Traditional end-of-passage assessment formats may inadvertently measure extraneous constructs such as working memory, attention, and language¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr?·q2
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · 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? Prompting students to answer items at the conclusion of a reading passage may introduce measurement of extraneous constructs. → Guerreiro 2022
Evidence¶
Guerreiro 2022¶
Guerreiro, M., & Johnson, J. (2022). Measuring student reading comprehension performance: Considerations of accuracy, equity, and engagement by embedding comprehension items within reading passages. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 27. https://www.nwea.org/research/publication/measuring-student-reading-comprehension-performance-considerations-of-accuracy-equity-and-engagement-by-embedding-comprehension-items-within-reading-passages/
q2 · i? · causal · r?
The article proposes that end-of-passage formats introduce extraneous memory and attention demands, stating assessments "may inadvertently measure extraneous constructs (e.g., working memory, attention, language, reading ability)"; this is an interpretive claim rather than a directly tested result in the available text.
"The study suggests that assessments may inadvertently measure extraneous constructs (e.g., working memory, attention, language, reading ability) by prompting students to answer items at the conclusion of the reading passage."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Classroom reading comprehension practice differs from formal assessment in item placement relative to the passage — related
- Embedded-item passages may yield improved student reading comprehension scores and a more valid measurement approach — related
- Embedding items has the potential to be a more equitable measure of reading comprehension for marginalized groups — related
- Embedding comprehension items within reading passages significantly affects measured reading achievement compared with answering items at the end of the passage — related
- The authors assert that innovative assessment measures capture POG competencies more fully than traditional standardized tests — related
- Benchmark success on human-designed assessments may not establish that the underlying abilities are being measured — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
end-of-passage-format-measures-extraneous-constructs |
title |
Traditional end-of-passage assessment formats may inadvertently measure extraneous constructs such as working memory, attention, and language |
description |
Traditional end-of-passage assessment formats may inadvertently measure extraneous constructs such as working memory, attention, and language |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2022 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-08 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — guerreiro-2022 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.