Drawing ability scores rise from grade IB to grade 8A, but the data support group norms rather than a distinctive norm for each grade¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 1915 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Median drawing scores increase across grades, yet adjacent grades are so similar that norms can only be established for groups of grades, not for each grade individually. → Childs 1915

Evidence¶

Childs 1915¶

Childs, H. G. (1915). Measurement of the drawing ability of two thousand one hundred and seventy-seven children in Indiana city school systems by a supplemented Thorndike scale. The Journal of Educational Psychology, 6(7), 391-408. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0075575

q2 · i? · design · r2

Summary of the combined distribution tables for 1,405 pupils in system A and 487 pupils in one school of system B, tabulated by grade. The author concludes that "no distinctive norm can be established for each grade" and instead proposes five grade groups with characteristic scores ranging from about 4.5-5.5 for the lowest group to 8.6-9.3 for the highest.

"From this it would seem that no distinctive norm can be established for each grade, but rather by groups as indicated below."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Content Proximity pilot tests contained significantly more on-grade items and made better use of adjacent-grade items than traditional MAP Growth tests — related
• The dashboard reports median achievement percentiles normed to a nationally representative pre-COVID sample and projected proficiency against state cut scores — related
• The supervised school system showed a larger range of grade-to-grade drawing progress (5.53 units from grade 1A to 8A) than the unsupervised system (2.44 units) — related