Test lengths are comparable across engines, but CBE test durations are higher than COLO's in both terms and content areas, more prominently in Reading¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · checked against its sources 2026-10-09 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? Test lengths average around 40–41 items (Reading) and 50–51 items (Mathematics) on both engines, while CBE durations exceed COLO's in both terms and content areas. → Bo 2020
Evidence¶
Bo 2020¶
Bo, E., & Meyer, P. (2020). Comparability of MAP Growth tests administered through different technology and psychometric infrastructure: An engine evaluation study based on empirical data. Portland, OR: NWEA. https://www.nwea.org/research/publication/comparability-of-map-growth-tests-administered-through-different-technology-and-psychometric-infrastructure-an-engine-evaluation-study-based-on-empirical-data/
q2 · i? · causal · r2
Descriptive comparison of test length and duration (in minutes) from the Nebraska Fall 2019/Winter 2020 data. The article reports similar magnitude and direction of duration differences in both terms, suggesting factors other than the Altair effect; small duration effect sizes (0.2–0.3) appeared in a few grades.
"CBE and COLO have comparable test lengths averaging around 40–41 items per Reading test and 50–51 items per Mathematics test. Notable differences are observed for test duration as the CBE group has higher test durations than the COLO group in both terms and content areas, with the differences being more prominent in Reading."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Within a single administration, COLO administered more items and overexposed fewer items than the CBE, likely due to its randomesque exposure-control procedure — related
- Differences in test-taking engagement across content categories were primarily due to differences in the reading load of items — related
- Growth-score differences between CBE and COLO are small, exceeding 0.2 only in Reading Grades K–1 (favoring CBE) and Mathematics Grade 8 (favoring COLO) — related
- Item exposure rates are comparable across engines, with most items below 10%, and the CBE Reading item-use rate is lower than COLO's — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
cbe-longer-test-duration-comparable-length |
title |
Test lengths are comparable across engines, but CBE test durations are higher than COLO's in both terms and content areas, more prominently in Reading |
description |
Test lengths are comparable across engines, but CBE test durations are higher than COLO's in both terms and content areas, more prominently in Reading |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2020 |
source_checked |
2026-10-09 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-08 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — bo-2020 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.