Processes V1WI Science - Concepts/Processes V1WY Science - Concepts/Processes V1

SC Concepts & Processes for Physical Science Pretest V2SC Science - Concepts/Processes V1TX Science 2-5 - Concepts/Processes V1TX Science 6-8 - Concepts/Processes V1TX Science 9+ - Concepts/Processes V1



Table 25.

State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10AK Decode Meaning of Words 0.801 0.783 0.768 0.753

Inform ational Texts 0.833 0.799 0.781 0.770Fact / Opinion / Effectiveness 0.719 0.756 0.770 0.762Literary Texts 0.850 0.807 0.777 0.764Lit. Elem ent / Genre / Device 0.789 0.786 0.779 0.779Word Identification 0.821 0.792 0.772 0.763Literal Meaning / Inferred 0.830 0.810 0.791 0.781Sum m arizes / Main Ideas; 0.819 0.806 0.791 0.780Decode Meaning of Words 0.749 0.757 0.743 0.790Fact / Opinion / Effectiveness 0.738 0.744 0.724 0.775Lit. Element / Genre / Device 0.771 0.775 0.768 0.800Literal Meaning / Inferred 0.754 0.766 0.756 0.794Summ arizes / Main Ideas; 0.766 0.779 0.768 0.798

AR Connections / Ques tioning 0.825 0.804 0.802 0.810Determ ine Im portance 0.830 0.809 0.809 0.816Foundations of Reading 0.797 0.782 0.778 0.792Summ arize / Analyze 0.750 0.768 0.782 0.804Variety of Texts 0.771 0.772 0.771 0.783Connections / Ques tioning 0.821 0.808 0.819 0.818 0.815Unders tand Text Im ag / Lit 0.814 0.827 0.835 0.863 0.822Determ ine Im portance 0.829 0.816 0.829 0.830 0.822Unders tand Text Inform / 0.809 0.813 0.827 0.855 0.810Foundations of Reading 0.802 0.798 0.807 0.816 0.803Summ arize / Analyze 0.814 0.811 0.826 0.829 0.822Variety of Texts 0.801 0.794 0.813 0.804 0.798

AZ Inform ational Texts 0.805 0.812 0.813 0.815Literary Texts 0.794 0.799 0.809 0.815Reading: Comprehens ion 0.804 0.809 0.812 0.809Reading: Process 0.783 0.783 0.799 0.810Inform ational Texts 0.816 0.824 0.812 0.832 0.831Literary Texts 0.832 0.835 0.823 0.841 0.838Reading: Comprehens ion 0.821 0.826 0.811 0.833 0.830Reading: Process 0.821 0.820 0.810 0.827 0.826

CA Comprehend & Analyze Text 0.804 0.793 0.797 0.794Inform Struct & Critique 0.812 0.797 0.788 0.777Lit Response & Analys is 0.803 0.798 0.807 0.803Word Analys is & Vocabulary 0.782 0.774 0.778 0.785Comprehend & Analyze Text 0.812 0.816 0.821 0.837 0.840Inform Struct & Critique 0.792 0.802 0.808 0.828 0.831Lit Response & Analys is 0.822 0.830 0.831 0.845 0.847Word Analys is & Vocabulary 0.801 0.807 0.805 0.823 0.825Interpretive Com prehens ion 0.821 0.772 0.755 0.748Literal Comprehens ion 0.816 0.773 0.764 0.737Literary Response & Analys is 0.811 0.769 0.773 0.765Word Analys is & Vocabulary D 0.803 0.774 0.781 0.778Interpretive Com prehens ion 0.759 0.755 0.740Literal Comprehens ion 0.744 0.728 0.709Literary Response & Analys is 0.770 0.756 0.745Word Analys is & Vocabulary D 0.768 0.772 0.751

CO Apply Thinking Skills to Read 0.855 0.845 0.833 0.818Locate / Select / Use Info 0.769 0.772 0.777 0.783Read / Recognize Literature 0.848 0.835 0.826 0.819Read a Variety of Material 0.857 0.840 0.826 0.818Apply Thinking Skills to Read 0.820 0.823 0.821 0.841 0.843Locate / Select / Use Info 0.812 0.821 0.823 0.842 0.844Read / Recognize Literature 0.830 0.837 0.836 0.858 0.861Read a Variety of Material 0.824 0.829 0.828 0.849 0.852

CT Construct Meaning 0.844 0.826 0.828Devices & Conventions 0.840 0.824 0.813Interpret / Analyze / Eval 0.851 0.826 0.817Word Recog & Vocabulary 0.815 0.800 0.801Construct Meaning 0.836Devices & Conventions 0.831Interpret / Analyze / Eval 0.831Word Recog & Vocabulary 0.813

Marginal Reliablilities for Goals of State Content Aligned MAP READING Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in Spring and Fall 2008 and Spring 2009

Grade

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4

Reading Goals Survey 6+ AK V4

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2

Reading Goals Survey 6+ AR V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3

Reading Goals Survey 6+ AZ V3

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2

Reading Goals Survey 6+ CA V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Poway

Reading Goals Survey 6+ Poway

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2

Reading Goals Survey 6+ CO V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CT V3

Reading Goals Survey 6+ CT V3




State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10DE Analyze & Evaluate Info 0.790 0.763 0.761 0.760

Decoding Skills 0.808 0.790 0.773 0.770Inform ative Text 0.832 0.808 0.782 0.764Unders tanding Literary Text 0.835 0.807 0.785 0.779Vocabulary 0.808 0.779 0.763 0.767Analyze & Evaluate Info 0.774 0.771 0.773 0.819 0.807Decoding Skills 0.768 0.752 0.750 0.807 0.780Inform ative Text 0.771 0.764 0.768 0.817 0.807Unders tanding Literary Text 0.782 0.780 0.785 0.830 0.823Vocabulary 0.771 0.766 0.768 0.811 0.787

FL Construct Meaning 0.829 0.830 0.816 0.807Features of Lit Form s 0.794 0.811 0.799 0.783Reading Process 0.816 0.805 0.799 0.792Respond Critically 0.778 0.784 0.810 0.802Construct Meaning 0.825 0.828 0.830 0.842 0.835Features of Lit Form s 0.822 0.828 0.829 0.844 0.831Reading Process 0.813 0.817 0.821 0.829 0.824Respond Critically 0.843 0.843 0.840 0.853 0.838

GA Phonics / Word Identification 0.790 0.776 0.761 0.772Purpose & Structure 0.820 0.809 0.793 0.802Strategies to Gain Meaning 0.817 0.797 0.787 0.791Validity & Merits of Text 0.699 0.672 0.720 0.733Phonics / Word Identification 0.790 0.793 0.795 0.790Infer & Interp Comp 0.800 0.781 0.757Purpose & Structure 0.813 0.822 0.819 0.825Literal Comprehens ion 0.800 0.787 0.776Strategies to Gain Meaning 0.806 0.813 0.818 0.818Read Strat & Word Meaning 0.789 0.771 0.762

HI Conventions & Skills 0.823Literary Response 0.830Reading Com p: Inform ational 0.831Reading Com p: Literary 0.850Conventions & Skills 0.832 0.838 0.795Literary Response 0.851 0.841 0.806Reading Com p: Inform ational 0.834 0.840 0.815Reading Com p: Literary 0.848 0.858 0.817

KY Comprehend Reading 0.759 0.760 0.738 0.744Inform ational Reading 0.746 0.735 0.736 0.735Literature 0.763 0.764 0.739 0.746Persuas ive Reading 0.769 0.769 0.748 0.725Reading Skills 0.709 0.721 0.720 0.719Comprehend Reading 0.736 0.723 0.736 0.743Inform ational Reading 0.745 0.728 0.728 0.717Literature 0.779 0.758 0.745 0.746Persuas ive Reading 0.742 0.719 0.738 0.726Reading Skills 0.718 0.720 0.732 0.715Form ing a Foundation 0.744 0.747 0.733 0.735Initial Under: Inform 0.752 0.746 0.735 0.740Initial Under: Literary 0.773 0.761 0.749 0.753Interpret Text: Inform 0.773 0.765 0.734 0.727Interpret Text: Literary 0.766 0.753 0.754 0.758Form ing a Foundation 0.730 0.732 0.720 0.746 0.742Initial Under: Inform 0.744 0.751 0.741 0.761 0.760Initial Under: Literary 0.758 0.766 0.751 0.776 0.779Interpret Text: Inform 0.726 0.734 0.726 0.748 0.757Interpret Text: Literary 0.763 0.769 0.756 0.777 0.779

KS Eval Validity / Credibility 0.751 0.770 0.728 0.686Identify Text / Locate Info 0.806 0.787 0.761 0.747Phonics / Vocab / Word 0.783 0.762 0.745 0.743Read & Com prehend 0.813 0.784 0.766 0.752Respond to Text 0.803 0.773 0.735 0.722

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 HI V2

Reading Goals Survey 6+ HI V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3

Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V3

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4

Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V4

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2

Marginal Reliablilities for Goals of State Content Aligned MAP READING Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in Spring and Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 (cont.)

Grade

Reading Goals Survey 6+ DE V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 FL V3

Reading Goals Survey 6+ FL V3

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2

Reading Goals Survey 6+ GA V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2



Table 25 (cont.)

State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Eval Validity / Credibility 0.706 0.731 0.733 0.754 0.757Identify Text / Locate Info 0.760 0.771 0.762 0.780 0.781Phonics / Vocab / Word 0.761 0.768 0.751 0.765 0.765Read & Com prehend 0.750 0.758 0.744 0.760 0.764

LA Analytical Viewpoint 0.839Com pre Strat / Elem / Devices 0.840Genre / Retell / Locate Info 0.834Analytical Viewpoint 0.849 0.853 0.844Compre Strat / Elem / Devices 0.860 0.858 0.849Genre / Retell / Locate Info 0.852 0.855 0.847Reading Strategies 0.835 0.846 0.835

IA Evaluative Com prehens ion 0.780 0.768 0.751 0.733Interp / Infer Com prehens ion 0.775 0.759 0.756 0.747Literal Comprehens ion 0.793 0.773 0.767 0.751Word Meaning 0.763 0.750 0.743 0.728Evaluative Comprehens ion 0.765 0.747 0.744 0.752 0.747Interp / Infer Com prehens ion 0.767 0.746 0.732 0.744 0.739Literal Comprehens ion 0.789 0.758 0.754 0.758 0.748Word Meaning 0.751 0.743 0.730 0.736 0.724Critical Judge Skills 0.788 0.781 0.739Infer & Interp Com p 0.781 0.775 0.758Literal Comprehens ion 0.800 0.792 0.772Read Strat & Word Meaning 0.758 0.760 0.746Critical Judge Skills 0.769 0.763 0.746Infer & Interp Comp 0.784 0.766 0.727Literal Comprehens ion 0.787 0.775 0.750Read Strat & Word Meaning 0.771 0.759 0.737Critical Judge Skills 0.766 0.773 0.755 0.756Infer / Interp / Com p 0.773 0.772 0.758 0.766Literal Comprehens ion 0.782 0.776 0.763 0.768Reading Strat / Word Meaning 0.756 0.756 0.747 0.759Critical Judge Skills 0.765 0.759 0.759 0.768 0.774Infer / Interp / Comp 0.778 0.760 0.760 0.762 0.767Literal Comprehens ion 0.777 0.762 0.764 0.758 0.756Reading Strat / Word Meaning 0.763 0.759 0.753 0.752 0.749

ID Comprehending Text 0.789 0.743 0.737Decoding & Vocabulary 0.776 0.731 0.743Expos itory Text 0.788 0.749 0.741Literary Text 0.797 0.734 0.740Comprehending Text 0.748 0.752 0.766Decoding & Vocabulary 0.743 0.743 0.751Expos itory Text 0.737 0.736 0.753Literary Text 0.756 0.758 0.768

IL Literary Works 0.773 0.774 0.775 0.767 0.748Literature 0.790 0.780 0.786 0.785 0.778Reading Strat / 0.788 0.783 0.782 0.779 0.767Word Analys is Vocabulary 0.772 0.772 0.774 0.773 0.770Literary Works 0.743 0.771 0.767 0.759 0.794 0.809Literature 0.784 0.799 0.797 0.786 0.811 0.824Reading Strat / 0.753 0.780 0.779 0.771 0.799 0.813Word Analys is Vocabulary 0.756 0.774 0.772 0.765 0.794 0.807

IN Inform Text: Com prehens ion 0.798 0.779 0.760 0.741 0.791Inform Text: Structures 0.771 0.723 0.701 0.676 0.722Literary Text: Comprehens ion 0.798 0.767 0.760 0.750 0.807Literary Text: Structures 0.715 0.696 0.699 0.695 0.729Word Recog & Vocabulary 0.781 0.746 0.734 0.732 0.776Inform Text: Com prehens ion 0.738 0.751 0.759 0.762 0.773 0.807Inform Text: Structures 0.718 0.704 0.694 0.685 0.694 0.723Literary Text: Comprehens ion 0.754 0.768 0.774 0.773 0.782 0.814Literary Text: Structures 0.726 0.731 0.730 0.725 0.739 0.764Word Recog & Vocabulary 0.728 0.735 0.746 0.746 0.757 0.786

Reading Goals Survey 6+ KS V2

Grade


Reading Goals Survey 6+ Loess Hills V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Mid-Iowa Consortium V2

Reading Goals Survey 6+ Mid-Iowa Consortium V2

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ID V3

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ID V3

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 LA V2

Reading Goals Survey 6+ LA V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Eas tern Iowa V2

Reading Goals Survey 6+ Eas tern Iowa V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Loess Hills V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2

Reading Goals Survey 6+ IL V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3

Reading Goals Survey 6+ IN V3




State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10MA Reading Survey 2-5 MA V2 Evaluative Com prehens ion 0.675 0.671 0.661

Interpretive Com prehens ion 0.678 0.680 0.648Literal Comprehens ion 0.678 0.670 0.660Style & Language 0.716 0.733 0.775 0.782Literature 0.681 0.717 0.680Word Meaning 0.660 0.665 0.657

Reading Survey 6+ MA V2 Evaluative Comprehens ion 0.711 0.711 0.720Interpretive Com prehens ion 0.691 0.706 0.707Literal Comprehens ion 0.712 0.706 0.712Literature 0.717 0.732 0.747Word Meaning 0.698 0.700 0.708

Reading Survey 2-5 MA V3 Genre / Fict / NonfictionLang: Vocab / Concept DevelStyle & LanguageUnders tand Text Im ag / LitUnders tand Text Inform / Expos

Reading Survey 6+ MA V3 Genre / Fict / Nonfiction 0.614 0.695 0.713Lang: Vocab / Concept Devel 0.634 0.702 0.719Style & Language 0.626 0.679 0.712Unders tand Text Im ag / Lit 0.607 0.709 0.716Unders tand Text Inform / Expos 0.607 0.687 0.711Evaluative Com prehens ion 0.774 0.801 0.799 0.797Interpretive Com prehens ion 0.807 0.815 0.799 0.792Literal Comprehens ion 0.792 0.812 0.801 0.799Literature 0.779 0.806 0.810 0.811Word Meaning 0.804 0.803 0.790 0.791Evaluative Comprehens ion 0.809 0.815 0.812 0.852 0.838Interpretive Com prehens ion 0.811 0.820 0.819 0.856 0.841Literal Comprehens ion 0.811 0.814 0.816 0.848 0.835Literature 0.820 0.830 0.830 0.865 0.852Word Meaning 0.802 0.811 0.810 0.851 0.837Genre / Fict / Nonfiction 0.781 0.808 0.802 0.815Lang: Vocab / Concept Devel 0.782 0.798 0.796 0.812Style & Language 0.658 0.739 0.761 0.786Unders tand Text Im ag / Lit 0.806 0.819 0.807 0.818Unders tand Text Inform / Expos 0.770 0.801 0.802 0.814Genre / Fict / Nonfiction 0.821 0.838 0.835 0.867 0.851Lang: Vocab / Concept Devel 0.819 0.839 0.834 0.871 0.854Style & Language 0.804 0.820 0.822 0.848 0.843Unders tand Text Im ag / Lit 0.824 0.839 0.833 0.867 0.848Unders tand Text Inform / Expos 0.821 0.832 0.829 0.861 0.843Genre / Fict / Nonfiction 0.833 0.818 0.804 0.797Lang: Vocab / Concept Devel 0.816 0.800 0.799 0.791Unders tand Text Im ag / Lit 0.843 0.831 0.819 0.810Unders tand Text Inform / Expos 0.820 0.802 0.799 0.797Genre / Fict / Nonfiction 0.788 0.821 0.816 0.840 0.853Lang: Vocab / Concept Devel 0.781 0.814 0.808 0.826 0.838Style & Language 0.780 0.807 0.812 0.831 0.851Unders tand Text Im ag / Lit 0.798 0.825 0.822 0.841 0.849Unders tand Text Inform / Expos 0.789 0.816 0.810 0.829 0.841

MD Gen Reading: Processes 0.767 0.766 0.768Inform : Ideas / Lang 0.770 0.756 0.747Inform : Var / Feat / Patterns 0.764 0.752 0.744Lit: Features & Elem ents 0.785 0.784 0.774Lit: Ideas / Lang 0.786 0.781 0.783Gen Reading: Processes 0.773 0.764 0.754 0.777 0.786Inform : Ideas / Lang 0.768 0.759 0.755 0.772 0.777Inform : Var / Feat / Patterns 0.760 0.746 0.733 0.762 0.775Lit: Features & Elem ents 0.779 0.770 0.755 0.783 0.788Lit: Ideas / Lang 0.794 0.784 0.771 0.793 0.805

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 (P)

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 (P)

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MD V3

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MD V3

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V2

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MA V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MA V3


Grade



Table 25 (cont.)

State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10ME Inform Text: Interpretation 0.733 0.725 0.715 0.709

Literal Comprehens ion 0.840 0.799 0.780 0.747Inform Text: Parts / Struc 0.719 0.706 0.696 0.680Literary Response & Analys is 0.840 0.800 0.791 0.778Literature: Devices / Struc 0.750 0.721 0.704 0.687Word Analys is & Vocabulary D 0.838 0.809 0.799 0.792Literature: Interpretation 0.761 0.741 0.719 0.699Reading: Inter & Evaluate 0.711 0.717 0.705 0.692Reading: Unknown Words 0.702 0.695 0.690 0.689Inform Text: Interpretation 0.722 0.718 0.717 0.732 0.751Word Analys is & Vocabulary 0.825 0.835 0.835 0.852 0.861Inform Text: Parts / Struc 0.697 0.692 0.687 0.701 0.717Literature: Devices / Struc 0.719 0.714 0.708 0.736 0.756Literature: Interpretation 0.734 0.716 0.712 0.725 0.749Reading: Inter & Evaluate 0.713 0.718 0.711 0.733 0.757Reading: Unknown Words 0.704 0.710 0.699 0.710 0.729Comprehens ion 0.858 0.836 0.808 0.796Inform ational & Persuas ive 0.840 0.827 0.803 0.798Literary Texts 0.856 0.837 0.805 0.799Vocabulary 0.835 0.812 0.790 0.788Comprehens ion 0.795 0.796 0.792 0.796 0.819Inform ational & Persuas ive 0.789 0.793 0.798 0.804 0.827Literary Texts 0.796 0.796 0.795 0.804 0.829Vocabulary 0.780 0.784 0.782 0.786 0.814

MI Com prehens ion / Metacognition 0.857 0.831 0.815 0.807Inform ational Text 0.850 0.818 0.799 0.785Narrative Text 0.840 0.815 0.805 0.799Word Recog / Word Study 0.836 0.806 0.796 0.789Comprehens ion / Metacognition 0.812 0.806 0.800 0.829 0.853Inform ational Text 0.789 0.779 0.768 0.800 0.825Narrative Text 0.811 0.807 0.797 0.827 0.851Word Recog / Word Study 0.796 0.791 0.785 0.810 0.833

MN Comprehens ion: 0.850 0.826 0.805 0.789 0.871Comprehens ion: Narrative 0.857 0.830 0.808 0.797 0.871Literature 0.835 0.809 0.797 0.793 0.865Word Recog / Vocabulary 0.835 0.806 0.789 0.784 0.870Comprehens ion: 0.784 0.787 0.789 0.791 0.805 0.832Comprehens ion: Narrative 0.797 0.798 0.795 0.789 0.800 0.825Literature 0.798 0.802 0.803 0.802 0.811 0.838Word Recog / Vocabulary 0.782 0.782 0.782 0.782 0.795 0.824

MO Fiction / Poetry / Drama 0.833 0.814 0.814 0.788Nonfiction 0.814 0.804 0.796 0.767Phonics / Vocabulary 0.792 0.773 0.780 0.758Reading Process 0.818 0.813 0.803 0.782Fiction / Poetry / Drama 0.808 0.809 0.819Nonfiction 0.793 0.788 0.796Phonics / Vocabulary 0.786 0.777 0.789Reading Process 0.805 0.800 0.803

MS Analyze or Interpret Text 0.787 0.778 0.768 0.770Infer / Predict / Conclude 0.757 0.762 0.757 0.767Text Features & Structures 0.707 0.714 0.713 0.726Word Recog & Vocabulary 0.737 0.740 0.736 0.760Analyze or Interpret Text 0.787 0.795 0.793 0.757Infer / Predict / Conclude 0.770 0.799 0.792 0.765Text Features & Structures 0.758 0.775 0.769 0.745Word Recog & Vocabulary 0.759 0.786 0.776 0.759

MT Analyze / Eval Inform ation 0.720 0.738 0.717 0.708Construct Meaning 0.723 0.736 0.726 0.719Lit Devices & Elem ents 0.728 0.729 0.691 0.693Read: Variety of Purposes 0.730 0.734 0.710 0.711Strategies to Read 0.708 0.707 0.705 0.702


Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3

Grade

Reading Goals Survey 6+ ME V3

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME V4

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MI V3

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MN V4

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO V4

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MS V3

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ MS V3

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2




State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10MT Analyze / Eval Inform ation 0.696 0.702 0.701 0.713 0.727

(cont.) Construct Meaning 0.714 0.714 0.712 0.723 0.736Lit Devices & Elements 0.711 0.721 0.712 0.726 0.734Read: Variety of Purposes 0.711 0.713 0.703 0.708 0.707Strategies to Read 0.696 0.690 0.686 0.688 0.7

NC Arg / Critical Thnk; Lit / Info 0.822 0.801 0.789 0.786Evaluate Info & Materials 0.802 0.785 0.776 0.771Interpret / Eval Literary Text 0.819 0.806 0.797 0.796Strategies & Skills 0.792 0.770 0.767 0.774Arg / Critical Thnk; Lit / Info 0.756 0.763 0.776 0.744 0.747Evaluate Info & Materials 0.755 0.764 0.777 0.756 0.754Interpret / Eval Literary Text 0.779 0.781 0.789 0.767 0.766Strategies & Skills 0.767 0.772 0.783 0.741 0.735

ND Literary Info Genre / Elem ents 0.767 0.732 0.720 0.709Phonics / Word / Vocab 0.746 0.707 0.697 0.702Purpose / Lit Techniques 0.754 0.725 0.715 0.707Reading: Comprehens ion 0.781 0.744 0.730 0.715Reading: Interpreting 0.789 0.758 0.728 0.705Literary Info Genre / Elements 0.719 0.723 0.728 0.742 0.733Phonics / Word / Vocab 0.705 0.712 0.707 0.719 0.712Purpose / Lit Techniques 0.717 0.724 0.729 0.740 0.734Reading: Comprehens ion 0.717 0.722 0.719 0.730 0.715Reading: Interpreting 0.711 0.716 0.725 0.733 0.725

NE Characteris tics of Text 0.796 0.773 0.769 0.751Elem ents / Tech Fict / Nonfict 0.819 0.800 0.782 0.772Identify Main Idea / Details 0.821 0.796 0.781 0.760Strat to Read Words / Vocab 0.800 0.784 0.771 0.763Characteris tics of Text 0.778 0.790 0.782 0.799 0.797Elements / Tech Fict / Nonfict 0.796 0.810 0.805 0.815 0.813Identify Main Idea / Details 0.791 0.802 0.796 0.806 0.803Strat to Read Words / Vocab 0.783 0.800 0.786 0.794 0.791

NH Comprehens ion Strategies 0.809 0.787 0.750 0.727Inform ational Texts 0.802 0.775 0.764 0.756Literary Texts 0.822 0.781 0.756 0.749Word Identification 0.783 0.763 0.752 0.748Comprehens ion Strategies 0.745 0.755 0.749 0.778 0.789Inform ational Texts 0.766 0.772 0.766 0.794 0.804Literary Texts 0.767 0.771 0.768 0.796 0.804Word Identification 0.757 0.761 0.752 0.774 0.784

NJ Com prehens ion Skills 0.793 0.782 0.777 0.764Concepts About Print 0.659 0.655 0.619 0.590Decoding / Word Recognition 0.758 0.743 0.744 0.743Read Strategy / Vocab Dev 0.766 0.752 0.768 0.765Response to Text 0.787 0.778 0.777 0.768Com prehens ion Skills 0.765 0.773 0.784 0.757 0.770Concepts About Print 0.643 0.596 0.593 0.623 0.621Decoding / Word Recognition 0.750 0.761 0.780 0.757 0.770Read Strategy / Vocab Dev 0.769 0.777 0.782 0.753 0.774Response to Text 0.774 0.787 0.796 0.771 0.791

NM Evaluative Comprehens ion 0.729 0.751 0.762 0.760Interpretive Com prehens ion 0.751 0.749 0.762 0.762Literal Comprehens ion 0.762 0.766 0.769 0.763Literature 0.739 0.746 0.752 0.744Word Meaning 0.722 0.727 0.745 0.750Evaluative Com prehens ion 0.766 0.772 0.772 0.788 0.784Interpretive Com prehens ion 0.765 0.776 0.772 0.789 0.791Literal Comprehens ion 0.772 0.779 0.776 0.788 0.783Literature 0.764 0.779 0.779 0.791 0.793Word Meaning 0.757 0.765 0.763 0.773 0.774

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NM V3

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2


Grade

Reading Goals Survey 6+ ND V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NE V2

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NE V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NH V4

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MT V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NC V3



Table 25 (cont.)

State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10NV Com pre / Interp / Eval Info Text 0.824 0.811 0.776 0.780

Com pre / Interp / Eval Lit 0.810 0.804 0.775 0.783Reading Skills & Strategies 0.837 0.825 0.798 0.795Word Analys is 0.804 0.806 0.769 0.792Compre / Interp / Eval Info Text 0.794 0.809 0.814 0.807Initial Unders tanding of Liter 0.705 0.726 0.739 0.742Compre / Interp / Eval Lit 0.801 0.811 0.809 0.818Reading Strategies 0.704 0.718 0.737 0.718Reading Skills & Strategies 0.809 0.813 0.812 0.808Word Analys is 0.781 0.799 0.793 0.796Com pre / Interp / Eval Info Text 0.790 0.759Com pre / Interp / Eval Lit 0.796 0.747Reading Skills & Strategies 0.813 0.747Word Analys is 0.794 0.744Expos itory Text 0.832 0.831 0.813 0.780Literary Text 0.853 0.841 0.832 0.812Reading Strategies 0.848 0.837 0.820 0.799Word Analys is 0.835 0.823 0.805 0.793Expos itory Text 0.802 0.805 0.806 0.808 0.820Literary Text 0.817 0.823 0.825 0.822 0.831Reading Strategies 0.807 0.811 0.812 0.809 0.827Word Analys is 0.802 0.800 0.800 0.798 0.804

NY Analys is & Evaluation 0.821 0.805 0.789 0.783Com petencies 0.796 0.793 0.776 0.783Inform ation / Unders tanding 0.826 0.816 0.791 0.781Lit Response / Express ion 0.815 0.805 0.792 0.778Analys is & Evaluation 0.796 0.790 0.791 0.817 0.840Competencies 0.775 0.767 0.757 0.792 0.814Inform ation / Unders tanding 0.774 0.769 0.769 0.804 0.822Lit Response / Express ion 0.798 0.790 0.784 0.817 0.841

OH Applications : Inform ational 0.851 0.836 0.831 0.818Applications : Literary Texts 0.827 0.822 0.829 0.824Phonem ic Aware Word Rec / 0.833 0.816 0.815 0.804Reading: Comprehens ion 0.855 0.841 0.839 0.826Analyze / Eval Inform ation 0.751 0.763 0.740 0.727Construct Meaning 0.789 0.778 0.758 0.743Lit Devices & Elem ents 0.783 0.768 0.724 0.720Read: Variety of Purposes 0.795 0.778 0.744 0.736Strategies to Read 0.780 0.754 0.736 0.727Applications : Inform ational 0.802 0.823 0.816 0.860 0.859Applications : Literary Texts 0.813 0.835 0.826 0.863 0.862Phonem ic Aware Word Rec / 0.798 0.814 0.807 0.850 0.847Reading: Comprehens ion 0.814 0.829 0.821 0.858 0.854

OK Compre: Lit / Sum / Generalize 0.830 0.831 0.808 0.817Com prehens ion: Infer / Intrprt 0.839 0.846 0.819 0.828Literature 0.816 0.827 0.822 0.830Print / Phonics / Vocabulary 0.811 0.822 0.795 0.808Compre: Lit / Sum / Generalize 0.837 0.823 0.825Comprehens ion: Infer / Intrprt 0.830 0.814 0.820Literature 0.843 0.826 0.840Print / Phonics / Vocabulary 0.818 0.800 0.811

OR Decoding & Word Recog 0.783 0.761 0.678 0.598Inform Text: Interpret 0.780 0.786 0.763 0.749Literary Text: Interpret 0.792 0.790 0.773 0.746Read Inform & Narr Text 0.787 0.774 0.757 0.742Vocabulary 0.758 0.777 0.757 0.749Decoding & Word Recog 0.558 0.528 0.561 0.580Inform Text: Interpret 0.743 0.721 0.757 0.757Literary Text: Interpret 0.747 0.734 0.756 0.759Read Inform & Narr Text 0.754 0.737 0.749 0.761Vocabulary 0.747 0.724 0.754 0.748

Reading Goals Survey 6+ OR V4

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NY V2

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NY V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3

Reading Goals Survey 6+ OH V3

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2

Reading Goals Survey 6+ OK V2

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OR V4


Grade

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V3

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V3

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NV V2




State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10PA Com prehens ion Strategies 0.805 0.792 0.782 0.756

Read / Analyze / Interpret Lit 0.804 0.801 0.803 0.795Read Critically Content Areas 0.822 0.808 0.780 0.743Text Structure & Vocabulary 0.798 0.787 0.782 0.770Comprehens ion Strategies 0.789 0.772 0.754 0.763 0.754Read / Analyze / Interpret Lit 0.803 0.789 0.772 0.783 0.782Read Critically Content Areas 0.761 0.749 0.738 0.750 0.752Text Structure & Vocabulary 0.767 0.752 0.732 0.757 0.751

RI Comprehens ion Strategies 0.839 0.819 0.775 0.779Inform ational Texts 0.845 0.802 0.765 0.790Literary Texts 0.850 0.814 0.773 0.784Word Identification 0.824 0.798 0.774 0.784Comprehens ion Strategies 0.769 0.764 0.730 0.766Inform ational Texts 0.779 0.781 0.763 0.795Literary Texts 0.784 0.782 0.762 0.791Word Identification 0.780 0.775 0.743 0.780

SC Analys is of Texts 0.785 0.774 0.773 0.766Evaluative Com prehens ion 0.790 0.767 0.746 0.726Interpretive Com prehens ion 0.793 0.772 0.764 0.751Literal Comprehens ion 0.788 0.769 0.762 0.756Word Study & Analys is 0.770 0.755 0.753 0.753Analys is of Texts 0.789 0.787 0.790 0.817 0.839Evaluative Comprehens ion 0.753 0.752 0.756 0.783 0.810Interpretive Com prehens ion 0.771 0.767 0.771 0.798 0.823Literal Comprehens ion 0.772 0.772 0.772 0.799 0.820Word Study & Analys is 0.772 0.769 0.771 0.791 0.818Building Vocabulary 0.864 0.863 0.858 0.854Inform ational Texts 0.880 0.872 0.861 0.851Literary Texts 0.886 0.883 0.874 0.868Building Vocabulary 0.860 0.861 0.858 0.868 0.881Inform ational Texts 0.859 0.862 0.862 0.873 0.884Literary Texts 0.871 0.872 0.870 0.879 0.889

TN Com p Strat: After Reading 0.752 0.756 0.734 0.739Com p Strat: Before / During 0.745 0.758 0.718 0.728Literary Genres 0.726 0.753 0.761 0.776Word Recog & Vocabulary 0.712 0.735 0.711 0.737Com p Strat: After Reading 0.782Com p Strat: Before / During 0.769Literary Genres 0.792Word Recog & Vocabulary 0.756

TX Comprehens ion 0.841 0.822 0.794 0.781Literary Concepts 0.834 0.812 0.788 0.781Print & Word Identification 0.824 0.820 0.799 0.783Word Ident / Vocab Devel 0.820 0.806 0.792 0.798Comprehens ion 0.819 0.826 0.830 0.887 0.886Literary Concepts 0.825 0.840 0.849 0.891 0.893Print & Word Identification 0.811 0.811 0.802 0.883 0.883Word Ident / Vocab Devel 0.825 0.832 0.832 0.880 0.884

UT Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 Analyze Narr / Inform Text 0.801 0.821 0.814 0.797Decode & Spell 0.790 0.799 0.797 0.799Interpret Narr / Inform Text 0.824 0.821 0.811 0.804Unders tand Narr / Inform Text 0.816 0.815 0.805 0.791

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ Analyze Narr / Inform Text 0.794 0.795 0.806 0.773Decode & Spell 0.779 0.787 0.795 0.747Interpret Narr / Inform Text 0.801 0.802 0.818 0.775Unders tand Narr / Inform Text 0.801 0.807 0.819 0.780

VA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 VA Analyze Inform Sources 0.813 0.810 0.783 0.770Initial Under: Literary 0.821 0.803 0.782 0.781Critique Fict / Nonfiction 0.824 0.814 0.794 0.776Interpret Text: Inform 0.822 0.803 0.770 0.760Critique Inform Sources 0.797 0.797 0.761 0.745Interpret Text: Literary 0.804 0.787 0.780 0.782Phonics / Vocab / Fig 0.781 0.792 0.777 0.763Read & Analyze 0.828 0.809 0.793 0.771

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2

Reading Goals Survey 6+ PA V2

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 RI V4

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ RI V4

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3

Reading Goals Survey 6+ TX V3


Grade

Reading Goals Survey 6+ SC V4

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 TN V4

Reading Goals Survey 6+ TN V4



Table 25 (cont.)

State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10VA Reading Goals Survey 6+ VA Analyze Inform Sources 0.768 0.747 0.766 0.819

(cont.) Literature 0.800 0.782 0.770 0.786Critique Fict / Nonfiction 0.797 0.765 0.770 0.812Persuas ive Reading 0.775 0.746 0.768 0.765Critique Inform Sources 0.768 0.728 0.745 0.793Reading Skills 0.765 0.755 0.765 0.758Phonics / Vocab / Fig 0.797 0.768 0.779 0.813Read & Analyze 0.796 0.771 0.784 0.830

VT Reading Goals Survey 2-5 VT Analyze Inform Text 0.694 0.694Analyze Literary Text 0.690 0.685Com prehens ion Strategies 0.679 0.666Initial Unders tanding of Infor 0.652 0.685Initial Unders tanding of Liter 0.650 0.656Reading Strategies 0.667 0.677

Reading Goals Survey 6+ VT Analyze Inform Text 0.699 0.697 0.713 0.715Analyze Literary Text 0.697 0.672 0.696 0.686Comprehens ion Strategies 0.697 0.701 0.707 0.717Initial Unders tanding of Infor 0.698 0.705 0.720 0.705Initial Unders tanding of Liter 0.678 0.693 0.704 0.702Reading Strategies 0.685 0.693 0.701 0.683

WA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Know Text Components 0.780 0.758 0.742 0.754Read: Variety of Purpose 0.755 0.743 0.725 0.741Reading Com prehens ion 0.781 0.760 0.743 0.748Think Critical & Analyze 0.779 0.767 0.748 0.756Word Recognition 0.756 0.742 0.730 0.755

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WA Know Text Components 0.753 0.750 0.748 0.778 0.781Read: Variety of Purpose 0.748 0.743 0.738 0.770 0.775Reading Com prehens ion 0.764 0.759 0.760 0.773 0.779Think Critical & Analyze 0.752 0.746 0.754 0.777 0.776Word Recognition 0.758 0.760 0.759 0.781 0.786

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Know Text Components 0.760 0.752 0.752 0.751Read: Variety of Purpose 0.743 0.743 0.743 0.746Reading Com prehens ion 0.769 0.759 0.754 0.754Think Critical & Analyze 0.757 0.768 0.764 0.758Word Recognition 0.735 0.743 0.747 0.754

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WA Know Text Components 0.758 0.754 0.747 0.752 0.775Read: Variety of Purpose 0.758 0.748 0.740 0.745 0.768Reading Com prehens ion 0.765 0.761 0.756 0.759 0.780Think Critical & Analyze 0.759 0.752 0.749 0.753 0.772Word Recognition 0.760 0.755 0.747 0.747 0.768

WI Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WI Analyze Text 0.802 0.787 0.780 0.776Evaluate & Extend Text 0.806 0.794 0.785 0.776Unders tand Text 0.817 0.795 0.781 0.773Word Meaning / Context 0.785 0.776 0.771 0.766

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WI Analyze Text 0.789 0.784 0.781 0.778 0.781 0.804Evaluate & Extend Text 0.781 0.780 0.775 0.771 0.773 0.795Unders tand Text 0.799 0.785 0.783 0.775 0.778 0.795Word Meaning / Context 0.777 0.764 0.761 0.749 0.749 0.765

WY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Comprehens ion 0.804 0.800 0.776 0.774Decode / Vocab 0.767 0.771 0.764 0.772Unders tand / Interpret Lit 0.806 0.803 0.782 0.784Unders tanding Inform Texts 0.792 0.783 0.771 0.775

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WY Comprehens ion 0.774 0.784 0.775 0.787 0.781Decode / Vocab 0.761 0.766 0.753 0.766 0.758Unders tand / Interpret Lit 0.778 0.785 0.772 0.788 0.775Unders tanding Inform Texts 0.777 0.783 0.772 0.793 0.785


Grade



Grades Table 26.



Table 26 (cont.)




State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10OH Conventions : Gram m ar / Usage 0.802 0.799 0.801 0.794 0.783 0.782 0.792 0.798 0.818

Conventions : Mechanics 0.814 0.809 0.817 0.809 0.803 0.805 0.796 0.800 0.813Writing Applications 0.773 0.781 0.786 0.798 0.798 0.805 0.797 0.836 0.850Writing Processes 0.809 0.810 0.818 0.818 0.812 0.810 0.806 0.817 0.828Gram m ar Usage 0.809 0.765 0.743 0.727 0.700 0.709 0.688Mechanics 0.833 0.780 0.768 0.758 0.729 0.724 0.706Writing Applications & Genre 0.820 0.771 0.763 0.755 0.737 0.743 0.728Writing Strategies 0.799 0.748 0.734 0.718 0.691 0.688 0.650

SC Capitalization 0.763 0.750 0.750 0.741 0.745 0.738 0.726 0.743 0.765Com pos ing 0.739 0.734 0.739 0.719 0.737 0.732 0.721 0.745 0.775Com pos ition Structure 0.759 0.746 0.752 0.737 0.760 0.759 0.756 0.788 0.814Language Conventions 0.724 0.727 0.734 0.725 0.732 0.725 0.719 0.726 0.756Punctuation 0.729 0.720 0.722 0.720 0.739 0.746 0.746 0.755 0.789Correct Use of Conventions 0.830 0.835 0.829 0.818 0.817 0.812 0.805 0.815 0.842Focus / Detail / Organization 0.843 0.844 0.840 0.826 0.827 0.825 0.819 0.830 0.856Form s / Research 0.830 0.848 0.854 0.855 0.856 0.855 0.851 0.861 0.877

TX Conventions & Spelling 0.824 0.803 0.790 0.827 0.818 0.820 0.842 0.850Gram m ar & Usage 0.822 0.799 0.787 0.820 0.812 0.822 0.855 0.867Writing Processes 0.814 0.791 0.786 0.826 0.830 0.829 0.868 0.875Writing Purposes 0.812 0.800 0.798 0.828 0.841 0.844 0.873 0.889

UT Com pos Strat: After Writing 0.820 0.810 0.801 0.799 0.774 0.797 0.783Com pos Strat: Before Writing 0.796 0.790 0.781 0.787 0.768 0.789 0.803Com pos Strat: During Writing 0.809 0.816 0.813 0.822 0.794 0.824 0.812Com pos Strat: Gram m ar 0.811 0.796 0.801 0.801 0.771 0.772 0.759Habits of Writing 0.712Structures of Language 0.666

VA Draft / Edit 0.804 0.786 0.767 0.788 0.765 0.765Draft / Revise 0.811 0.789 0.766 0.799 0.799 0.792Gram m ar / Usage 0.799 0.785 0.765 0.784 0.788 0.766Prewrite / Draft 0.787 0.766 0.741 0.757 0.749 0.759

VT Structures of Language 0.724 0.724 0.705 0.722 0.747Writing Conventions 0.731 0.711 0.715 0.719 0.730Writing Conventions : Punctuation 0.726 0.723 0.711 0.722 0.752Writing in Response to Lit 0.736 0.745 0.727 0.745 0.758Writing Process 0.730 0.729 0.723 0.733 0.769

WA Concept & Gram m ar 0.724Form s / Audience Purpose 0.733Sentences & Paragraphs 0.729Spelling / Punc / Capitalization 0.725Writing Process 0.738Concept & Gram m ar 0.772 0.777 0.767 0.755 0.773 0.751 0.740 0.754 0.791Form s / Audience Purpose 0.770 0.772 0.770 0.775 0.780 0.757 0.761 0.775 0.807Sentences & Paragraphs 0.790 0.799 0.792 0.784 0.797 0.767 0.759 0.766 0.798Spelling / Punc / Capitalization 0.791 0.791 0.776 0.774 0.787 0.767 0.752 0.755 0.787Writing Process 0.773 0.776 0.780 0.775 0.778 0.758 0.751 0.773 0.801

WI Language 0.793 0.770 0.758 0.760 0.762 0.760 0.744 0.748 0.758Sen / Para / Conventions 0.805 0.793 0.775 0.764 0.758 0.749 0.735 0.741 0.755Write / Plan / Revise / Edit 0.807 0.789 0.772 0.757 0.753 0.745 0.737 0.744 0.765Write Nonfict / Creative Form s 0.786 0.763 0.745 0.741 0.752 0.751 0.748 0.762 0.784

WY Students Apply Writing Skills 0.726 0.753 0.747 0.746 0.740 0.731 0.731 0.737 0.738Students Use Conventions 0.714 0.731 0.713 0.716 0.713 0.704 0.704 0.706 0.703Students Write: Expos itory 0.690 0.708 0.700 0.711 0.719 0.741 0.733 0.752 0.769Students Write: Express ive 0.632 0.719 0.735 0.748 0.765 0.766 0.774 0.771 0.777

Language Goals Survey WI V2

Language Goals Survey WY V3

Language Goals Survey OH V3

Marginal Reliabilities for Goals of State Content Aligned MAP LANGUAGE USAGE Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in Spring and Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 (cont.)

Grade

Language Goals Survey SC V4

Language Survey w/ Goals SC V5

Language Goals Survey TX V3

Language Goals Survey UT V2

Language Goals Survey VA V2

Language Goals Survey VT V2

Language Goals Survey WA V3

Language Goals Survey WA V4



Table 27.

State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10AK Math Goals Survey 2-5 AK V4 Es tim ation & Computation 0.736 0.742 0.757 0.791

Functions & Relationships 0.747 0.740 0.747 0.745Geom etry 0.686 0.729 0.757 0.783Measurem ent 0.741 0.762 0.782 0.789Numeration 0.734 0.741 0.758 0.783Statis tics & Probability 0.730 0.759 0.773 0.800

Math Goals Survey 6+ AK V4 Es tim ation & Computation 0.791 0.795 0.814 0.814Functions & Relationships 0.753 0.758 0.801 0.793Geom etry 0.800 0.797 0.799 0.811Measurem ent 0.794 0.794 0.798 0.801Numeration 0.785 0.781 0.782 0.776Statis tics & Probability 0.803 0.806 0.793 0.802

AR Math Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 Algebra 0.755 0.782 0.788 0.814Data Analys is & Probability 0.759 0.774 0.785 0.835Geom etry 0.732 0.795 0.802 0.824Measurem ent 0.758 0.795 0.824 0.843Number & Operations 0.729 0.760 0.770 0.819

Math Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 Algebra 0.834 0.846 0.868 0.878Data Analys is & Probability 0.865 0.866 0.880 0.869Geom etry 0.852 0.853 0.868 0.873Measurem ent 0.859 0.872 0.878 0.869Number & Operations 0.853 0.862 0.866 0.877

AZ Math Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 Data Analys is & Probability 0.732 0.761 0.788 0.826Geom etry & Measurem ent 0.720 0.781 0.809 0.835Number Sense & Operations 0.739 0.771 0.793 0.830Patterns & Functions 0.767 0.785 0.802 0.814Structure & Logic 0.781 0.812 0.825 0.839

Math Goals Survey 6+ AZ V3 Algebra & Functions 0.839 0.856 0.861 0.859 0.867Data Analys is & Probability 0.855 0.862 0.860 0.856 0.861Geom etry & Measurem ent 0.849 0.859 0.867 0.862 0.877Number Sense & Operations 0.853 0.867 0.872 0.860 0.864Structure & Logic 0.857 0.862 0.865 0.857 0.871

CA Math Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 Algebra & Functions 0.765 0.780 0.808 0.813Mathem atical Reasoning 0.796 0.814 0.828 0.836Measurem ent & Geom etry 0.754 0.781 0.808 0.840Number Sense 0.771 0.747 0.772 0.827Statis tics & Probability 0.759 0.718 0.784 0.823

Math Goals Survey 6+ CA V2 Algebra & Functions 0.822 0.847 0.865 0.870 0.864Mathem atical Reasoning 0.860 0.859 0.863 0.868 0.862Measurem ent & Geom etry 0.854 0.858 0.858 0.867 0.862Number Sense 0.855 0.865 0.869 0.868 0.862Statis tics & Probability 0.857 0.852 0.854 0.856 0.850

Math Goals Survey 3-5 Poway Data Analys is / Statis tics / and 0.676 0.692 0.730 0.763Geom etry & Spatial Sense 0.697 0.762 0.767 0.784Measurem ent 0.766 0.778 0.804 0.830Number Sense & Operations 0.738 0.732 0.778 0.809Patterns / Functions / Algeb 0.777 0.767 0.735 0.730Problem Solving 0.761 0.771 0.764 0.791

Math Goals Survey 6-8 Poway Data Analys is / Statis tics / and 0.778 0.751 0.752Geom etry & Spatial Sense 0.764 0.763 0.782Measurem ent 0.822 0.817 0.826Number Sense & Operations 0.824 0.807 0.824Patterns / Functions / Algeb 0.742 0.770 0.819Problem Solving 0.799 0.782 0.807

CO Math Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 Algebraic Methods 0.755 0.754 0.753 0.762Computation 0.749 0.761 0.775 0.790Data Analys is & Probability 0.734 0.771 0.796 0.807Geom etric Concepts 0.708 0.753 0.772 0.779Measurem ent 0.726 0.750 0.772 0.783Number Sense 0.750 0.758 0.786 0.806

Grade

Marginal Reliabilities for Goals of State Content Aligned MAP MATHEMATICS Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in Spring and Fall 2008 and Spring 2009




State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10CO Math Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 Algebraic Methods 0.761 0.800 0.816 0.831 0.841

(cont.) Computation 0.806 0.832 0.836 0.847 0.855Data Analys is & Probability 0.819 0.833 0.833 0.841 0.839Geom etric Concepts 0.801 0.816 0.826 0.850 0.854Measurem ent 0.811 0.834 0.843 0.854 0.855Number Sense 0.815 0.830 0.831 0.836 0.834

CT Math Goals Survey 2-5 CT V3 Data analys is 0.866Patterns & Functions 0.803Quantitative relationships 0.856Shapes & s tructures 0.863

Math Goals Survey 6+ CT V3 Data analys is 0.880Patterns & Functions 0.838Quantitative relationships 0.871Shapes & s tructures 0.866

DE Math Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2 Algebraic Reasoning 0.837 0.833 0.841 0.850Geom etry & Measurem ent 0.807 0.815 0.832 0.855Numeric Reasoning 0.801 0.809 0.830 0.862Quantitative Reasoning 0.795 0.799 0.828 0.862

Math Goals Survey 6+ DE V2 Algebraic Reasoning 0.848 0.871 0.887 0.905 0.902Geom etry & Measurem ent 0.870 0.878 0.884 0.904 0.899Numeric Reasoning 0.863 0.877 0.884 0.900 0.894Quantitative Reasoning 0.867 0.875 0.878 0.895 0.885

FL Math Goals Survey 2-5 FL V3 Algebraic Thinking 0.705 0.720 0.738 0.779Data Analys is & Probability 0.683 0.740 0.778 0.829Geom etry & Spatial Sense 0.647 0.729 0.763 0.804Measurem ent 0.685 0.740 0.755 0.811Number Sense & Operations 0.660 0.724 0.723 0.797

Math Goals Survey 6+ FL V3 Algebraic Thinking 0.799 0.813 0.832 0.845 0.840Data Analys is & Probability 0.829 0.835 0.839 0.856 0.845Geom etry & Spatial Sense 0.826 0.836 0.851 0.874 0.869Measurem ent 0.828 0.833 0.851 0.861 0.859Number Sense & Operations 0.816 0.825 0.837 0.848 0.850

GA Math Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 Algebra 0.627 0.676 0.704 0.711Data Analys is & Probability 0.703 0.722 0.715 0.719Geom etry 0.680 0.698 0.722 0.746Measurem ent 0.668 0.697 0.706 0.778Numbers & Operations 0.640 0.609 0.667 0.734Process Skills 0.713 0.731 0.741 0.761

Math Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 Algebra 0.738 0.764 0.793 0.802Data Analys is & Probability 0.770 0.790 0.788 0.800Geom etry 0.754 0.768 0.784 0.829Measurem ent 0.809 0.799 0.795 0.821Numbers & Operations 0.752 0.773 0.789 0.808Process Skills 0.789 0.789 0.788 0.804

HI Math Goals Survey 2-5 HI V2 Data / Stats / Probability 0.810 0.847Geom etry & Spatial Sense 0.823 0.833Measurem ent 0.830 0.847Numbers & Operations 0.792 0.821Patterns / Functions / Alg 0.793 0.799

Math Goals Survey 6+ HI V2 Data / Stats / Probability 0.856 0.850Geom etry & Spatial Sense 0.847 0.850Measurem ent 0.848 0.841Numbers & Operations 0.830 0.840Patterns / Functions / Alg 0.810 0.820

Marginal Reliabilities for Goals of State Content Aligned MAP MATHEMATICS Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in Spring and Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 (cont.)

Grade



Table 27 (cont.)

State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10IA Data Analys is 0.627 0.650 0.691 0.733

Geom etry 0.602 0.668 0.700 0.723Measures 0.683 0.708 0.715 0.733Numeration 0.671 0.688 0.701 0.741Operations 0.644 0.692 0.711 0.742Patterns / Rules / Functions 0.658 0.685 0.673 0.683Problem Solving 0.703 0.722 0.723 0.740Data Analys is 0.748 0.747 0.758 0.745 0.747Geom etry 0.742 0.762 0.767 0.795 0.802Measures 0.739 0.766 0.769 0.757 0.766Numeration 0.747 0.769 0.765 0.766 0.758Operations 0.739 0.761 0.779 0.776 0.785Patterns / Rules / Functions 0.687 0.715 0.751 0.751 0.765Problem Solving 0.751 0.769 0.780 0.781 0.795Algebra 0.698 0.705 0.699 0.717Computation 0.681 0.709 0.711 0.759Geom etry 0.635 0.674 0.734 0.764Measurem ent 0.673 0.692 0.700 0.731Numbers & Relationships 0.661 0.672 0.679 0.759Statis tics & Probability 0.638 0.655 0.698 0.743Algebra 0.728 0.756 0.787 0.805 0.815Computation 0.761 0.783 0.800 0.813 0.823Geom etry 0.775 0.789 0.794 0.827 0.841Measurem ent 0.766 0.782 0.795 0.806 0.814Numbers & Relationships 0.773 0.791 0.797 0.800 0.794Statis tics & Probability 0.774 0.785 0.792 0.791 0.793Geom etry & Spatial Sense 0.710 0.771 0.750Measurem ent 0.738 0.759 0.763Number & Operation 0.691 0.723 0.756Patterns & Algebra 0.732 0.746 0.732Statis tics & Probability 0.655 0.727 0.768Geom etry & Spatial Sense 0.807 0.824 0.810Measurem ent 0.809 0.834 0.840Number & Operation 0.810 0.823 0.827Patterns & Algebra 0.777 0.796 0.794Statis tics & Probability 0.823 0.831 0.818

ID Algebra & Functions 0.744 0.738Data Analys is & Probability 0.741 0.734Geom etry 0.640 0.686Measurem ent 0.752 0.749Number & Operation 0.729 0.714Algebra & Functions 0.743 0.780 0.789 0.814Data Analys is & Probability 0.746 0.795 0.806 0.817Geom etry 0.752 0.780 0.791 0.803Measurem ent 0.763 0.804 0.819 0.832Number & Operation 0.759 0.807 0.826 0.835

IL Math Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 Algebra 0.785 0.791 0.798 0.805 0.808Data Analys is & Probability 0.762 0.779 0.805 0.840 0.845Geom etry 0.742 0.791 0.800 0.819 0.823Measurem ent 0.777 0.798 0.805 0.822 0.825Number Sense 0.780 0.784 0.806 0.825 0.829

Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 Algebra 0.807 0.804 0.829 0.849 0.861 0.873Data Analys is & Probability 0.848 0.837 0.837 0.835 0.846 0.847Geom etry 0.837 0.828 0.830 0.835 0.869 0.877Measurem ent 0.851 0.843 0.848 0.852 0.864 0.870Number Sense 0.852 0.839 0.847 0.854 0.865 0.869


Grade

Math Goals Survey 2-5 Eas tern Iowa Consortium V2

Math Goals Survey 6+ Eas tern Iowa Cornsortium V2

Math Goals Survey 2-5 Mid-Iowa Consortium V2

Math Goals Survey 6+ Mid-Iowa Consortium V2

Math Goals Survey 2-5 Loess Hills V2

Math Goals Survey 6+ Loess Hills V2

Math Survey w/ Goals 2-4 ID V3

Math Survey w/ Goals 5+ ID V3




State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10IL Algebra 0.793 0.785 0.795

(cont.) Data Analys is & Probability 0.743 0.821 0.836Geom etry 0.791 0.794 0.805Measurem ent 0.782 0.812 0.819Number Sense 0.770 0.814 0.810Algebra 0.776Data Analys is & Probability 0.821Geom etry 0.792Measurem ent 0.816Number Sense 0.827

IN Math Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 Algebra & Functions 0.681 0.686 0.701 0.717 0.764Computation 0.647 0.681 0.689 0.726 0.770Geom etry 0.645 0.680 0.714 0.735 0.755Measurem ent 0.689 0.694 0.717 0.751 0.795Number Sense 0.685 0.651 0.667 0.717 0.765Problem Solving 0.721 0.723 0.733 0.749 0.787Stats / Data / Probability 0.637 0.644 0.699 0.755 0.790

Math Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 Algebra & Functions 0.697 0.707 0.743 0.768 0.775 0.811Computation 0.763 0.749 0.777 0.790 0.795 0.819Geom etry 0.748 0.747 0.763 0.769 0.801 0.831Measurem ent 0.782 0.759 0.776 0.779 0.777 0.805Number Sense 0.772 0.765 0.783 0.788 0.789 0.813Problem Solving 0.781 0.771 0.787 0.793 0.799 0.821Stats / Data / Probability 0.774 0.771 0.780 0.777 0.773 0.788

KS Math Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 Algebra 0.806 0.818 0.823 0.827Data 0.798 0.812 0.852 0.871Geom etry 0.788 0.813 0.839 0.849Number & Com putation 0.791 0.795 0.801 0.834

Math Goals Survey 6+ KS V2 Algebra 0.823 0.847 0.862 0.873 0.883Data 0.858 0.870 0.877 0.878 0.872Geom etry 0.846 0.865 0.869 0.886 0.889Number & Com putation 0.846 0.866 0.876 0.883 0.885

KY Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Algebraic Ideas 0.671 0.650 0.687 0.712Fractions & Decim als 0.615 0.588 0.623 0.706Geom etry 0.634 0.670 0.708 0.763Measurem ent 0.676 0.697 0.691 0.735Number Computation 0.625 0.638 0.665 0.712Numbers & Place Value 0.667 0.694 0.642 0.719Probability & Statis tics 0.649 0.676 0.667 0.760

Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Algebraic Ideas 0.804 0.809 0.836 0.861 0.851Geom etry 0.820 0.815 0.833 0.844 0.855Measurem ent 0.827 0.834 0.843 0.839 0.842Number Computation 0.816 0.831 0.846 0.865 0.854Probability & Statis tics 0.822 0.827 0.840 0.843 0.819

Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V4 Algebraic Thinking 0.778 0.780 0.785 0.791Data Analys is / Probability 0.751 0.759 0.776 0.814Geom etry 0.736 0.774 0.779 0.794Measurem ent 0.756 0.784 0.789 0.806Number & Operations 0.767 0.780 0.773 0.799

Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V4 Algebraic Thinking 0.796 0.820 0.837 0.854 0.857Data Analys is / Probability 0.827 0.838 0.836 0.846 0.840Geom etry 0.808 0.828 0.835 0.853 0.859Measurem ent 0.816 0.835 0.844 0.848 0.846Number & Operations 0.806 0.834 0.849 0.863 0.860

LA Math Goals Survey 6+ LA V2 Algebra & Functions 0.815 0.842 0.847Data / Prob / Discrete Math 0.821 0.850 0.855Geom etry 0.824 0.853 0.864Measurem ent 0.823 0.856 0.860Number; Num ber Relations 0.838 0.857 0.858


Grade

Math Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 (NSAE)

Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 (NSAE)



Table 27 (cont.)

State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10MA Math Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 Data Analys is & Probability 0.739 0.774 0.818 0.853

Geom etry 0.728 0.789 0.818 0.836Measurem ent 0.738 0.785 0.823 0.837Number Sense & Operations 0.761 0.779 0.809 0.837Patterns & Algebra 0.770 0.786 0.802 0.805

Math Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 Data Analys is & Probability 0.860 0.880 0.881 0.888 0.877Geom etry 0.849 0.868 0.876 0.890 0.885Measurem ent 0.852 0.870 0.883 0.887 0.882Number Sense & Operations 0.850 0.874 0.879 0.885 0.877Patterns & Algebra 0.809 0.837 0.854 0.875 0.865

ME Math Goals Survey 2-5 ME V3 Computation 0.660 0.678 0.746 0.790Geom etry 0.621 0.716 0.760 0.775Mathem atical Decis ion Making 0.697 0.728 0.761 0.785Measurem ent 0.677 0.692 0.754 0.790Numbers & Num ber Sense 0.693 0.706 0.748 0.785Patterns 0.706 0.715 0.731 0.737

Math Goals Survey 6+ ME V3 Computation 0.793 0.809 0.817 0.841 0.855Geom etry 0.795 0.802 0.803 0.842 0.856Mathem atical Decis ion Making 0.799 0.806 0.803 0.818 0.829Measurem ent 0.791 0.814 0.813 0.829 0.839Numbers & Num ber Sense 0.812 0.820 0.820 0.828 0.837Patterns 0.755 0.777 0.807 0.830 0.844

Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 ME Algebra 0.818 0.825 0.820 0.829Data 0.790 0.805 0.815 0.838Geom etry 0.759 0.796 0.820 0.841Number 0.785 0.802 0.828 0.845Algebra 0.826 0.844 0.865 0.873 0.889Data 0.858 0.867 0.874 0.875 0.879Geom etry 0.851 0.864 0.874 0.879 0.892Number 0.857 0.868 0.877 0.879 0.890

MI Math Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 Algebra 0.785 0.777 0.770 0.777Data & Probability 0.750 0.744 0.781 0.816Geom etry 0.737 0.758 0.789 0.814Measurem ent 0.773 0.785 0.804 0.814Number & Operations 0.768 0.771 0.788 0.817

Math Goals Survey 6+ MI V3 Algebra 0.807 0.832 0.844 0.857 0.865Data & Probability 0.840 0.846 0.845 0.850 0.853Geom etry 0.832 0.841 0.846 0.872 0.876Measurem ent 0.830 0.843 0.848 0.860 0.866Number & Operations 0.837 0.852 0.858 0.865 0.872

MN Math Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 Functions & Algebra 0.823 0.833 0.829 0.824 0.879Geom etry & Measurem ent 0.812 0.833 0.844 0.856 0.889Number Sense & Com putation 0.825 0.822 0.834 0.851 0.899Statis tics & Probability 0.796 0.804 0.842 0.874 0.907

Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 Functions & Algebra 0.838 0.830 0.845 0.859 0.869 0.887Geom etry & Measurem ent 0.875 0.862 0.868 0.871 0.888 0.901Number Sense & Com putation 0.876 0.865 0.874 0.879 0.885 0.894Statis tics & Probability 0.882 0.866 0.871 0.870 0.874 0.886

MO Algebraic Relationships 0.790 0.777 0.773 0.779Data & Probability 0.775 0.795 0.792 0.793Geom etric Relationships 0.783 0.767 0.776 0.797Measurem ent 0.751 0.766 0.794 0.805Number & Operations 0.774 0.758 0.750 0.798Algebraic Relationships 0.791 0.813 0.841Data & Probability 0.825 0.833 0.836Geom etric Relationships 0.814 0.840 0.848Measurem ent 0.827 0.849 0.853Number & Operations 0.817 0.832 0.845


Grade

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ MO V4

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ ME V4

Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MO V4



Grades

Table 27 (cont.)

State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10MS Algebra 0.695 0.755 0.753 0.785

Data Analys is & Probability 0.685 0.722 0.792 0.847Geom etry 0.676 0.751 0.770 0.795Measurem ent 0.710 0.770 0.794 0.821Number & Operations 0.688 0.724 0.726 0.775Algebra 0.798 0.809 0.843 0.835Data Analys is & Probability 0.826 0.827 0.834 0.817Geom etry 0.792 0.813 0.834 0.834Measurem ent 0.813 0.825 0.832 0.826Number & Operations 0.785 0.818 0.829 0.820

MT Math Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 Algebraic Concepts 0.751 0.772 0.780 0.786Data & Statis tics 0.735 0.741 0.765 0.807Measurem ent 0.757 0.778 0.781 0.800Numbers & Operations 0.734 0.744 0.765 0.805Shape & Geom etry 0.714 0.763 0.781 0.805

Math Goals Survey 6+ MT V2 Algebraic Concepts 0.769 0.792 0.820 0.831 0.842Data & Statis tics 0.802 0.814 0.823 0.822 0.830Measurem ent 0.802 0.821 0.835 0.835 0.855Numbers & Operations 0.807 0.827 0.839 0.839 0.853Shape & Geom etry 0.805 0.818 0.823 0.838 0.863

NC Math Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 Algebra 0.767 0.777 0.755 0.771Data Analys is & Probability 0.735 0.743 0.786 0.820Geom etry 0.723 0.772 0.776 0.806Measurem ent 0.749 0.789 0.799 0.821Number & Operations 0.753 0.751 0.766 0.788

Math Goals Survey 6+ NC V3 Algebra 0.793 0.805 0.840 0.803 0.786Data Analys is & Probability 0.836 0.834 0.846 0.788 0.752Geom etry 0.808 0.815 0.834 0.800 0.772Measurem ent 0.827 0.836 0.854 0.823 0.807Number & Operations 0.815 0.823 0.857 0.819 0.809

NCNSP HS Math V1 Algebra 0.853 0.846Data Analys is & Probability 0.846 0.825Geom etry 0.850 0.844Measurem ent 0.857 0.839Number & Operations 0.864 0.854

ND Math Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 Algebra / Func / Patterns 0.745 0.745 0.754 0.766Data / Stats / Probability 0.732 0.718 0.757 0.798Geom etry & Spatial Sense 0.696 0.732 0.758 0.782Measurem ent 0.744 0.752 0.770 0.788Number & Operation 0.724 0.729 0.760 0.791

Math Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 Algebra / Func / Patterns 0.772 0.790 0.820 0.831 0.839Data / Stats / Probability 0.804 0.811 0.818 0.822 0.821Geom etry & Spatial Sense 0.803 0.813 0.815 0.845 0.859Measurem ent 0.803 0.814 0.827 0.842 0.848Number & Operation 0.797 0.813 0.833 0.838 0.847

NE Math Goals Survey 2-5 NE V2 Algebraic Concepts 0.682 0.699 0.735 0.723Computation & Estimation 0.682 0.714 0.731 0.745Data Analys is & Probability 0.650 0.655 0.714 0.748Geom etry & Spatial Concept 0.623 0.680 0.745 0.762Measurem ent 0.672 0.703 0.747 0.759Numeration & Num ber Sense 0.661 0.691 0.723 0.752

Math Goals Survey 6+ NE V2 Algebraic Concepts 0.721 0.768 0.790 0.813 0.808Computation & Estimation 0.755 0.804 0.808 0.828 0.824Data Analys is & Probability 0.766 0.785 0.790 0.810 0.788Geom etry & Spatial Concept 0.758 0.794 0.787 0.825 0.824Measurem ent 0.792 0.812 0.815 0.832 0.819Numeration & Num ber Sense 0.791 0.810 0.810 0.818 0.807


Grade

Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 MS V3

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ MS V3



Table 27 (cont.)

State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10NH Math Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4 Data / Stats / Probability 0.773 0.778 0.815 0.852

Functions & Algebra 0.820 0.806 0.798 0.806Geom etry & Measurem ent 0.780 0.796 0.812 0.827Number & Operations 0.808 0.801 0.816 0.841

Math Goals Survey 6+ NH V4 Data / Stats / Probability 0.851 0.858 0.852 0.866 0.873Functions & Algebra 0.810 0.829 0.852 0.882 0.893Geom etry & Measurem ent 0.844 0.857 0.856 0.877 0.891Number & Operations 0.851 0.861 0.866 0.883 0.889

NJ Math Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 Data / Prob / Discrete Math 0.716 0.752 0.813 0.835Geom etry & Measurem ent 0.733 0.776 0.816 0.833Mathem atical Processes 0.783 0.807 0.830 0.836Number & Operations 0.738 0.750 0.790 0.827Patterns & Algebra 0.757 0.771 0.786 0.800

Math Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 Data / Prob / Discrete Math 0.838 0.852 0.850 0.840 0.845Geom etry & Measurem ent 0.842 0.857 0.855 0.860 0.866Mathem atical Processes 0.849 0.865 0.869 0.854 0.856Number & Operations 0.842 0.861 0.868 0.855 0.864Patterns & Algebra 0.806 0.836 0.851 0.844 0.853

NM Math Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 Algebra 0.753 0.772 0.782 0.790Data Analys is & Probability 0.743 0.781 0.802 0.820Geom etry 0.716 0.775 0.798 0.818Measurem ent 0.742 0.778 0.789 0.802Numbers & Operations 0.730 0.771 0.795 0.822

Math Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 Algebra 0.795 0.822 0.840 0.847 0.852Data Analys is & Probability 0.834 0.846 0.850 0.844 0.845Geom etry 0.828 0.843 0.854 0.862 0.872Measurem ent 0.814 0.833 0.845 0.846 0.851Numbers & Operations 0.826 0.843 0.851 0.853 0.857

NV Math Goals Survey 6+ NV V2 Data Analys is 0.823Measurem ent 0.836Numbers & Com putation 0.825Patterns / Func / Algebra 0.774Spatial Rel / Geom etry 0.809

Math Goals Survey 2-5 NV V3 Algebra 0.694 0.720 0.739 0.759Data Analys is 0.707 0.665 0.717 0.816Geom etry / Logic 0.655 0.711 0.748 0.804Measurem ent 0.698 0.740 0.753 0.798Number Sense & Com putation 0.697 0.713 0.718 0.788

Math Goals Survey 6+ NV V3 Algebra 0.752 0.784 0.808 0.820Data Analys is 0.807 0.818 0.820 0.827Geom etry / Logic 0.785 0.810 0.824 0.837Measurem ent 0.806 0.817 0.821 0.830Number Sense & Com putation 0.785 0.815 0.827 0.830Algebra 0.765 0.774 0.770 0.771Data Analys is 0.747 0.747 0.761 0.805Geom etry / Logic 0.710 0.751 0.790 0.807Measurem ent 0.748 0.777 0.789 0.796Number Sense & Com putation 0.754 0.771 0.753 0.767Algebra 0.787 0.813 0.837 0.842 0.840Data Analys is 0.810 0.832 0.837 0.833 0.821Geom etry / Logic 0.793 0.826 0.835 0.849 0.850Measurem ent 0.812 0.833 0.836 0.847 0.843Number Sense & Com putation 0.803 0.830 0.848 0.851 0.849

Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 NV V4

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ NV V4


Grade




State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10NY Math Goals Survey 2-5 NY V2 Algebra 0.779 0.779 0.783 0.788

Geom etry 0.724 0.760 0.778 0.805Measurem ent 0.776 0.794 0.806 0.820Number Sense & Operations 0.753 0.769 0.784 0.803Statis tics & Probability 0.749 0.746 0.768 0.814

Math Goals Survey 6+ NY V2 Algebra 0.802 0.823 0.845 0.857 0.880Geom etry 0.825 0.840 0.838 0.853 0.876Measurem ent 0.835 0.845 0.842 0.844 0.860Number Sense & Operations 0.829 0.843 0.847 0.851 0.868Statis tics & Probability 0.833 0.843 0.836 0.845 0.856

OH Math Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3 Data Analys is & Probability 0.750 0.775 0.806 0.831Geom etry & Spatial Sense 0.739 0.807 0.827 0.837Measurem ent 0.753 0.799 0.822 0.835Number Sense & Operations 0.742 0.775 0.801 0.831Patterns & Functions 0.763 0.780 0.789 0.804

Math Goals Survey 6+ OH V3 Data Analys is & Probability 0.844 0.856 0.863 0.875 0.870Geom etry & Spatial Sense 0.838 0.849 0.853 0.883 0.887Measurem ent 0.841 0.859 0.866 0.878 0.875Number Sense & Operations 0.832 0.858 0.867 0.880 0.879Patterns & Functions 0.822 0.842 0.858 0.879 0.878

OK Math Goals Survey 2-5 OK V2 Data Analys is & Probability 0.689 0.689 0.714 0.760Geom etry 0.637 0.728 0.758 0.768Measurem ent 0.703 0.715 0.754 0.774Number Sense 0.714 0.726 0.731 0.762Operations & Com putation 0.692 0.722 0.731 0.736Patterns 0.708 0.724 0.731 0.755

Math Goals Survey 6+ OK V2 Data Analys is & Probability 0.791 0.795 0.800Geom etry 0.781 0.802 0.804Measurem ent 0.796 0.794 0.799Number Sense 0.807 0.813 0.819Operations & Com putation 0.799 0.806 0.815Patterns 0.763 0.778 0.805

OR Math Goals Survey 2-5 OR V4 Algebraic Relationships 0.763 0.782 0.788 0.796Calculations & Estimations 0.723 0.769 0.790 0.804Geom etry 0.673 0.748 0.766 0.793Mathem atical Problem Solving 0.755 0.793 0.808 0.801Measurem ent 0.725 0.779 0.796 0.800Statis tics & Probability 0.708 0.758 0.782 0.808

Math Goals Survey 6+ OR V4 Algebraic Relationships 0.792 0.815 0.828 0.848 0.825Calculations & Estimations 0.829 0.834 0.838 0.844 0.833Geom etry 0.817 0.823 0.835 0.852 0.843Mathem atical Problem Solving 0.824 0.835 0.838 0.855 0.844Measurem ent 0.828 0.840 0.844 0.857 0.833Statis tics & Probability 0.817 0.816 0.819 0.821 0.828

PA Math Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 Algebraic Concepts 0.780 0.786 0.763 0.769Data Analys is & Probability 0.755 0.746 0.795 0.844Geom etry 0.730 0.795 0.795 0.809Measurem ent 0.794 0.804 0.817 0.831Numbers & Operations 0.779 0.756 0.755 0.784

Math Goals Survey 6+ PA V2 Algebraic Concepts 0.804 0.816 0.823 0.828 0.831Data Analys is & Probability 0.842 0.836 0.836 0.832 0.810Geom etry 0.820 0.817 0.816 0.844 0.830Measurem ent 0.851 0.843 0.844 0.851 0.841Numbers & Operations 0.843 0.841 0.844 0.847 0.838


Grade



Table 27 (cont.)

State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10RI Functions & Algebra 0.817 0.818 0.821 0.834

Geom etry & Measurem ent 0.767 0.789 0.802 0.852Number & Operations 0.799 0.804 0.839 0.860Statis tics & Probability 0.782 0.797 0.828 0.871Functions & Algebra 0.803 0.829 0.865 0.867Geom etry & Measurem ent 0.830 0.845 0.858 0.874Number & Operations 0.848 0.855 0.866 0.877Statis tics & Probability 0.847 0.848 0.855 0.859

SC Math Goals Survey 2-5 SC V4 Algebra 0.735 0.755 0.779 0.796Data Analys is & Probability 0.711 0.726 0.778 0.832Geom etry 0.691 0.756 0.782 0.798Measurem ent 0.730 0.764 0.794 0.824Number & Operations 0.691 0.714 0.770 0.823

Math Goals Survey 6+ SC V4 Algebra 0.801 0.830 0.851 0.855 0.879Data Analys is & Probability 0.841 0.847 0.851 0.846 0.863Geom etry 0.814 0.821 0.835 0.852 0.876Measurem ent 0.831 0.838 0.846 0.842 0.857Number & Operations 0.826 0.845 0.856 0.859 0.878Algebra 0.750 0.754 0.778 0.797Data Analys is & Probability 0.728 0.756 0.781 0.840Geom etry 0.719 0.783 0.807 0.826Measurem ent 0.775 0.796 0.803 0.829Number & Operations 0.729 0.751 0.768 0.803Algebra 0.814 0.838 0.848 0.855 0.874Data Analys is & Probability 0.843 0.856 0.853 0.849 0.861Geom etry 0.818 0.832 0.831 0.841 0.866Measurem ent 0.836 0.848 0.844 0.840 0.853Number & Operations 0.818 0.846 0.852 0.851 0.868

TN Math Goals Survey 2-5 TN V4 Algebra 0.691 0.760 0.773 0.795Data Analys is & Probability 0.632 0.718 0.792 0.823Geom etry 0.645 0.753 0.778 0.805Measurem ent 0.702 0.755 0.791 0.830Number & Operations 0.653 0.698 0.759 0.796

TN Math Goals Survey 6+ TN V4 Algebra 0.798Data Analys is & Probability 0.836Geom etry 0.820Measurem ent 0.840Number & Operations 0.838

TX Math Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 Geom etry & Spat Reasoning 0.699 0.755 0.730 0.739Measurem ent 0.751 0.794 0.784 0.789Number / Operat / Reasoning 0.711 0.752 0.737 0.771Patterns & Relationships 0.704 0.747 0.737 0.750Probability & Statis tics 0.753 0.774 0.736 0.801Underlying Process / Tools 0.772 0.797 0.776 0.771

Math Goals Survey 6+ TX V3 Geom etry & Spat Reasoning 0.794 0.814 0.829 0.874 0.887Measurem ent 0.837 0.855 0.855 0.880 0.889Number / Operat / Reasoning 0.829 0.837 0.835 0.855 0.870Patterns & Relationships 0.795 0.804 0.831 0.863 0.885Probability & Statis tics 0.833 0.849 0.852 0.867 0.884Underlying Process / Tools 0.829 0.841 0.847 0.872 0.889

UT Data Analys is & Probability 0.748 0.762 0.783 0.827Geom etry 0.726 0.775 0.797 0.818Measurem ent 0.756 0.805 0.811 0.835Number & Operations 0.757 0.781 0.782 0.820Patterns & Algebra 0.769 0.778 0.789 0.807Data Analys is & Probability 0.820 0.836 0.839 0.835 0.839Geom etry 0.806 0.831 0.836 0.846 0.864Measurem ent 0.833 0.837 0.848 0.836 0.852Number & Operations 0.819 0.839 0.847 0.845 0.846Patterns & Algebra 0.802 0.820 0.831 0.844 0.852


Grade

Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 RI V4

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ RI V4

Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ UT V4

Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 UT V4




State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10VA Math Goals Survey 2-5 VA V2 Computation & Estimation 0.707 0.753 0.766 0.773

Functions & Algebra 0.767 0.759 0.746 0.762Geom etry 0.711 0.739 0.762 0.777Measurem ent 0.736 0.764 0.765 0.800Number & Num ber Sense 0.721 0.742 0.757 0.779Probability & Statis tics 0.727 0.750 0.748 0.806

Math Goals Survey 6+ VA V2 Computation & Estimation 0.774 0.779 0.816 0.826Functions & Algebra 0.778 0.790 0.815 0.832Geom etry 0.794 0.777 0.819 0.835Measurem ent 0.814 0.800 0.815 0.817Number & Num ber Sense 0.800 0.780 0.811 0.814Probability & Statis tics 0.809 0.797 0.805 0.817

VT Math Goals Survey 2-5 VT V2 Functions & Algebra 0.800 0.803 0.807Geom etry & Measurem ent 0.776 0.800 0.823Number & Operation 0.778 0.809 0.836Statis tics & Probability 0.771 0.788 0.822

Math Goals Survey 6+ VT V2 Functions & Algebra 0.805 0.843 0.884 0.887Geom etry & Measurem ent 0.843 0.873 0.887 0.891Number & Operation 0.839 0.870 0.890 0.885Statis tics & Probability 0.847 0.866 0.889 0.876

WA Math Goals Survey 2-5 WA V3 Algebraic Sense 0.798 0.796 0.785 0.788Geom etric Sense 0.745 0.768 0.812 0.836Measurem ent 0.795 0.815 0.826 0.835Number Sense 0.772 0.793 0.809 0.833Probability & Statis tics 0.786 0.783 0.805 0.833

Math Goals Survey 2-5 WA V4 Algebraic Sense 0.786 0.787 0.793 0.792Geom etric Sense 0.699 0.761 0.807 0.812Measurem ent 0.771 0.799 0.822 0.826Number Sense 0.763 0.778 0.800 0.815Probability & Statis tics 0.750 0.759 0.794 0.817

Math Goals Survey 6+ WA V3 Algebraic Sense 0.807 0.839 0.848 0.853 0.867Geom etric Sense 0.837 0.852 0.856 0.874 0.882Measurem ent 0.847 0.858 0.862 0.871 0.882Number Sense 0.846 0.858 0.862 0.864 0.873Probability & Statis tics 0.841 0.855 0.851 0.854 0.859

Math Goals Survey 6+ WA V4 Algebraic Sense 0.804 0.820 0.840 0.847 0.856Geom etric Sense 0.836 0.844 0.850 0.863 0.867Measurem ent 0.850 0.858 0.862 0.868 0.870Number Sense 0.833 0.845 0.855 0.856 0.856Probability & Statis tics 0.838 0.843 0.845 0.849 0.853

WI Math Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 Algebraic Relationships 0.776 0.774 0.779 0.780Geom etry 0.742 0.764 0.778 0.785Measurem ent 0.772 0.784 0.798 0.806Process & Num ber 0.760 0.767 0.789 0.816Statis tics & Probability 0.761 0.745 0.766 0.803

Math Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 Algebraic Relationships 0.784 0.786 0.810 0.834 0.847 0.856Geom etry 0.809 0.814 0.825 0.829 0.859 0.864Measurem ent 0.827 0.823 0.840 0.844 0.860 0.862Process & Num ber 0.831 0.826 0.839 0.849 0.861 0.864Statis tics & Probability 0.824 0.819 0.824 0.826 0.833 0.830

WY Math Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 Algebra 0.758 0.760 0.759 0.772Data Analys is & Probability 0.749 0.771 0.763 0.760Geom etry 0.731 0.767 0.775 0.804Measurem ent 0.752 0.780 0.795 0.808Number Concepts & Operations 0.747 0.755 0.749 0.788

Math Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 Algebra 0.750 0.779 0.813 0.828 0.830Data Analys is & Probability 0.816 0.826 0.835 0.827 0.819Geom etry 0.798 0.815 0.823 0.843 0.852Measurem ent 0.806 0.830 0.847 0.853 0.851Number Concepts & Operations 0.794 0.813 0.836 0.847 0.848


Grade



Table 28.

State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10AZ AZ General Science V1 Earth & Space Science 0.643 0.736

Life Science 0.632 0.755Phys ical Science 0.667 0.758

CO CO General Science V2 Earth & Space Science: 0.652 0.660 0.677 0.693 0.699 0.717 0.733 0.725Life Science 0.627 0.628 0.684 0.699 0.737 0.732 0.760 0.763Phys ical Science 0.647 0.654 0.658 0.690 0.702 0.719 0.756 0.750

DE DE General Science V1 Earth: Space / Sys tem 0.636 0.670 0.695 0.746Ecology / Continuity 0.616 0.693 0.717 0.754Materials ; Energy Effects 0.626 0.658 0.673 0.734

GA GA General Science V1 Earth Science 0.634 0.647 0.663 0.735 0.709 0.680Life Science 0.596 0.631 0.692 0.670 0.759 0.717Phys ical Science 0.591 0.598 0.654 0.659 0.674 0.732

IL IL General Science V1 Earth & Space Sciences 0.662 0.665 0.695 0.669 0.678 0.650 0.611 0.651Life Sciences 0.636 0.639 0.674 0.659 0.701 0.666 0.672 0.724Phys ical Sciences 0.664 0.662 0.665 0.676 0.692 0.681 0.675 0.684

IN IN General Science V1 Earth & Space Science 0.577 0.586 0.636 0.665 0.692 0.703Living Environm ent 0.542 0.618 0.644 0.677 0.716 0.726Phys ical Science 0.574 0.606 0.607 0.658 0.683 0.716

KS KS General Science V1 Earth Sys tem / Dynam ics 0.584 0.624 0.621 0.640 0.663 0.661 0.687 0.684Living Sys tem s & the 0.538 0.605 0.604 0.650 0.680 0.675 0.683 0.730Phys ical Science 0.603 0.620 0.603 0.640 0.657 0.672 0.695 0.713

KY KY General Science V2 Biological Science 0.465 0.520 0.591 0.578 0.627 0.643 0.646 0.668 0.689Earth / Space Science 0.461 0.569 0.630 0.579 0.598 0.628 0.634 0.641 0.639Phys ical Science 0.539 0.555 0.555 0.485 0.524 0.593 0.602 0.654 0.638Unifying Concepts 0.502 0.567 0.610 0.553 0.607 0.628 0.632 0.636 0.648

ME ME General Science V2 Cells / Class ify Life 0.477 0.475 0.502 0.523 0.558 0.544 0.529 0.606Earth & Universe 0.473 0.466 0.479 0.516 0.527 0.533 0.540 0.544

0.487 0.504 0.526 0.511 0.519 0.525 0.503 0.564

Energy & Motion 0.480 0.511 0.476 0.515 0.528 0.541 0.561 0.566Structure of Matter 0.498 0.489 0.485 0.504 0.514 0.534 0.537 0.539

MI MI General Science V1 Earth Science 0.626 0.637 0.658 0.664 0.687 0.685 0.680 0.712 0.708Life Science 0.609 0.599 0.632 0.648 0.674 0.702 0.685 0.734 0.749Phys ical Science 0.650 0.646 0.668 0.666 0.677 0.687 0.680 0.716 0.737

MN MN General Science V1 Earth & Space Science 0.644 0.654 0.665 0.675 0.691 0.725 0.702 0.719Life Science 0.636 0.646 0.669 0.682 0.744 0.724 0.708 0.773Phys ical Science 0.648 0.655 0.657 0.707 0.703 0.703 0.717 0.750

MT MT General Science V2 Earth & Space Science 0.660 0.654Life Science 0.722 0.682Phys ical Science: 0.657 0.693

ND ND General Science V1 Earth & Space Science 0.621 0.657 0.666 0.659 0.662 0.704 0.698 0.6700.596 0.650 0.667 0.694 0.719 0.705 0.708 0.729

Phys ical Science 0.631 0.619 0.659 0.668 0.643 0.665 0.721 0.696NE NE General Science V1 Earth & Space Science 0.649 0.658 0.625

Life Science 0.674 0.665 0.690Phys ical Science 0.615 0.673 0.656

NH NH General Science V2 Earth Space Science 0.638 0.646 0.630 0.663 0.691Life Science 0.630 0.663 0.669 0.668 0.684Phys ical Science 0.618 0.642 0.618 0.653 0.714

NJ NJ General Science V1 Char of Life; Env Studies 0.655 0.660 0.686Chem is try & Phys ics 0.626 0.667 0.666

0.631 0.658 0.673

NM NM General Science V1 Earth & Space Science 0.572 0.616 0.648 0.664 0.703 0.698 0.700 0.720 0.718Life Science 0.546 0.605 0.651 0.688 0.704 0.733 0.734 0.746 0.763Phys ical Science 0.583 0.651 0.658 0.683 0.693 0.682 0.719 0.739 0.745

NV NV General Science V1 Earth & Space Science 0.703 0.672 0.689 0.682 0.680Life Science 0.702 0.705 0.712 0.715 0.725Phys ical Science 0.703 0.663 0.702 0.691 0.709

Grade

Marginal Reliabilities for Goals of State Content Aligned MAP SCIENCE Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in Spring and Fall 2008 and Spring 2009

Ecology / Change / Continuity

Life Science & Environm ent

Earth Science; As tro / Space




State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10OH OH General Science V1 Earth & Space Sciences 0.673 0.704 0.719 0.732 0.738 0.722 0.766 0.750

Life Science 0.663 0.691 0.711 0.738 0.748 0.727 0.775 0.779Phys ical Science 0.679 0.708 0.699 0.728 0.736 0.719 0.780 0.777

SC Chem is try 0.823Phys ics 0.814Chem is try 0.819Phys ics 0.824

SC General Science V1 Earth Science 0.627 0.635 0.684 0.671 0.700 0.693 0.737 0.737Life Science 0.621 0.616 0.652 0.674 0.717 0.744 0.745 0.735Phys ical Science 0.652 0.648 0.648 0.652 0.685 0.707 0.723 0.762Earth & Space 0.656 0.675 0.691 0.696 0.699 0.706 0.751 0.744Life Science 0.636 0.650 0.699 0.698 0.724 0.728 0.752 0.764Phys ical Science 0.660 0.672 0.697 0.683 0.691 0.724 0.753 0.757

SC 3 General Science V2 Earth Science 0.671Life Science 0.651Phys ical Science 0.694






TX Earth & Space Science 0.680 0.672 0.691Living Organism s 0.661 0.668 0.677Phys ical Science 0.669 0.627 0.653

0.704 0.707 0.756

0.724 0.751 0.746

0.692 0.725 0.744

0.874 0.842

0.839 0.837

WA WA General Science V1 Changes in Sys tem s 0.675 0.676 0.689 0.685 0.695 0.715Properties of Sys tem s 0.656 0.665 0.666 0.674 0.688 0.686Structure of Sys tem s 0.643 0.645 0.681 0.683 0.693 0.723

WI WI General Science V1 Earth & Space Science 0.619 0.620 0.651 0.633 0.669 0.674 0.686 0.683 0.676Life & Environ Science 0.589 0.606 0.631 0.650 0.668 0.697 0.692 0.703 0.735Phys ical Science 0.609 0.615 0.635 0.642 0.663 0.676 0.676 0.701 0.716

WY WY General Science V1 Earth & Space Science 0.669 0.681 0.668 0.687 0.651Life Science 0.647 0.672 0.669 0.688 0.713Phys ical Science 0.652 0.658 0.660 0.721 0.675

Grade

Marginal Reliabilities for Goals of State Content Aligned MAP SCIENCE Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in Spring and Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 (cont.)

SC Science - Phys ical Science Pretes t V2SC Science - Phys ical Science EOC V2

TX Science 6-8 - General Science V1

Science Concepts : Earth & SpScience Concepts : Living OrganScience Concepts : Phys ical Sci

TX Science 2-5 - General Science V1

Science Concepts : Living Organ

TX Science 9+ - General Science V1

Science Concepts : Phys ical Sci



Table 29.

State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10AZ 0.613 0.718

Inquiry: Analys is 0.616 0.701Inquiry: Inves tigate 0.638 0.704

2085 1920CO Com m on Connections 0.707 0.722 0.746 0.738 0.758 0.768 0.788 0.794

0.726 0.744 0.769 0.759 0.776 0.787 0.804 0.809

Nature of Science 0.692 0.700 0.718 0.745 0.759 0.767 0.786 0.7930.751 0.741 0.752 0.769 0.784 0.783 0.803 0.807

DE 0.730 0.759 0.791 0.803

0.691 0.742 0.763 0.792

GA Ideas / Nature of Sci 0.683 0.702 0.721 0.741 0.759 0.763Inquiry 0.736 0.743 0.755 0.760 0.780 0.784

IL Nature of Science 0.708 0.705 0.729 0.722 0.743 0.732 0.724 0.7040.717 0.709 0.718 0.727 0.749 0.746 0.748 0.741

IN Inquiry 0.677 0.684 0.698 0.743 0.755 0.771Views & Them es 0.629 0.658 0.672 0.725 0.744 0.765

KS Science as Inquiry 0.664 0.690 0.705 0.702 0.738 0.726 0.738 0.7670.655 0.699 0.692 0.722 0.743 0.734 0.739 0.763

KY 0.524 0.600 0.664 0.644 0.677 0.694 0.687 0.715 0.717

Thinking & Working 0.600 0.657 0.689 0.687 0.724 0.731 0.736 0.760 0.757ME 0.731 0.702 0.699 0.733 0.745 0.741 0.731 0.764

Unifying Them es 0.669 0.650 0.669 0.697 0.721 0.711 0.714 0.736MI 0.726 0.711 0.726 0.736 0.746 0.745 0.746 0.773 0.793

0.690 0.671 0.691 0.700 0.719 0.727 0.726 0.760 0.770

MN Collect / Analyze Data 0.511 0.545 0.568 0.626 0.626 0.627 0.632 0.665Nature of Science 0.557 0.601 0.623 0.657 0.651 0.641 0.624 0.649

0.598 0.586 0.599 0.634 0.646 0.651 0.628 0.662

MT 0.756 0.736

Nature of Science 0.758 0.742ND 0.725 0.715 0.726 0.709 0.737 0.748 0.767 0.743

0.653 0.652 0.680 0.690 0.716 0.728 0.747 0.737

NE Science as Inquiry 0.713 0.745 0.7500.702 0.741 0.716

NH Inquiry & Thinking 0.710 0.720 0.735 0.737 0.755Unifying Concepts 0.693 0.707 0.729 0.722 0.748

NJ Science & Society 0.696 0.727 0.734Scientific Processes 0.691 0.730 0.703

NM 0.522 0.547 0.565 0.588 0.639 0.650 0.675 0.701 0.708

Knowledge / Society 0.551 0.584 0.618 0.643 0.675 0.677 0.686 0.701 0.707Question / Des ign 0.581 0.624 0.640 0.648 0.676 0.679 0.694 0.721 0.722

Grade

Marginal Reliabilities for Goals of State Aligned MAP CONCEPTS AND PROCESSES Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in Spring and Fall 2008 and Spring 2009

CO Science - Concepts /Processes V1

CO Science Part 1of 2 - Concepts /Processes V2

GA Science - Concepts /Processes V1IL Science - Concepts /Processes V1

IN Science - Concepts /Processes V1KS Science - Concepts /Processes V1

His tory / Nature Perspective

Process : Sci Inves tigation

Processes of Scientific Inves t

KY Science - Concepts /Processes V2

ME Science - Concepts /Processes V2

Scientific Inquiry & Technol

Cons tructing Sci KnowledgeReflecting on Sci Knoledge

Appl of Science TechnologyNature of Sci / Technology

Processes of Scientific Inq

Technology / Nature / ScienceMethods to Solve Problem s

Scientific Inq: Des ign ExpKnowing & Doing Science

Scientific Inquiry / TechnologyUnifying Concepts ; Nature of S

ND Science - Concepts /Processes V1

MT Science - Concepts /Processes V2

Unifying Concepts / Nature of S

NH Science - Concepts /Processes V2NJ Science - Concepts /Processes V1NM Science - Concepts /Processes V1

Analyze / Com m unicate

DE Science - Concepts /Processes V1

AZ Science - Concepts /Processes V1

NE Science - Concepts /Processes V1

MN Science - Concepts /Processes V1

MI Science - Concepts /Processes V1




State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10NV 0.683 0.671 0.700 0.651 0.646

Form ulating / Tes ting 0.656 0.656 0.679 0.654 0.6330.650 0.635 0.666 0.627 0.631

OH Scientific Inquiry 0.645 0.688 0.708 0.739 0.759 0.752 0.789 0.7770.699 0.736 0.748 0.760 0.770 0.771 0.810 0.787

SC Scientific Inquiry 0.741 0.722 0.730 0.744 0.778 0.787 0.798 0.7800.695 0.673 0.700 0.713 0.746 0.756 0.772 0.759

0.796

0.768

0.737

0.718

0.735

0.714

0.742

0.718

0.771

0.745

0.788

0.761

0.790

0.765

0.788

0.766

TX Problem Solving 0.723 0.714 0.718Sci Process : Inquiry 0.759 0.732 0.735Problem Solving 0.766 0.769 0.777Sci Process : Inquiry 0.780 0.787 0.788Problem Solving 0.814 0.793Sci Process : Inquiry 0.834 0.804

UT Nature of Science 0.709 0.708 0.7320.698 0.694 0.721

Grade

Marginal Reliabilities for Goals of State Aligned MAP CONCEPTS AND PROCESSES Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in Spring and Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 (cont.)

Explanations / Evidence

Process ; Tech / Society

Scientific Way / Technology

Unifying Concepts ; SciTech


OH Science - Concepts /Processes V1

Des ign Sci Inves tigationsHypothes ize / Ques / Des ignDes ign Sci Inves tigationsHypothes ize / Ques / Des ign


SC Concepts & Processes for Phys ical Science Pretes t V2

Des ign Sci Inves tigations

Hypothes ize / Ques / Des ignDes ign Sci Inves tigationsHypothes ize / Ques / Des ign








Science Process & Skills

UT Science - Concepts /Processes V1

TX Science 9+ - Concepts /Processes V1

TX Science 6-8 - Concepts /Processes V1

TX Science 2-5 - Concepts /Processes V1

SC Concepts & Processes for Phys ical Science EOC V2

NV Science - Concepts /Processes V1



Table 29 (cont.)

State Test Name Goal Name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10WA 0.763 0.757 0.751 0.750 0.750 0.757

Inves tigating Sys tem s 0.763 0.753 0.755 0.747 0.758 0.775WI 0.676 0.674 0.702 0.697 0.716 0.727 0.732 0.750 0.763

Science Inquiry 0.722 0.713 0.715 0.703 0.722 0.745 0.745 0.762 0.788WY 0.707 0.706 0.703 0.775 0.748

Science as Inquiry 0.744 0.742 0.733 0.796 0.777

Nature & Unify Concepts

Marginal Reliabilities for Goals of State Aligned MAP CONCEPTS AND PROCESSES Tests Administered to a Minimum of 1200 Students in Spring and Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 (cont.)

Grade

Application; Sys Structure

Nature of Sci / Connections

WY Science - Concepts /Processes V1

WI Science - Concepts /Processes V1

WA Science - Concepts /Processes V1

A portion of the MAP for Primary Grades system uses Skills Checklist Tests to inform instruction relative to the content of the assessment. These tests are made up of concentrated sets of skills within the content domains of reading and mathematics. Items are selected randomly from within a specific set and presented to students. The items in these tests are not calibrated to scales. Therefore the scores yielded are raw, number-correct scores. Estimates of the internal consistency of these skills tests are provided in Table 30 in the form of coefficient alphas. Not all of the 38 skills tests are present in Table 30 – the only tests shown are those that have been taken by 100 or more students.



Grades Table 30.



Accuracy and Consistency of Classification Decisions Using MAP Scores

MAP test scores can be used to classify students into performance levels for accountability purposes. For this reason, educational decisions that rely on classification accuracy and consistency are important. What proportion of students can we expect to be classified accurately? How consistently would a test, parallel to the administered test in every way except specific item content, be expected to classify the same students? To answer these and similar questions, a straightforward approach first presented by Rudner (2004) is adopted and extended.

Classification Accuracy. The approach to classification accuracy provides a method of constructing a k X k table of probabilities, where k is the number of performance categories of interest. Each cell of the k X k table is a calculation of the expected proportion of all students

whose true score, θ , falls in the cut score interval [c,d], and whose observed score, , falls in the cut score interval [a,b]. When [a,b] and [c,d] are set to correspond to the true score intervals defined by the cut scores, an individual element of the classification table is:

θ̂

∑=

d

c 0P(a ≤ < b | θ̂ θ ) ( ) ,

ˆˆ

ˆˆ⎟⎠⎞

⎜⎝⎛ −

⎟⎟⎠

⎞⎜⎜⎝

⎛⎟⎟⎠

⎞⎜⎜⎝

⎛ −−⎟

⎟⎠

⎞⎜⎜⎝

⎛ −= ∑

= σμθϕθφθφθ

θ θθ

d

c sea

sebf (4)

where: ( )zθ is the cumulative normal distribution function representing the area under the

normal curve between a and b with mean,θ and standard deviation, , and θse

( )θf is the expected proportion of students whose true score is .θ

For this application, θ is assumed ~ ( )σμ ,N . Therefore, ( )θf is the standard normal density

function, ⎟⎠⎞

⎜⎝⎛ −

σμθϕ . The values for μ andσ are taken from the spring 2007 grade level

performance for the test involved.

The application of this procedure to various state-content aligned MAP tests was undertaken to demonstrate the levels of classification accuracy that result. For this demonstration only two performance categories are used, “proficient” and “not proficient.” The cut scores used to form these categories for each test were taken from the series of NWEA state scale alignment studies (Cronin, Dahlin, Adkins & Kingsbury, 2007). Since only two categories were used, the score intervals [a,b] and [c,d] referred to above reduce to [<b,≥ b] and [<c, ≥ c], respectively. The results of applying this classification accuracy procedure are provided in Tables 30 and 31.

Classification Consistency. Estimates of classification consistency entail the use of a hypothetical test, parallel (identical) in length and item per item difficulty. Given such a test, the

expected difference between two observed scores, E ( )( )21ˆ,ˆ θθΔ

θ̂

, would be zero, exclusive of the

measurement error associated with each score. By definition, is expected to be distributed

normally with mean θ and standard deviation, . Adopting the conservative assumption thatθse

( ) 0,cov21

ˆˆ =θθsese , the standard deviation for the expected difference between and is 1̂θ 2θ̂



Grades 2

22

1ˆˆ θθσ sese +=Δ . (5)

Substituting this quantity into equation 6, an individual element in the k X k classification consistency table is

∑ P(a ≤ < b | =

d

c θ̂

θ̂ θ ) ( ) ,ˆˆ

ˆ⎟⎠⎞

⎜⎝⎛ −

⎟⎟⎠

⎞⎜⎜⎝

⎛⎟⎟⎠

⎞⎜⎜⎝

⎛ −−⎟

⎟⎠

⎞⎜⎜⎝

⎛ −= ∑

= ΔΔ σμθϕ

σθφ

σθφθ

θ

d

c

abf (6)

where interval [a,b] contains the observed score, , on the administered test and interval [c,d]

contains the expected observed score, , on the hypothetical parallel test. Since only two categories were used for this demonstration of classification consistency, the score intervals [a,b] and [c,d] referred to above reduce to [<b,≥ b] and [<c, ≥ c], respectively.

1̂θ

2̂θ

The results of applying these procedures to estimate classification accuracy and consistency are provided in Tables 31 and 32.



Table 31.

State Nam e Grade Mean SD N

AZ Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 3 197.6 13.77 3410 188 0.982 0.9744 204.8 14.53 3656 197 0.976 0.9675 210.3 14.69 3496 203 0.973 0.964

Reading Goals Survey 6+ AZ V3 6 213.6 15.14 3055 210 0.970 0.9577 216.8 15.44 3096 212 0.976 0.9658 219.7 14.70 2885 218 0.962 0.947

CA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 3 198.5 12.90 7015 203 0.951 0.9294 204.8 13.72 7374 204 0.960 0.9435 210.1 13.66 7278 213 0.948 0.924

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 Pow ay 3 207.6 12.35 2342 203 0.969 0.9584 214.3 12.73 2471 204 0.987 0.9835 219.6 12.59 2443 213 0.975 0.967

Reading Goals Survey 6+ CA V2 6 213.8 14.83 7061 218 0.956 0.9347 216.2 14.75 5884 220 0.954 0.9338 217.6 15.53 5897 225 0.959 0.940

Reading Goals Survey 6+ Pow ay 6 223.2 12.39 2286 218 0.973 0.9637 225.6 12.46 1882 220 0.973 0.9638 226.9 12.35 1766 225 0.961 0.946

CO Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 3 200.6 12.54 23270 175 1.000 0.9994 207.1 13.00 23576 187 0.997 0.9975 212.5 13.20 22753 194 0.997 0.996

Reading Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 6 215.8 13.89 21947 199 0.995 0.9937 218.7 14.13 20598 205 0.991 0.9888 221.4 14.07 18110 207 0.992 0.989

DE Reading Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2 3 199.6 13.05 3356 191 0.981 0.9744 206.5 13.54 3964 200 0.974 0.9645 212.6 13.00 3830 202 0.986 0.981

Reading Goals Survey 6+ DE V2 6 215.7 13.92 4135 208 0.977 0.9707 218.6 13.17 4161 209 0.983 0.9778 220.8 13.16 3875 211 0.982 0.977

GA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 3 202.4 10.98 3997 184 0.998 0.9984 207.9 12.41 4061 191 0.996 0.9955 213.9 12.24 4195 195 0.998 0.997

Reading Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 6 215.8 13.37 2939 192 0.999 0.9997 218.5 13.56 2626 201 0.996 0.9958 220.8 13.11 2274 200 0.997 0.997

Student RITs Est. State Prof. Cut

Class . Accuracy

Decis ion Consistency

Classification Accuracy and Decision Consistency of State Content-Aligned READING MAP Tests Administered in the Same Term as the State Accountability Test in the 2008-2009 School Year by State and Grade Level





IL Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 3 202.6 12.81 35507 194 0.981 0.9744 208.6 13.39 40333 198 0.986 0.9815 214.2 13.28 38667 206 0.980 0.9726 216.4 13.03 3557 207 0.984 0.978

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NWEA V4 3 206.6 11.68 1176 194 0.992 0.9904 214.6 11.06 1210 198 0.998 0.9985 219.6 11.06 1204 206 0.994 0.992

Reading Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 6 218.4 13.52 37746 207 0.988 0.9847 221.4 13.54 39743 213 0.981 0.9748 224.0 13.29 38332 212 0.990 0.986

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NWEA V4 6 223.0 11.22 1287 207 0.996 0.9957 226.3 10.99 1213 213 0.995 0.993

IN Reading Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 3 194.3 11.61 21296 182 0.987 0.9834 202.1 11.60 22264 192 0.984 0.9795 207.9 11.68 22147 200 0.980 0.973

Reading Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 6 212.6 12.52 20584 206 0.976 0.9677 216.5 12.56 20560 211 0.971 0.9618 219.5 12.76 19702 214 0.973 0.964

KS Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 3 202.7 12.56 19234 194 0.982 0.9764 209.6 12.42 18955 199 0.989 0.9855 215.3 12.32 18854 209 0.973 0.964

Reading Goals Survey 6+ KS V2 6 219.3 13.27 17708 210 0.985 0.9797 222.3 13.83 18016 213 0.985 0.9798 225.4 13.20 17353 217 0.984 0.977

MA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 3 200.0 12.99 1398 201 0.951 0.9314 204.8 13.73 1541 211 0.952 0.9285 210.9 13.67 1542 212 0.951 0.931

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 (P) 3 199.1 12.86 1233 201 0.949 0.9274 204.8 13.82 1195 211 0.948 0.9235 209.8 14.18 1121 212 0.957 0.937

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 6 215.4 13.67 1465 214 0.964 0.9477 215.8 15.31 1360 218 0.960 0.944

MD Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MD V3 3 205.2 14.53 9989 190 0.992 0.9894 211.4 14.18 9818 194 0.995 0.9935 216.2 14.43 9860 202 0.991 0.988

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MD V3 6 219.4 14.57 9974 206 0.990 0.9867 222.7 14.23 10210 211 0.987 0.9838 225.2 13.88 10010 216 0.982 0.976



Class . Accuracy




Table 31 (cont.)


ME Reading Survey w / Goals 2-5 ME V4 3 200.5 13.16 9567 195 0.973 0.9634 207.8 12.75 10285 204 0.966 0.9535 213.3 12.87 10437 210 0.965 0.951

Reading Survey w / Goals 6+ ME V4 6 217.7 13.11 11038 215 0.961 0.9467 220.7 13.42 11191 217 0.966 0.9538 223.6 13.15 11014 221 0.963 0.948

MI Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 3 191.0 13.53 10126 175 0.992 0.9904 200.0 13.46 10601 188 0.987 0.9835 206.7 13.18 10739 197 0.984 0.979

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MI V3 6 211.3 13.95 9914 201 0.985 0.9807 215.8 13.60 10123 207 0.982 0.9768 218.9 13.31 9773 212 0.976 0.968

MN Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 3 202.2 12.84 41558 190 0.989 0.9864 208.9 13.05 42125 201 0.981 0.9745 214.5 12.93 40474 206 0.982 0.976

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 5 218.3 12.82 1639 206 0.991 0.9896 218.7 13.11 40126 212 0.977 0.9687 221.7 13.18 37621 217 0.970 0.9608 224.3 12.98 35364 221 0.966 0.953

MT Reading Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 3 201.1 12.58 4460 190 0.987 0.9834 208.0 12.05 4583 197 0.988 0.9845 213.1 12.19 4495 204 0.983 0.977

Reading Goals Survey 6+ MT V2 6 218.1 12.31 4245 209 0.984 0.9797 221.1 12.37 4172 213 0.983 0.9778 224.2 12.23 3616 218 0.975 0.967

ND Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 3 191.8 12.57 5139 181 0.985 0.9794 201.0 12.18 5464 193 0.982 0.9765 207.7 11.96 5825 204 0.968 0.956

Reading Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 6 213.1 12.24 5303 207 0.974 0.9657 216.9 12.26 5340 206 0.988 0.9848 220.4 12.41 5288 212 0.982 0.976

NH Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4 3 193.7 13.47 6040 185 0.979 0.9714 203.0 12.97 6278 195 0.981 0.9745 209.6 12.45 6252 202 0.979 0.972

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NH V4 6 213.8 13.00 5796 210 0.963 0.9507 218.1 13.25 6513 213 0.969 0.9588 221.4 13.19 5707 219 0.962 0.946



Class . Accuracy






NJ Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 3 201.4 12.06 6650 182 0.998 0.9974 208.0 12.43 6711 194 0.993 0.9905 213.3 12.32 7058 210 0.965 0.951

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 6 217.6 12.51 5769 215 0.962 0.9467 219.5 12.74 4741 214 0.973 0.9638 220.7 13.61 3324 209 0.988 0.985

NM Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 3 194.7 13.42 10483 191 0.965 0.9514 201.0 14.10 11244 200 0.960 0.9445 207.2 13.84 11071 204 0.965 0.952

Reading Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 6 212.1 14.34 11940 216 0.953 0.9317 214.4 14.86 11330 214 0.962 0.9458 217.5 14.79 11268 215 0.967 0.953

NV Reading Survey w / Goals 2-5 NV V4 3 197.3 13.19 3495 198 0.955 0.9354 204.4 13.48 3640 203 0.962 0.9475 211.1 12.83 3393 213 0.955 0.934

Reading Survey w / Goals 6+ NV V4 6 214.7 13.13 3492 211 0.966 0.9547 217.2 13.91 3311 216 0.957 0.9398 221.0 13.41 3137 219 0.955 0.939

OH Reading Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3 3 199.8 13.34 3800 187 0.989 0.9854 206.2 14.03 3576 195 0.987 0.9835 210.9 14.05 3665 201 0.985 0.979

Reading Goals Survey 6+ OH V3 6 216.1 13.42 4423 207 0.985 0.9797 217.9 14.35 3667 209 0.983 0.9778 220.8 13.73 3366 212 0.981 0.974

OR Reading Goals Survey 6+ OR V4 7 220.2 13.05 1038 212 0.984 0.978RI Reading Survey w / Goals 6+ RI V4 6 215.7 12.72 1108 210 0.968 0.957

7 219.0 12.29 1140 213 0.975 0.9668 224.9 11.86 1411 219 0.979 0.969

SC Reading Survey w / Goals 2-5 SC V5 3 198.7 13.87 49804 197 0.961 0.9464 206.1 13.65 48850 209 0.953 0.9315 211.7 13.18 47245 216 0.948 0.925

Reading Survey w / Goals 6+ SC V5 6 214.6 13.70 44987 220 0.951 0.9287 217.2 13.60 43646 226 0.958 0.9358 219.2 13.37 40071 230 0.960 0.939

TX Reading Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 3 204.2 13.38 6337 180 0.999 0.9994 211.8 12.94 8214 196 0.995 0.9945 217.0 12.37 8136 205 0.992 0.989

Reading Goals Survey 6+ TX V3 6 221.3 13.53 6284 205 0.995 0.9947 223.4 14.02 7575 213 0.988 0.984



Class . Accuracy




Table 31 (cont.)


WA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WA V3 3 198.8 13.34 2381 195 0.970 0.9574 206.4 13.18 2317 196 0.986 0.9815 211.3 13.99 2383 204 0.976 0.968

Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WA V4 3 198.8 13.61 14185 195 0.967 0.9554 205.0 13.79 16123 196 0.983 0.9775 210.4 13.74 16833 204 0.975 0.966

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WA V3 6 215.0 13.83 2350 213 0.961 0.9457 219.3 13.77 2267 219 0.957 0.9398 221.2 13.59 2156 218 0.963 0.949

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WA V4 6 214.8 14.11 18251 213 0.959 0.9447 218.6 13.94 16772 219 0.955 0.9368 221.5 13.86 16934 218 0.967 0.954

WI Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 3 190.6 13.75 17899 174 0.993 0.9914 199.6 13.53 17577 185 0.992 0.9895 206.6 13.33 18572 193 0.992 0.989

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 6 212.0 13.54 19775 198 0.993 0.9907 216.4 13.64 19695 202 0.993 0.9908 220.0 13.42 17532 204 0.994 0.992

WY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 3 201.1 12.78 4398 199 0.959 0.9434 207.1 12.64 4468 206 0.955 0.9375 212.7 12.90 4410 210 0.963 0.948

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 6 216.9 12.84 4388 217 0.953 0.9357 219.5 13.24 4272 217 0.959 0.9448 222.6 12.61 4030 221 0.958 0.941



Class . Accuracy




Grades Table 32.


AZ Math Goals Survey 2-5 AZ V3 3 202.0 12.70 3459 196 0.972 0.9614 210.5 14.35 3648 203 0.974 0.9645 218.5 15.37 3484 212 0.974 0.962

Math Goals Survey 6+ AZ V3 6 223.5 17.39 3062 220 0.971 0.9597 228.1 17.89 3168 223 0.975 0.9658 232.4 18.16 2946 231 0.973 0.961

CA Math Goals Survey 2-5 CA V2 3 202.5 12.14 7303 201 0.960 0.9424 211.3 14.29 7648 212 0.963 0.9445 219.1 15.60 7472 221 0.970 0.954

Math Goals Survey 3-5 Pow ay 3 212.6 12.50 2356 201 0.989 0.9864 222.5 13.81 2511 212 0.983 0.9775 231.7 14.68 2506 221 0.987 0.982

Math Goals Survey 6-8 Pow ay 6 237.0 15.47 2388 229 0.982 0.9757 239.4 14.75 2067 233 0.980 0.9728 236.8 16.31 1117 241 0.963 0.945

Math Goals Survey 6+ CA V2 6 224.5 17.56 7448 229 0.968 0.9517 226.5 17.81 5910 233 0.970 0.9548 225.9 18.23 5160 241 0.983 0.972

CO Math Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 3 202.9 13.02 24543 181 0.998 0.9984 212.2 14.25 24072 191 0.998 0.9975 219.8 15.09 22979 199 0.997 0.996

Math Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 6 225.1 15.92 22045 207 0.993 0.9917 229.8 17.30 20927 213 0.991 0.9878 233.2 17.70 18248 222 0.985 0.979

DE Math Goals Survey 2-5 DE V2 3 201.7 12.41 3316 194 0.981 0.9734 210.0 13.85 3947 202 0.981 0.9745 219.2 14.77 3722 208 0.985 0.979

Math Goals Survey 6+ DE V2 6 223.6 15.93 4246 215 0.980 0.9727 228.6 16.88 4288 223 0.973 0.9628 232.7 17.20 4098 228 0.974 0.962

GA Math Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 3 203.6 11.25 4203 183 0.999 0.9994 211.6 12.16 4043 201 0.989 0.9855 218.6 13.23 4217 200 0.997 0.996

Math Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 6 223.3 14.37 3077 217 0.975 0.9657 226.5 14.79 2686 215 0.984 0.9798 230.1 15.58 2377 214 0.992 0.988

Classification Accuracy and Decision Consistency of State Content Aligned MAP MATHEMATICS Tests Administered in the Same Term as the State Accountability Test in the 2008-2009 School Year by State and Grade Level


Class . Accuracy

Decis ion Consis tency



Table 32 (cont.)


IL Math Goals Survey 2-5 IL V2 3 206.0 12.70 37186 192 0.993 0.9914 214.3 14.12 41283 197 0.995 0.9945 222.3 15.18 39718 206 0.992 0.9896 226.4 15.29 3545 210 0.992 0.990

Math Goals Survey 6+ IL V2 5 229.0 15.82 1063 206 0.997 0.9966 227.4 15.78 38647 210 0.993 0.9917 232.2 16.30 40322 213 0.995 0.9938 235.6 16.69 37802 218 0.993 0.991

IN Math Goals Survey 2-5 IN V3 3 193.6 11.31 23513 188 0.973 0.9624 204.2 11.72 23463 198 0.976 0.9675 212.7 12.61 22657 205 0.979 0.971

Math Goals Survey 6+ IN V3 6 220.0 13.98 21189 209 0.987 0.9827 226.5 15.12 21178 214 0.989 0.9848 231.6 15.84 20547 223 0.981 0.973

KS Math Goals Survey 2-5 KS V2 3 205.1 11.78 19428 196 0.985 0.9804 215.4 13.55 19014 205 0.984 0.9785 223.8 14.52 18668 213 0.984 0.977

Math Goals Survey 6+ KS V2 6 228.6 14.81 17519 217 0.988 0.9837 233.1 16.02 18509 227 0.977 0.9678 238.0 16.64 17688 229 0.982 0.975

MA Math Goals Survey 2-5 MA V3 3 202.8 12.88 1844 207 0.953 0.9304 213.7 14.17 1843 220 0.960 0.9405 220.6 16.22 1474 226 0.962 0.945

Math Goals Survey 6+ MA V3 6 223.1 17.23 1121 231 0.968 0.9517 224.5 18.28 1103 238 0.978 0.964

ME Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 ME V4 3 202.5 11.99 9808 173 1.000 1.0004 212.0 13.14 10229 189 0.999 0.9995 219.0 14.17 10262 201 0.995 0.994

Math Survey w / Goals 6+ ME V4 6 224.9 15.07 10906 209 0.993 0.9907 229.7 15.85 10932 218 0.987 0.9828 234.3 16.75 10843 222 0.987 0.982

MI Math Goals Survey 2-5 MI V3 3 191.9 11.66 10243 196 0.955 0.9334 202.4 12.16 10490 208 0.953 0.9285 210.5 13.19 10623 220 0.971 0.953

Math Goals Survey 6+ MI V3 6 216.9 14.69 9992 225 0.966 0.9487 223.4 15.99 10013 230 0.968 0.9508 228.8 16.66 9424 235 0.968 0.952

Classification Accuracy and Decision Consistency of State Content-Aligned MAP MATHEMATICS Tests Administered in the Same Term as the State Accountability Test in the 2008-2009 School Year by State and Grade Level (cont.)


Class . Accuracy






MN Math Goals Survey 2-5 MN V4 3 207.9 12.40 42159 196 0.991 0.9874 217.3 13.96 42439 208 0.980 0.9735 225.6 15.12 40396 220 0.975 0.964

Math Goals Survey 6+ MN V4 5 231.3 16.09 1711 220 0.985 0.9796 231.3 15.50 40616 225 0.977 0.9687 235.0 16.07 37578 230 0.976 0.9668 238.1 16.27 33324 235 0.973 0.962

MT Math Goals Survey 2-5 MT V2 3 205.1 11.89 3840 200 0.970 0.9594 214.7 12.65 4613 208 0.973 0.9625 222.2 14.14 4555 215 0.976 0.966

Math Goals Survey 6+ MT V2 6 228.8 14.13 4351 222 0.977 0.9687 233.4 15.19 4553 226 0.976 0.9678 237.6 15.65 4062 239 0.963 0.947

ND Math Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 3 192.3 10.52 5239 180 0.992 0.9904 203.0 11.00 5587 195 0.984 0.9785 211.2 11.93 5823 201 0.987 0.982

Math Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 6 218.7 12.75 5380 208 0.986 0.9807 225.7 13.68 5392 215 0.988 0.9838 231.5 14.70 5369 225 0.978 0.970

NH Math Goals Survey 2-5 NH V4 3 194.8 11.37 6238 190 0.972 0.9614 205.5 11.73 6362 199 0.975 0.9655 214.2 12.78 6451 206 0.978 0.970

Math Goals Survey 6+ NH V4 6 220.1 13.66 5701 216 0.970 0.9587 226.2 14.54 6425 222 0.972 0.9608 231.3 15.27 5705 231 0.969 0.955

NJ Math Goals Survey 2-5 NJ V3 3 204.6 12.54 6162 185 0.998 0.9974 214.4 14.80 6517 198 0.994 0.9925 222.3 15.44 6742 210 0.988 0.983

Math Goals Survey 6+ NJ V3 6 230.9 15.86 6680 216 0.992 0.9897 233.5 16.97 4912 228 0.975 0.9648 237.0 17.92 2335 227 0.982 0.975

NM Math Goals Survey 2-5 NM V3 3 200.1 12.68 10526 201 0.957 0.9374 207.8 13.78 11066 208 0.958 0.9395 215.2 14.54 11037 219 0.963 0.945

Math Goals Survey 6+ NM V3 6 220.4 15.43 12718 228 0.967 0.9507 223.9 16.25 12003 234 0.971 0.9558 227.9 17.01 11867 235 0.969 0.952



Class . Accuracy




Table 32 (cont.)


NV Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 NV V4 3 201.7 11.52 3600 202 0.954 0.9344 210.6 12.80 3710 209 0.960 0.9425 218.6 13.86 3312 217 0.964 0.948

Math Survey w / Goals 6+ NV V4 6 223.2 14.19 3502 218 0.971 0.9597 226.5 15.99 3339 223 0.971 0.9588 231.2 16.22 3198 229 0.970 0.956

OH Math Goals Survey 2-5 OH V3 3 204.6 12.70 3890 192 0.992 0.9884 213.4 14.59 3621 204 0.982 0.9745 219.8 15.58 3738 215 0.971 0.958

Math Goals Survey 6+ OH V3 6 226.2 15.92 4423 217 0.982 0.9747 228.9 17.09 3959 221 0.980 0.9728 232.4 17.65 3355 225 0.983 0.975

OR Math Goals Survey 6+ OR V4 6 227.5 16.70 1028 219 0.978 0.9697 232.9 17.72 1111 219 0.990 0.9868 235.7 17.30 1010 227 0.982 0.976

RI Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 RI V4 5 213.8 13.55 1007 206 0.981 0.974Math Survey w / Goals 6+ RI V4 6 219.9 13.60 1113 216 0.973 0.961

7 227.0 14.39 1141 222 0.975 0.9648 235.0 15.57 1341 231 0.973 0.962

SC Math Survey w / Goals 2-5 SC V5 3 202.1 12.29 50811 208 0.953 0.9284 211.6 13.43 49406 215 0.958 0.9365 220.9 15.07 48013 227 0.967 0.950

Math Survey w / Goals 6+ SC V5 6 225.0 15.63 46842 230 0.965 0.9487 229.9 16.55 45984 237 0.965 0.9478 233.3 16.48 42754 246 0.975 0.959

TX Math Goals Survey 2-5 TX V3 3 212.1 12.92 6271 196 0.995 0.9944 220.8 12.95 8073 205 0.996 0.9945 229.6 13.90 7502 208 0.998 0.997

Math Goals Survey 6+ TX V3 6 234.7 16.34 6424 218 0.993 0.9917 239.2 17.54 7460 225 0.990 0.987

WA Math Goals Survey 2-5 WA V3 3 201.5 13.06 2442 198 0.966 0.9524 211.4 14.39 2372 209 0.966 0.9505 219.1 15.25 2395 218 0.969 0.953

Math Goals Survey 2-5 WA V4 3 202.1 12.54 15355 198 0.970 0.9584 211.3 14.07 17537 209 0.963 0.9475 218.4 14.48 17401 218 0.966 0.951

Math Goals Survey 6+ WA V3 6 225.4 16.34 2362 227 0.966 0.9507 231.2 17.51 2168 233 0.972 0.9588 232.6 17.30 2076 237 0.967 0.950

Math Goals Survey 6+ WA V4 6 224.2 15.98 18388 227 0.967 0.9507 229.4 16.44 17498 233 0.965 0.9488 232.9 16.98 17380 237 0.965 0.948



Class . Accuracy






WI Math Goals Survey 2-5 WI V2 3 193.2 11.63 18752 186 0.978 0.9694 203.9 12.19 18088 197 0.978 0.9705 212.0 12.98 18672 203 0.979 0.972

Math Goals Survey 6+ WI V2 6 218.9 14.29 20049 206 0.989 0.9857 224.6 15.19 19673 211 0.990 0.9868 230.0 15.85 17777 217 0.988 0.983

WY Math Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 3 206.1 11.33 4448 198 0.982 0.9754 214.6 12.13 4489 208 0.972 0.9625 222.3 13.08 4265 216 0.978 0.968

Math Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 6 227.0 13.87 4268 221 0.977 0.9677 231.3 14.73 4162 227 0.976 0.9658 234.4 16.04 3494 235 0.964 0.949


Class . Accuracy



Validity

In general terms, the better a test measures what it purports to measure and can support its intended uses and decision making, the stronger its validity is said to be. Within this broad statement resides a wide range of information that can be used as validity evidence. This information ranges, for example, from the adequacy and coverage of a test’s content, to its ability to yield scores that are predictive of a status in some area, to its ability to draw accurate inferences about a test taker’s status with respect to a construct, to its ability to allow generalizations from test performance within a domain to like performance in the same domain. While the full range of these areas cannot be adequately addressed for the over 350 tests reported in this document, some common forms of validity evidence can be offered to support broad validity arguments. The vast preponderance of this evidence comes from the relationships of MAP test scores to state content-aligned accountability test scores. These come in several forms including: the test content; the concurrent performance of students on MAP tests with their performance on state tests given for accountability purposes; the predictive relationship between students’ performance on MAP tests with their performance, two testing terms later, on state accountability tests; and the relationship between students’ performance on MAP tests and their nominal status relative to criteria defined by their state’s achievement standards. This last form of evidence was addressed indirectly in Tables 31 and 32. The difference between the classification accuracy reported in those tables and the criterion-related evidence reported below is that the former were based on estimates of state-defined proficiency cut scores as they would be expressed on the RIT scale. In Table 35 below, the criteria are the state-assigned performance classifications on the state accountability tests.

Several important points should be noted regarding concurrent performance on MAP tests with that on state accountability tests. First, these two forms of tests are designed to serve two related but different purposes. MAP tests are designed to provide estimates of achievement status with low measurement error. They are also designed to provide reasonable estimates of students’



strengths and weaknesses within the identified goal structure. State accountability tests are commonly designed to determine student proficiency within the state performance standard structure, with the most important decision being the classification of the student as proficient or not proficient. This primary purpose of most state tests in conjunction with adopted content and curriculum standards and structures can influence the relationship of student performance between the two tests. For example, one of the most common factors influencing these relationships is the use of constructed response items in state tests. In general, the greater the number of constructed response items, the weaker the relationship will appear. Another difference is in test design. Since most state accountability tests are fixed form, it is reasonable for the test to be constructed so that maximum test information is established around the proficiency cut point. This is where a state wants to be the most confident about the classification decision that the test will inform. To the extent that this strategy is reflected in the state’s operational test, the relationship in performance between MAP tests and state tests will be attenuated due to a more truncated range of scores on the state test. The requirement that state test content be connected to single grade level content standards is different than MAP test content structure that spans grade levels. This difference is another factor that weakens the observed score relationships between tests. Finally, when focus is placed on the relationship between performance on MAP tests and the assigned proficiency category from the state test, information from the state test will have been collapsed into three to five categories. The correlations between RIT scores and these category assignments will always be substantially lower than if the correlations were based on RIT scores and scale scores.

The uses of MAP test scores that NWEA supports include the following:

• Use of test score reports to describe the performance of individual students, classes or groups of students, and students in a grade level within a school or school district

• Use of test score reports for general planning purposes of classes or groups of students within a school or school district

• Use of norms to reference the performance of individual students and groups of students against the sample of students or schools used in the most recent norming studies

• Use of test score reports to identify skills that are commonly challenging for students with a particular score range

• Use of test score reports for district level or school level resource allocation

• Use of test scores as broad indicators of student performance that would be combined with other information and indicators to make decisions about individual students

The data provided in Tables 33 through 35 can be used as evidence to support these uses. In accord the Standards for Education and Psychological Testing (AERA/APA/NCME, 1999), standards 1.3, 1.4, 13.2, 14.13, and 15.1, validity arguments for MAP test scores that extend beyond the bounds of these five general categories are considered to be the responsibility of the MAP test user to provide.

Content Validity

For standard MAP assessments, content validity is developed by carefully mapping into a test blueprint the content standards being used by the educational entity commissioning the test. This is accomplished, in part, by using a combination of proprietary software that uses both artificial intelligence as well as matching to key words and phrases from item content descriptors to words



Grades and phrases found in content standards. In addition, content experts verify that matches are valid and identify areas of content standards that were not associated to items in the automated processes. Upon finding such items, the content expert would carry out a broader search of the item bank to find appropriate item content for an unpopulated or under-populated standard.

For the MAP for Primary Grades Assessment system a content framework was developed based on extensive curricular and instructional research regarding the skills and concepts deemed critical for success in early literacy and numeracy development. For additional information, please see the instructional and research references in Appendix A. Additionally, items with particular emphasis on the developmental needs of young learners were developed.

NWEA uses audio and enhanced item styles to provide young children the ability to manipulate, model, and construct item responses appropriate for the content being assessed.

Concurrent Validity Much of the documented validity evidence for NWEA tests comes in the form of concurrent validity. This form of validity is expressed in the form of a Pearson correlation coefficient between the total domain area RIT score and the total scale score of another established test designed to assess the same domain area. It answers the question, “How well do the scores from this test that reference this (RIT) scale in this subject area (e.g., Reading) correspond to the scores obtained from an established test that references some other scale in the same subject area?” Both tests are administered to the same students in close temporal proximity, roughly two to three weeks apart. Strong concurrent validity is indicated when the correlations are in the mid- .80’s. Correlations with non-NWEA tests that include more performance test items that require subjective scoring tend to have lower correlations than when non-NWEA tests consist of exclusively multiple choice items. Concurrent validity estimates are provided in Table 33.




Table 33.

State State-aligned Test Admin. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

AR Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AR Spring 2009 r 0.808 0.811 0.832N 2060 1919 1429

Reading Goals Survey 6+ AR Spring 2009 r 0.815 0.787 0.763N 1137 1240 1226

CA Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 CA V2 Spring 2009 r 0.787 0.803 0.770N 2655 2600 2581

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ CA V2 Spring 2009 r 0.814 0.779 0.754N 2474 1980 1787

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 Poway Spring 2009 r 0.788 0.781 0.773N 2362 2506 2460

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ Poway Spring 2009 r 0.789 0.822 0.781N 2330 2029 1991

CO Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 Spring 2009 r 0.763 0.804 0.812N 6313 6443 5821

Reading Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 Spring 2009 r 0.797 0.778 0.765 0.781 0.642N 5824 6138 4815 3359 1912

FL Reading Goals Survey 2-5 FL V3 Spring 2007 r 0.781 0.792 0.726N 949 910 1719

Reading Goals Survey 6+ FL V3 Spring 2007 r 0.629 0.693 0.623 0.679 0.703N 1780 1691 3199 2119 1377

GA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 Spring 2007 r 0.673 0.717 0.718 0.673N 2716 2759 2843 2772

Reading Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 Spring 2007 r 0.702 0.694 0.706N 2765 2836 2524

KY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Spring 2006 r 0.656 0.578 0.608N 2383 2284 2371

Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Spring 2006 r 0.662 0.671 0.594 0.578N 2450 2005 2245 965

NC Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 Spring 2009 r 0.787 0.768 0.772N 1159 1118 1054

ND Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 Fall 2005 r 0.699 0.703 0.682N 1271 1239 1431

Reading Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 Fall 2005 r 0.701 0.674 0.691N 1494 1652 1612

SC Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 Spring 2009 r 0.788 0.777 0.775N 6365 6284 5942

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 Spring 2009 r 0.783 0.774 0.763N 5583 5784 5295

WI Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 WI Fall 2008 r 0.775 0.818 0.809N 3510 3489 3662

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ WI Fall 2008 r 0.819 0.808 0.805N 3275 3412 3179

WY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 Spring 2006 r 0.706 0.685 0.720N 824 832 874

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 Spring 2006 r 0.728 0.753 0.678N 854 833 882

Reading

Validity (as Pearson Product-Moment Correlations) of Concurrent Performance on State Accountability Tests by State Content Aligned MAP Tests Administered to a Minimum of 500 Students

Grade 10


Grades


Table 33 (cont.)

State State-aligned Test Admin. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

GA Language Goals Survey 2-5 GA V3 Spring 2007 r 0.665 0.704 0.693 0.672N 2743 2709 2811 2720

Language Goals Survey 6-10 GA V2 Spring 2007 r 0.696 0.694 0.635N 2736 2812 2506

AR Math Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 Spring 2009 r 0.796 0.800 0.847N 1929 1866 1375

Math Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 Spring 2009 r 0.849 0.841 0.817N 1121 1258 1213

CA Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 CA V2 Spring 2009 r 0.820 0.814 0.840N 2659 2601 2574

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ CA V2 Spring 2009 r 0.862 0.796 0.758N 2525 1834 1569

Math Survey w/ Goals 3-5 Poway Spring 2009 r 0.828 0.795 0.870N 2365 2492 2471

Math Survey w/ Goals 6-8 Poway Spring 2009 r 0.856 0.842 0.767N 2409 2108 1155

CO Math Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 Spring 2009 r 0.800 0.847 0.865N 6248 6311 5824

Math Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 Spring 2009 r 0.876 0.868 0.872 0.853 0.810N 5994 6264 4919 3283 1719

FL Math Goals Survey 2-5 FL V3 Spring 2007 r 0.807 0.798 0.834N 970 913 873

Math Goals Survey 6+ FL V3 Spring 2007 r 0.780 0.791 0.808 0.732 0.741N 1771 1708 1585 2049 1334

GA Math Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 Spring 2007 r 0.717 0.706 0.796 0.833N 2679 2706 2739 2726

Math Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 Spring 2007 r 0.818 0.812 0.799N 2756 2799 2517

KY Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Spring 2006 r 0.709 0.712 0.769N 2383 2277 2364

Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Spring 2006 r 0.754 0.815 0.800N 2451 1974 2235

ND Math Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 Fall 2005 r 0.643 0.732 0.741N 1282 1259 1459

Math Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 Fall 2005 r 0.748 0.790 0.789N 1497 1659 1621

NC Math Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 Spring 2009 r 0.813 0.804 0.815N 1129 1104 1049

PA Math Goals Survey 2-5 PA V2 Spring 2006 r 0.840 0.838N 569 605

Math Goals Survey 6+ PA V2 Spring 2006 r 0.864 0.850 0.824N 568 580 662

SC Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 Spring 2009 r 0.808 0.839 0.858N 6398 6301 6025

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 Spring 2009 r 0.849 0.839 0.833N 5974 5920 5570

WI Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 WI V2 Fall 2008 r 0.789 0.790 0.830N 3551 3446 3618

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ WI V2 Fall 2008 r 0.860 0.871 0.878N 3495 3568 3383

WY Math Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 Spring 2006 r 0.678 0.635 0.647N 824 831 874

Math Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 Spring 2006 r 0.746 0.698 0.704N 854 833 883

Mathematics

Validity (as Pearson Product-Moment Correlations) of Concurrent Performance on State Accountability Tests by State Content Aligned MAP Tests Administered to a Minimum of 500 Students (cont.)

Grade

Language Usage10


Table 33 (cont.)

State State-aligned Test Admin. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

GA General Science GA V1 Spring 2007 r 0.710 0.711N 552 552

Concepts /Processes GA V1 Spring 2007 r 0.750 0.689N 557 558

Science

Validity (as Pearson Product-Moment Correlations) of Concurrent Performance on State Accountability Tests by State Content Aligned MAP Tests Administered to a Minimum of 500 Students (cont.)

Grade

Predictive Validity An additional source of evidence for NWEA tests is in their relationship to performance on other tests measuring achievement in the same domain at some later point in time. This form of validity can also be expressed in the form of a Pearson correlation coefficient between the total domain area RIT score and the total scale score of another established test. It answers the question, “How well do the scores from this test that reference this (RIT) scale in this subject area (e.g., Reading) predict the scores obtained from an established test that references some other scale in the same subject area at a later point in time?” Both tests are administered to the same students several weeks apart, typically 12 to 36 weeks in evidence reported here. Strong predictive validity is indicated when the correlations are in the low .80’s. Correlations with non-NWEA tests that include more performance test items that require subjective scoring tend to have lower correlations than when non-NWEA tests consist of exclusively multiple choice items. Predictive validity estimates are provided in Table 34.



Grades Table 34.



Table 34 (cont.)



Grades Criterion-related validity

The extent to which test scores relate to an external performance criterion provide evidence of one form of validity. Criterion-related validity is typically expressed as the correlation between a test score and a dichotomous criterion such as graduate-not graduate, pass-fail, meet standard-not meet standard, or acceptable-not acceptable job performance. In the case of MAP assessments, a student performance at the proficient level or above on a state assessment is often used as the external criterion. The relationship between a MAP score and a proficient-not proficient designation on a state assessment is expressed as a point-measure correlation. These correlation coefficients will always be smaller than a correlation coefficient calculated from both test performances expressed as scale scores. Table 35 provides the criterion-related validity coefficients for several MAP assessments with their corresponding state accountability assessments where both assessments were given within a month of one another.



Table 35.


AR Reading Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 Spring 2008 r 0.661 0.632 0.629N 786 518 366

Reading Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 Spring 2008 r 0.647 0.602N 352 347

CA Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 CA V2 Spring 2009 r 0.663 0.661 0.635N 2620 2571 2561

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ CA V2 Spring 2009 r 0.674 0.64 0.63N 2453 1935 1739

Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 Poway Spring 2009 r 0.635 0.570 0.580N 2351 2496 2452

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ Poway Spring 2009 r 0.624 0.635 0.651N 2319 2022 1978

CO Reading Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 Spring 2009 r 0.548 0.639 0.624N 5253 5533 5154

Reading Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 Spring 2009 r 0.626 0.652 0.632 0.640 0.551N 4033 4009 3857 2823 1586

FL Reading Goals Survey 2-5 FL V3 Spring 2007 r 0.622 0.603 0.486N 949 910 1719

Reading Goals Survey 6+ FL V3 Spring 2007 r 0.512 0.539 0.461 0.484 0.366N 1780 1691 3199 2119 1377

GA Reading Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 Spring 2007 r 0.460 0.519 0.492 0.486N 2716 2759 2843 2772

Reading Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 Spring 2007 r 0.442 0.481 0.497N 2765 2836 2524

KY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Spring 2006 r 0.512 0.470 0.505N 2383 2284 2371

Reading Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Spring 2006 r 0.552 0.569 0.511 0.483N 2450 2005 2245 965

NC Reading Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 Spring 2009 r 0.628 0.615 0.626N 1113 1073 1026

ND Reading Goals Survey 2-5 ND V2 Fall 2005 r 0.526 0.565 0.559N 1271 1239 1431

Reading Goals Survey 6+ ND V2 Fall 2005 r 0.572 0.514 0.543N 1494 1652 1612

SC Reading Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 Spring 2009 r 0.611 0.627 0.594N 6365 6281 5941

Reading Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 Spring 2009 r 0.636 0.651 0.614N 5572 5779 5300

WY Reading Goals Survey 2-5 WY V3 Spring 2006 r 0.569 0.545 0.579N 824 832 874

Reading Goals Survey 6+ WY V3 Spring 2006 r 0.607 0.602 0.565N 854 833 882

GA Language Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 Spring 2007 r 0.442 0.529 0.523 0.459N 2743 2709 2811 2720

Language Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 Spring 2007 r 0.461 0.510 0.462N 2736 2812 2506

Reading

Validity (as Pearson Product-Moment Correlations) of Criterion-Related Performance on State Accountability Tests by State Content Aligned MAP Tests Administered to a Minimum of 500 Students

Grade

Language Usage



Grades


Table 35 (cont.)


AR Math Goals Survey 2-5 AR V2 Spring 2008 r 0.525 0.617 0.653N 732 506 368

Math Goals Survey 6+ AR V2 Spring 2008 r 0.676 0.705N 352 356

CA Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 CA V2 Spring 2009 r 0.674 0.666 0.685N 2625 2573 2561

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ CA V2 Spring 2009 r 0.715 0.713 0.649N 2510 2255 2200

Math Survey w/ Goals 3-5 Poway Spring 2009 N 0.606 0.565 0.653r 2354 2482 2464

Math Survey w/ Goals 6-8 Poway Spring 2009 N 0.693 0.698 0.6142398 2101 1147

CO Math Goals Survey 2-5 CO V2 Spring 2009 r 0.601 0.618 0.640N 5435 5536 5191

Math Goals Survey 6+ CO V2 Spring 2009 r 0.678 0.722 0.724 0.719 0.705N 4456 4217 4104 3011 1512

FL Math Goals Survey 2-5 FL V3 Spring 2007 r 0.657 0.625 0.662N 970 913 873

Math Goals Survey 6+ FL V3 Spring 2007 r 0.624 0.657 0.667 0.636 0.652N 1771 1708 1585 2049 1334

GA Math Goals Survey 2-5 GA V2 Spring 2007 r 0.554 0.472 0.602 0.509N 2679 2706 2739 2726

Math Goals Survey 6+ GA V2 Spring 2007 r 0.657 0.589 0.570N 2756 2799 2517

KY Math Goals Survey 2-5 KY V3 Spring 2006 r 0.566 0.574 0.599N 2383 2277 2364

Math Goals Survey 6+ KY V3 Spring 2006 r 0.633 0.666 0.659N 2451 1974 2235

NC Math Goals Survey 2-5 NC V3 Spring 2009 r 0.572 0.597 0.627N 1118 1076 1030

SC Math Survey w/ Goals 2-5 SC V5 Spring 2009 r 0.653 0.617 0.655N 6394 6293 6021

Math Survey w/ Goals 6+ SC V5 Spring 2009 r 0.676 0.660 0.690N 5961 5909 5569

Mathematics

Accountability Tests by State Content Aligned MAP Tests Administered to a Minimum of 500 Students (cont.)

Grade

Validity (as Pearson Product-Moment Correlations) of Criterion-Related Performance on State


Precision of MAP and MAP for Primary Grades Scores

The importance and influence of score precision on reliability and validity is obvious from the immediately preceding sections. Less obvious, perhaps, is that score precision in both the MAP Survey with Goals and the MAP for Primary Grades Survey with Goals Tests is consistent across the measurement range of interest. Figures 5, 6, and 7 demonstrate this consistency for randomly selected MAP reading, language usage, and mathematics tests, respectively. They show the levels of standard error of measurement (SEM) across the operational RIT range for grades 2 through 10. Figures 8 and 9 show the corresponding data from MAP for Primary Grades Tests for grades kindergarten through 2.

Included in the figures are comparable SEM distributions for hypothetical fixed-form tests for grades in the same grade range. These “tests” are designed to have the same test length as the corresponding MAP or MAP for Primary Grades tests. Data for the fixed-form tests are calculated assuming that items exist for every point in a test designed to provide maximum information at the mean achievement level in each grade. These are very informative fixed-form tests, but they cannot be created because no infinite item pools exist.

In each of the figures there is slight but noticeable fluctuation in MAP and the MAP for Primary Grades SEM at the very lowest end of the grade level distributions. All mean SEMs are below 4 RITs, except at the very highest levels of the grade 10 distributions in reading and language usage. By contrast SEMs for the fixed-form tests show rapid acceleration of SEM as student performance moves away from the center of the test. This consistency in MAP and MAP for Primary Grades SEMs across the RIT ranges of interest is particularly important when student change in performance is to be evaluated. Since SEMs must be combined to evaluate the precision of change, greater precision in the scores will allow greater precision in the evaluation of change.



Grades

Figure 5. Mean standard errors of measurement for New Hampshire READING tests in grades 2 through 10

and for optimal fixed form tests.

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

11.0

135 145 155 165 175 185 195 205 215 225 235 245 255

Mea

n St

anda

rd E

rror

of M

easu

rem

ent

RIT

Grd 2

Grd 3

Grd 4

Grd 5

Grd 6

Grd 7

Grd 8

Grd 9

Grd 10

Grd 4 fixedGrd 7 fixed

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

11.0

145 155 165 175 185 195 205 215 225 235 245 255

Mea

m S

tand

ard

Erro

r of M

easu

rem

ent

RIT

Grd 2

Grd 3

Grd 4

Grd 5

Grd 6

Grd 7

Grd 8

Grd 9

Grd 10

Grd 4 fixedGrd 7 fixed

Figure 6. Mean standard errors of measurement for Colorado LANGUAGE USAGE tests in grades 2 through 10 and for optimal fixed form tests.



1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

11.0

145 155 165 175 185 195 205 215 225 235 245 255 265 275

Mea

n St

anda

rd E

rror

of M

easu

rem

ent

RIT

Grd 2

Grd 3

Grd 4

Grd 5

Grd 6

Grd 7

Grd 8

Grd 9

Grd 10Grd 4 fixedGrd 7 fixed

Figure 7. Mean standard errors of measurement for South Carolina MATHEMATICS tests in grades 2 through 10 and for optimal fixed form tests.

Figure 8. Mean standard errors of measurement for MAP for Primary Grades READING tests in

grades kindergarten through 2 and for optimal fixed form tests.

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

11.0

12.0

130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230

Mea

n St

anda

rd E

rror

of M

easu

rem

ent

RIT

K-Fixed

K

Grd 1-FixedGrd 1

Grd 2-FixedGrd 2



Grades

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

11.0

12.0

125 135 145 155 165 175 185 195 205 215 225 235

Mea

n St

anda

rd E

rror

of M

easu

rem

ent

RIT

K-Fixed

K

Grd 1-FixedGrd 1

Figure 9. Mean standard errors of measurement for MAP for Primary Grades MATHEMATICS

tests in grades kindergarten through 2 and for optimal fixed form tests.

Test Information Another method of analyzing the quality of test scores for the range of student achievement is to examine the test information (Samejima, 1977). Test information considers the amount of information that is added to a test by each item that is administered. It is commonly used in examining the precision of tests developed using item response theory, and is particularly useful in examining the quality of adaptive tests such as the MAP and MAP for Primary Grades tests. Test information has a mathematical relationship to the conditional standard error that we considered above, but it is related more directly to the number and characteristics of items included on the test. Therefore, test information is somewhat more useful in comparing different types of tests and determining how a particular change in a test might affect the precision of scores for a particular group of students.

Figure 10 below shows an example of test information for state content-aligned MAP survey with goals reading tests administered in Minnesota in spring 2007. In this figure, the mean test information for each RIT level is plotted for students in grades 2 through 10. This figure also shows the test information for the optimal fixed-form tests described above. It is useful to repeat that these fixed-form tests are hypothetical, representing the best fixed-form test that could be created with an infinitely large item bank with the same test length as the MAP survey with goals tests. Figures 11 and 12 show corresponding information for state content-aligned MAP survey with goals language usage and mathematics tests, respectively.

In addition to the dramatic differences in test information yielded by MAP tests over the optimal fixed-form tests, there are other notable similarities between Figures 10, 11, and 12. At the peak of the fixed-form information functions, the MAP tests are providing between 25% and 30% more information than the fixed-form tests. This suggests that the fixed-form tests would have to be



extended in length by 25% to 30% in order to yield test information levels that are comparable to MAP tests. The other similarities between the figures are the two arrows along the X-axis in each figure. These arrows represent the 1st percentile rank at the beginning of grade 2 (arrow on the left) and the 98th percentile rank from the end of grade 10 (arrow on the right). The percentile ranks were taken from the 2008 RIT Norms (NWEA, 2008). In each figure, we can also see that the information yield for MAP tests only drops noticeably at the extremes of the grade level range. However, for reading and mathematics in kindergarten through early grade 2, the MAP for Primary Grades tests restore test information to levels that are comparable to those from MAP tests (see Figures 13 and 14).

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

11.0

12.0

140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250

Test

Info

rmat

ion

RIT

Grd 2

Grd 3

Grd 4

Grd 5

Grd 6

Grd 7

Grd 8

Grd 9

Grd 10

Grd 4 FixedGrd 7 Fixed

Figure 10. Mean test information for state content-aligned MAP survey with goals READING tests

from Minnesota and optimal fixed form tests in grades 2 through 10.



Grades

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

11.0

12.0

150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250

Test

Info

rmat

ion

RIT

Grd 2

Grd 3

Grd 4

Grd 5

Grd 6

Grd7

Grd 8

Grd 9

Grd 10


Figure 11. Mean test information for state content-aligned MAP survey with goals LANGUAGE

USAGE tests from Indiana and optimal fixed form tests in grades 2 through 10.

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

11.0

12.0

145 155 165 175 185 195 205 215 225 235 245 255 265

Test

Info

rmat

ion

RIT

Grd 2

Grd 3

Grd 4

Grd 5

Grd 6

Grd 7

Grd 8

Grd 9

Grd 10


Figure 12. Mean test information for state content-aligned MAP survey with goals

MATHEMATICS tests from South Carolina and optimal fixed form tests for grades 2 through 10.



0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

11.0

12.0

130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230

Test

Info

rmat

ion

RIT

K-Fixed

K-MPG

Grd 1-Fixed

Grd 1-MPG

Grd 2 -Fixed

Grd 2 -MPG

Figure 13. Mean test information for Primary Grades READING Tests and optimal fixed form tests

in Grade K, 1, and 2

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

11.0

12.0

125 135 145 155 165 175 185 195 205 215 225 235

Test

Info

rmat

ion

RIT

K - Fixed

K - MPG

Grd 1 -Fixed

Grd 1 -MPG

Grd - 2 Fixed

Grd - 2 MPG

Figure 14. Mean test information for Primary Grades MATHEMATICS Tests and optimal fixed

form tests in Grade K, 1, and 2



Grades

APPENDIX A: ITEM DEVELOPMENT READING LIST Listed below are the instructional and research references used in the development of MAP for Primary Grades item content.

Reading Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to Read: Thinking and Learning about Print. Cambridge, MA: MIT

Press.

Adams, M. J., Foorman, B. R., Lundberg, I., & Beeler, T. (1998). Phonemic Awareness in Young Children. Baltimore: Brooks.

Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. R., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J. & Wittrock, M. C. (Eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York, NY: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Burns, M. S., Griffin, P., Snow, C. E. (Eds.) (1999). Starting Out Right, A Guide to Promoting Children’s Reading Success. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Clay, M. M. (2nd ed.). (2005). An Observation Survey of Early Literacy Achievement. New Hampshire: Heinemann.

Cunningham, P. M. (4th ed.). (2005). Phonics They Use: Words for Reading and Writing. Boston: Pearson Education.

Dahl, K. L., Scharer, P. L., Lawson, L. L., & Grogan, P. R. (2001). Rethinking Phonics: Making the Best Teaching Decisions. New Hampshire: Heinemann.

Fountas, I. C. & Pinnell, G. S. (1999). Matching Books to Readers: Using Leveled Books in Guided Reading, K-3. New Hampshire: Heinemann.

Fountas, I. C. & Pinnell, G. S. (2003). Phonics Lessons: Letters, Words, and How They Work: Grade 2. New Hampshire: Firsthand-Heinemann.

Hiebert, E., Pearson, P. D., Taylor, B. M., Richardson, V., & Paris, S. G. (1998). Every Child a Reader, Applying Reading Research in the Classroom. Ann Arbor, Michigan: CIERA.

Honig, B., Diamond, L., Gutlohn, L., & Mahler, J. (2000). Teaching Reading Sourcebook for Kindergarten through Eighth Grade. Emeryville: Core.

McGill-Franzen, A. (2005). Kindergarten Literacy: Matching Assessment and Instruction in Kindergarten. New York: Scholastic.

Moats, L. C. (2000). Speech to Print Language Essentials for Teachers. Baltimore: Brooks.

Routman, R. (2000). Conversations Strategies for Teaching, Learning, and Evaluating. Portsmouth: Heinemann.

Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.) (1998). Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.



Weaver, C. (3rd ed.). (2002). Reading Process and Practice. New Hampshire: Heinemann.

Mathematics Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. R., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P.

R., Raths, J. & Wittrock, M. C. (Eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York, NY: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Carpenter, F., & Levi. (2003). Thinking Mathematically, Integrating Arithmetic and Algebra in Elementary School. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Carpenter, F., Levi, & Empson. (1999). Children’s Mathematics: Cognitively Guided Instruction. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Fosnot & Dolk. (2001). Young Mathematicians at Work: Constructing Multiplication and Division. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Fosnot & Dolk. (2001). Young Mathematicians at Work: Constructing Number Sense, Addition, and Subtraction. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Kilpatrick, J., et al. (2001). Adding It Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

Hong, K. T. (2004) Primary Mathematics. Singapore: Times Media Private Limited.

Ma, L. (2003). Knowing Mathematics. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning. (2006). Compendium: K-12 Standards. http://www.mcrel.org/standards-benchmarks/index.asp. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Curriculum Focal Points for Prekindergarten through Grade 8 Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1995). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2007). Teaching Children Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.

Northwest Evaluation Association. (2001). Learning Continuum Release 1.01. Portland, OR: NWEA.

Sherman, Richardson, & Yard. (2005). Teaching Children Who Struggle with Mathematics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Van deWalle (2004). Elementary and Middle School Mathematics: Teaching Developmentally. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Wright, R. J., Martland, R. J., & Stafford, A. K. (2006). Early Numeracy, Assessment for Teaching and Intervention.London: Paul Chapman Publishing.

Wright, R. J., Martland, R. J., Stafford, A. K., & Stanger, G. (2002). Teaching Number, Advancing Children’s Skills and Strategies. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.


http://www.mcrel.org/standards-benchmarks/index.asp


Grades Wright, R. J., Stanger, G., Stafford, A. K., & Martland, J. (2006). Teaching Number in the

Classroom with 4– 8 Year Olds. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.



REFERENCES American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National

Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Andersen, E. B. (2002). Residual diagrams based on a remarkably simple result concerning the variances of maximum likelihood estimators. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 27, (1), 19–30.

Andrich, D., Marais, I., Humphry, S. (2010, June). Using a theorem by Andersen and the dichotomous Rasch model to assess the presence of random guessing in multiple choice items. Paper presented at the International Conference on Probabilistic Models for Education, Psychology, Social Science and Health, Copenhagen, DK.

Baker, F. (2001). The basics of item response theory. College Park, MD: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation.

Bejar, I. I. (1980). A procedure for investigating the unidimensionality of achievement tests based on item parameters. Journal of Educational Measurement, 17, 283-296.

Cronin, J., Dahlin, M., Adkins, D. & Kingsbury, G. G. (2007). The proficiency illusion. Portland, OR: Northwest Evaluation Association.

Green, B. F., Bock, R. D., Humphreys, L. G., Linn, R. L., Reckase, M. D. (1984). Technical guidelines for assessing computerized adaptive tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21, 347-360.

Haladyna, T. M. (1994). Developing and validating multiple-choice test items. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hauser, C., Kingsbury, G. G. & Wise, S. L. (2008, March). Individual validity: Adding a missing link. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.

Holland, P. W. & Thayer, D. T. (1985). An alternative definition of the ETS delta scale of item difficulty. ETS Research Report No. 85-43. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Ingebo, G. S. (1997). Probability in the measure of achievement. Chicago, IL: MESA Press.

Kingsbury G. G. & Hauser, C. (2004, April). Computerized adaptive testing and No Child Left Behind. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.

Linacre, J. M. & Wright, B. D. (1989). Mantel-Haenszel DIF and PROX are Equivalent. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 1989, 3, (2), 52-53.

Linacre, J. M. (2009). Winsteps-Ministep: Rasch Model Computer Programs, Version 3.69.0, www.winsteps.com.

Lord, F. M. & Novick M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.

Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.



Grades


Luppescu, S. (1993). DIF detection examined. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 7, (2), 285-286.

Mantel, N. & Haenszel, W. (1959). Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 22, 719-748.

Masters, G. N. (1985). Common person equating with the Rasch model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, (1), 73-82.

Northwest Evaluation Association. (2008, September). RIT scale norms: For use with Measures of Academic Progress. Portland, OR: Author.

Osterlind, S. J. (1998). Constructing test items: Multiple-choice, constructed response, performance, and other formats. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Owen, R. J. (1975). A Bayesian sequential procedure for quantal response in the context of adaptive testing. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 70, 229-244.

Rasch, G. (1980). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago, IL: MESA Press.

Roid, G. H. & Haladyna, T. M. (1997). A technology for test-item writing. New York: Academic Press.

Rudner, L. M. (2004, April). Expected classification accuracy. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.

Samejima, F. (1977). A use of the information function in tailored testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1 (3), 233-247.

Samejima, F. (1994). Estimation of reliability coefficients using the test information function and its modifications. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18 (3), 229-244.

Schulz, E. M., Perlman, C., Rice, W. K., Wright, B. D. (1996). An empirical comparison Rasch and Mantel-Haenszel procedures for assessing differential item functioning. In G. Englehard & M. Wilson (Eds.), Objective measurement: Theory into practice, Volume 3, (pp. 65-81). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Warm, A. W. (1989). Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory with tests of finite length. Psychometrika, 54, 427-450.

Wilson, E. B. & Hilferty, M. M. (1931). The distribution of chi-square. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 17, 684-688.

Wright, B. D. (1977). Solving measurement problems with the Rasch model. Journal of Educational Measurement, 14, 97-116.

Wright, B. D. (1999). Rasch measurement models. In G.N. Masters & J.P. Keeves (Eds.), Advances in measurement in educational research and assessment (pp. 85- 97). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science Ltd.

MPG Technical Manual - Richland County School District Two 5...Technical Manual for Measures of...

Documents

Transcript of MPG Technical Manual - Richland County School District Two 5...Technical Manual for Measures of...