Seriously disengaged initial testers who stopped rapid-guessing on retest showed large RIT gains, averaging about 6 points in Reading and 12 in Math¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2019 · checked against its sources 2026-10-15 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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.
q3 i? For students serious rapid-guessing on the initial test, zero rapid guesses on the retest was associated with mean RIT differences around 6 points for the Reading tests and about 12 points for the Math tests. → Wise 2019
Evidence¶
Wise 2019¶
Wise, S. (2019). The Relationship Between Test-Taking Disengagement and Performance on MAP Growth Retests. (The Collaborative for Student Growth at NWEA Working Paper). https://www.nwea.org/research/publication/the-relationship-between-test-taking-disengagement-and-performance-on-map-growth-retests/
q3 · i? · associational · r2
Observational analysis of retests taken no more than one day after the initial test, shown in Figures 1-4: students serious (30% or more) rapid-guessing initially but showing "zero rapid guesses on the retest" averaged large RIT gains; gains exceeded typical standard errors of roughly 3.5 points in Reading and 3.0 in Math. No inferential statistics or effect sizes are printed.
"For each of the figures, less rapid guessing on the retest was associated with a higher positive RIT score difference. For example, when there were zero rapid guesses on the retest, the RIT differences tended to be large, averaging around 6 points for the two Reading tests and about 12 points for the two Math tests."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Test-taking disengagement frequently differs between a MAP Growth initial test and a same-day retest — related
- E-M scoring partially accounts for observed RIT score differences between disengaged first tests and engaged retests — related
- Including rapid guesses in scoring introduces systematic measurement errors that can seriously distort test scores — related
- Rapid guesses on MAP Growth reflect a lack of engagement rather than a lack of knowledge — a broader claim this one bears on
- Students who rapid-guess less on a MAP Growth retest tend to see score gains, while those who rapid-guess more tend to see declines — a broader claim this one bears on
- Standard effort-moderated scoring accounts for roughly one-third of score distortion due to differential disengagement on low-stakes achievement tests — related
- E-M scoring leaves residual score distortion, suggesting some disengaged test responses are nonrapid rather than rapid guesses — related
- Rapid guessing is a validated indicator of disengaged item responding — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
serious-disengagement-retest-zero-guessing-gains |
title |
Seriously disengaged initial testers who stopped rapid-guessing on retest showed large RIT gains, averaging about 6 points in Reading and 12 in Math |
description |
Seriously disengaged initial testers who stopped rapid-guessing on retest showed large RIT gains, averaging about 6 points in Reading and 12 in Math |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2019 |
source_checked |
2026-10-15 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-09 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — wise-2019 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.