Seasonal growth patterns were examined with math and reading scores for over seven million K-8 students across three within-year test occasions¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 2 studies · 2 associationalr?·q2–q3
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2026: baselines and conditions change
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? The linearity assumption was tested using math and reading scores for over seven million students in grades K-8 across fall, winter, and spring of 2016-17. → Megan Kuhfeld 2020
q2 i? The linearity assumption was examined with math and reading test scores for over seven million students in kindergarten through 8th grade across fall, winter, and spring of 2016-17. → Megan Kuhfeld 2021
Evidence¶
Megan Kuhfeld 2020¶
Megan Kuhfeld, James Soland. (2020). The learning curve: Revisiting the assumption of linear growth across the school year. NWEA Research working paper. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19345747.2020.1839990
q3 · i? · associational · r?
Descriptive statement of the study's data and design: a dataset of "math and reading test scores for over seven million students" assessed at three within-year occasions in 2016-17. No effect size is printed in the available text.
"We examine this assumption using a data set containing math and reading test scores for over seven million students in kindergarten through 8th grade across the fall, winter, and spring of the 2016-17 school year."
Megan Kuhfeld 2021¶
Megan Kuhfeld, James Soland. (2021). The learning curve: Revisiting within-year linear growth assumptions. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 14:1, 143-171. https://www.nwea.org/research/publication/35099/
q2 · i? · associational · r?
Descriptive statement of the study's data source: math and reading scores for "over seven million students in kindergarten through 8th grade" at three seasonal time points in 2016-17, used to test the linearity assumption.
"We examine this assumption using a data set containing math and reading test scores for over seven million students in kindergarten through 8th grade across the fall, winter, and spring of the 2016-17 school year."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Seasonal patterns are discrepant across national data sets — related
- Assuming linear within-year achievement growth is often not justified, particularly in reading — related
- Test preparation demands slow instruction, with the spring review season beginning earlier and lasting longer each year of the study — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
seven-million-students-three-seasonal-occasions |
aliases |
seven-million-student-three-season-dataset-growth-linearity |
title |
Seasonal growth patterns were examined with math and reading scores for over seven million K-8 students across three within-year test occasions |
description |
Seasonal growth patterns were examined with math and reading scores for over seven million K-8 students across three within-year test occasions |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2021 |
recheck_by |
2026 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-08 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — megan-kuhfeld-2020, megan-kuhfeld-2021 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.