The dashboard's cohort view restricts results to students who consistently tested across selected terms, and those outcomes may be positively biased¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2024: tool and model accuracy changes quickly
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? The cohort view includes only students who participated in MAP Growth testing in the two terms selected, and outcomes for these consistent testers may be notably different from, and positively biased relative to, students with less consistent testing patterns. → User guide for interpreting the NWEA state dashboard: Exploring the educational impacts of COVID-19 2021
Evidence¶
User guide for interpreting the NWEA state dashboard: Exploring the educational impacts of COVID-19 2021¶
User guide for interpreting the NWEA state dashboard: Exploring the educational impacts of COVID-19. (2021). NWEA Center for School and Student Progress. https://www.nwea.org/research/publication/user-guide-for-interpreting-the-nwea-state-dashboard-exploring-the-educational-impacts-of-covid-19/
q2 · i? · associational · r1
The guide's cohort-view section explains that this view shows students who tested in both selected terms (Spring 2020 excluded because very few students tested at the pandemic's onset) and warns results "may be positively biased."
"When interpreting cohort results, it is important to consider that the outcomes for students who consistently tested may be notably different than outcomes for students with less consistent testing patterns (that is, results may be positively biased)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Systematic attrition differences mean COVID-19 impacts on student achievement are likely underestimated in fall 2020 MAP Growth results — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
- The dashboard's cross-sectional view compares same-grade students across terms using the full sample of testers, but attrition is not random — related
- The study's invariance findings may be biased by excluding students who missed a test and by sample heterogeneity — related
- State-level dashboard results are reported only when at least 20% of students were tested across most grades and the sample contains at least 10 students — related
- Sample selection bias may have led the study to overestimate language outcomes for adolescents with long-term CI use — related
- Sensitivity analyses restricting to students assessed in all 15 terms reproduced the full-sample between-group comparisons — related
- Systematic demographic differences in available fall 2020 assessment data suggest COVID-19 impacts on the most vulnerable students may be underestimated — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
cohort-view-consistent-testers-positive-bias |
title |
The dashboard's cohort view restricts results to students who consistently tested across selected terms, and those outcomes may be positively biased |
description |
The dashboard's cohort view restricts results to students who consistently tested across selected terms, and those outcomes may be positively biased |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2021 |
recheck_by |
2024 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-08 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — user-guide-for-interpreting-the-nwea-state-dashboard-exploring-the-educational-impacts-of-covid-19-2021 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.