Equated WCPM scores are more highly correlated across passages read by the same student than raw WCPM scores, suggesting greater reliability¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2023: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Correlations between students' equated WCPM scores from pairs of passages read in the same test event exceed correlations between their raw WCPM scores across all three terms. → Chen 2020

Evidence¶

Chen 2020¶

Chen, J., & Simpson, M. A. (2020). Equating words-correct-per-minute (WCPM) scores across passages of MAP Reading Fluency. Portland, OR: NWEA. https://www.nwea.org/research/publication/equating-words-correct-per-minute-wcpm-scores-across-passages-of-map-reading-fluency/

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Large-scale observational analysis of adaptive oral reading test records from students in grades K-3 across Fall 2018 through Spring 2019 (Table 3.1 reports pair Ns such as 22,073 and correlations such as 0.865 raw versus 0.894 equated for p1_p2 in Fall 2018). The report states "suggesting that the equated scores are more reliable."

"The correlations between students’ equated WCPM scores are higher than the correlations between students’ raw WCPM scores, suggesting that the equated scores are more reliable."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Cross-term WCPM score differences are more consistent across passage positions after equating, supporting progress monitoring — related
• Equated WCPM scores generally correlate more highly with MAP Growth Reading RIT scores than raw WCPM scores, with one exception — related
• Equated WCPM scores show much less within-student variance than raw WCPM scores, indicating reduced passage-difficulty fluctuations — related
• Equated WCPM scores from non-reference passages show smaller residuals against reference-passage scores than raw scores, with one passage exception — related