MAP tests show metric invariance across grades for all studied tests except Michigan Mathematics tests¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2013 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2016: 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? Multi-group CFA provides clear support for metric invariance across grades for all tests except Michigan Mathematics tests, with configural invariance for all tests. → Shudong Wang 2013
Evidence¶
Shudong Wang 2013¶
Shudong Wang, Marty McCall, Hong Jiao, & Gregg Harris. (2013). Construct Validity and Measurement Invariance of Computerized Adaptive Testing: Application to Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) Using Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.5539/jedp.v3n1p88
q2 · i? · associational · r2
MGCFA nested-model comparisons (no constraint, equal loadings, equal loadings plus factor variance) across five grades per academic calendar in ten states. The article reports "clear support for the metric invariance for all tests except for Michigan Mathematics Tests".
"All fit indexes for both Reading and Mathematics tests for different grades and academic years from 10 states satisfied Hu and Bentler’s criteria, except RMSEAs and SRMRs for Michigan Mathematics Tests. In summary, the results provide clear support for the metric invariance for all tests except for Michigan Mathematics Tests, and at least, there are configure invariances for all tests."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The authors conclude that MAP reading and mathematics CAT constructs are invariant across five time points in ten states (except Indiana mathematics), though their mathematics tables show strong-invariance CFI drops above 0.01 in most states — related
- A one-factor unidimensional model is the most reasonable fit for MAP computerized adaptive Reading and Mathematics tests across grades, terms, and ten states, though Michigan Mathematics misses the RMSEA criterion — related
- Chi-square difference tests show significant loading invariance constraints for Kansas Reading but all constraints significant for Michigan Mathematics — related
- MLGM model fit failed for the Indiana mathematics test, the sole exception to invariance support — related
- 13%–15% of MAP Growth items per subject were flagged as significantly drifted by the Robust Z procedure, with no clear pattern among flagged items — related
- SFAILQ shows scalar measurement invariance across adolescents, young adults, and middle-aged adults — related
- Quadratic latent growth fits MAP longitudinal achievement data better than linear growth across ten states — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
map-cat-metric-invariance-across-grades |
title |
MAP tests show metric invariance across grades for all studied tests except Michigan Mathematics tests |
description |
MAP tests show metric invariance across grades for all studied tests except Michigan Mathematics tests |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2013 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
recheck_by |
2016 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-08 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — shudong-wang-2013 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.