Children’s Educational Services, Inc. (CES)

Standard Reading Passages

Cost

Technology, Human Resources, and Accommodations for Special Needs

Service and Support

Purpose and Other Implementation Information

Usage and Reporting

Initial Cost:

Each license (or "set") allows you to access materials for screening up to 35 students.

 

Number of Sets

(Each set allows you to assess up to 35 students)             

 

Cost per Set

1-10: $100

11-20: $95

21-100: $90

101-200: $85

201+: $80                                 

 

Replacement Cost:

No information provided; contact vendor for details.

 

Included in Cost:

 

  • 138 Controlled Reading passages for measuring oral reading fluency

 

 

 

Technology Requirements:

An online scoring platform for the Standard Reading Passages is available through EdSpring. This technology provides online administration, scoring and reporting of student scores.

 

Training Requirements:

No information provided; contact vendor for details.

 

Qualified Administrators:

  • Paraprofessionals
  • Professionals

 

Accommodations:

No information provided; contact vendor for details.

Where to Obtain:

Website: Children’s Educational Services, Inc. (CES): Website under construction

 

EdSpring online platform is available at TIES@k12.mn.us

 

Phone number: Not available

Email: Not available


Access to Technical Support:

No information provided; contact vendor for details.

The Children’s Educational Services, Inc. (CES) Standard Reading Passages (SRP) system includes grade level passages for teachers and other school personnel to use in screening to establish student achievement in reading, to set annual goals for those students, to monitor their progress and to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction for the purpose of modifying instruction when indicated.  An online scoring platform with reporting features for the Standard Reading Passages is available through EdSpring; TIES@k12.mn.us

 

The essential procedures used in CES SRP are the same as those developed by researchers at the University of Minnesota beginning in 1977 and the years following.  The reading passages were initially developed in 1988 and disseminated as the Standard Reading Passages.

Assessment Format:

  • One-to-one

 

Administration Time:

  • 10 minutes per student

 

Scoring Time:

  • 5 minutes per student

 

Scoring Method:

Raw score is count of number of words read correctly and incorrectly in one minute of reading aloud.  

                                                                                                                                                                          

Scores Generated:

  • Raw score
  • Developmental cut points
  • Error analysis

 

Classification Accuracy

Grade123456
Criterion 1 Falldashdashdashdashdashdash
Criterion 1 WinterFull bubbledHalf-filled bubbledFull bubbledFull bubbledFull bubbledHalf-filled bubble
Criterion 1 Springdashdashdashdashdashdash
Criterion 2 Falldashdashdashdashdashdash
Criterion 2 WinterdashdashFull bubbledFull bubbledHalf-filled bubbledHalf-filled bubble
Criterion 2 Springdashdashdashdashdashdash

Primary Sample

 

Criterion 1: Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) administered in Spring

Time of Year: Winter

 

Grade 1

Grade 2

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Cut points

20th percentile

20th Percentile

20th Percentile

20th Percentile

20th Percentile

20th Percentile

Base rate in the sample for children requiring intensive intervention

20th percentile Grade

20th percentile Grade

20th percentile Grade

20th percentile Grade

20th percentile Grade

20th percentile Grade

Base rate in the sample for children considered at-risk, including those with the most intensive needs

0.18

0.20

0.12

0.08

0.09

0.15

False Positive Rate

0.28

0.12

0.10

0.17

0.20

0.36

False Negative Rate

0.20

0.21

0.20

0.21

0.19

0.22

Sensitivity

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.81

0.78

Specificity

0.71

0.88

0.90

0.83

0.80

0.64

Positive Predictive Power

0.39

0.63

0.51

0.30

0.27

0.27

Negative Predictive Power

0.94

0.95

0.97

0.98

0.98

0.94

Overall Classification Rate

0.73

0.87

0.89

0.83

0.80

0.66

Area Under the Curve (AUC)

0.84

0.93

0.94

0.90

0.89

0.89

AUC 95% Confidence Interval Lower

0.82

0.92

0.92

0.87

0.86

0.86

95% Confidence Interval AUC Upper

0.87

0.94

0.95

0.92

0.92

0.92

At 90% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.63

0.78

0.80

0.65

0.67

0.67

At 80% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.71

0.88

0.89

0.83

0.79

0.79

At 70% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.76

0.95

0.94

0.92

0.90

0.90

 

 

Criterion 2: Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment (MCA) - Reading administered in Spring

Time of Year: Winter

 

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Cut points

20th Percentile

20th Percentile

20th Percentile

20th Percentile

Base rate in the sample for children requiring intensive intervention

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

Base rate in the sample for children considered at-risk, including those with the most intensive needs

0.20

0.21

0.21

0.21

False Positive Rate

0.14

0.20

0.28

0.36

False Negative Rate

0.20

0.20

0.20

0.20

Sensitivity

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.81

Specificity

0.86

0.80

0.72

0.64

Positive Predictive Power

0.58

0.51

0.43

0.38

Negative Predictive Power

0.95

0.94

0.93

0.92

Overall Classification Rate

0.85

0.80

0.74

0.67

Area Under the Curve (AUC) (Confidence Interval)

0.91

0.88

0.85

0.81

AUC 95% Confidence Interval Lower

0.90

0.87

0.84

0.78

AUC 95% Confidence Interval Upper

0.92

0.89

0.87

0.85

At 90% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.72

0.62

0.44

0.43

At 80% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.86

0.80

0.72

0.65

At 70% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.92

0.88

0.84

0.75

 

 

Additional Classification Accuracy

The following are provided for context and did not factor into the Classification Accuracy ratings.

 

Disaggregated Data

Criterion 1: Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) administered in Spring

Time of Year: Winter

Subgroup: African American

 

Grade 1

Grade 2

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Cut points

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

Base rate in the sample for children requiring intensive intervention

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

Base rate in the sample for children considered at-risk, including those with the most intensive needs

0.33

0.35

0.20

0.14

0.33

False Positive Rate

0.35

0.12

0.19

0.29

0.35

False Negative Rate

0.19

0.26

0.16

0.17

0.19

Sensitivity

0.81

0.74

0.84

0.83

0.81

Specificity

0.65

0.88

0.81

0.71

0.65

Positive Predictive Power

0.54

0.77

0.53

0.40

0.54

Negative Predictive Power

0.87

0.86

0.95

0.95

0.87

Overall Classification Rate

0.33

0.35

0.20

0.14

0.33

Area Under the Curve (AUC)

0.81

0.91

0.88

0.81

0.78

AUC 95% Confidence Interval Lower

0.71

0.87

0.81

0.66

0.65

AUC 95% Confidence Interval Upper

0.91

0.95

0.95

0.96

0.90

At 90% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.59

0.72

0.58

0.32

0.35

At 80% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.68

0.84

0.83

0.60

0.66

At 70% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.73

0.92

0.88

0.81

0.73

 

Criterion 2: Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment (MCA) - Reading administered in Spring

Time of Year: Winter

Subgroup: African American

 

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Cut points

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

Base rate in the sample for children requiring intensive intervention

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

Base rate in the sample for children considered at-risk, including those with the most intensive needs

0.49

0.52

0.52

False Positive Rate

0.23

0.28

0.29

False Negative Rate

0.14

0.21

0.20

Sensitivity

0.86

0.79

0.80

Specificity

0.77

0.72

0.71

Positive Predictive Power

0.71

0.71

0.69

Negative Predictive Power

0.89

0.80

0.81

Overall Classification Rate

0.81

0.76

0.75

Area Under the Curve (AUC)

0.91

0.84

0.84

AUC 95% Confidence Interval Lower

0.88

0.81

0.80

AUC 95% Confidence Interval Upper

0.94

0.88

0.89

At 90% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.73

0.48

0.43

At 80% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.82

0.71

0.71

At 70% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.92

0.84

0.88

 

Cross-Validation Sample

 

Criterion 1: Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) Reading

Time of Year: Spring

 

Grade 2

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Cut points

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

Base rate in the sample for children requiring intensive intervention

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

20th percentile

Base rate in the sample for children considered at-risk, including those with the most intensive needs

0.16

0.21

0.21

0.20

0.32

False Positive Rate

0.12

0.25

0.19

0.37

0.21

False Negative Rate

0.17

0.16

0.27

0.17

0.52

Sensitivity

0.83

0.84

0.73

0.83

0.48

Specificity

0.89

0.75

0.81

0.63

0.79

Positive Predictive Power

0.59

0.47

0.50

0.35

0.52

Negative Predictive Power

0.86

0.95

0.92

0.94

0.76

Overall Classification Rate

0.88

0.77

0.79

0.67

0.69

Area Under the Curve (AUC)

0.95, 0.95

0.85

0.84

0.85

0.89

AUC 95% Confidence Interval Lower

.90, .95

0.75

0.68

0.75

0.80

AUC 95% Confidence Interval Upper

1.00

0.95

0.00

0.94

0.98

At 90% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.88

0.39

0.79

0.46

0.55

At 80% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.90

0.75

0.80

0.64

0.87

At 70% Sensitivity, specificity equals

0.93

0.87

0.80

0.81

0.87

 

Reliability

Grade123456
RatingFull bubbleFull bubbledFull bubbledFull bubbledFull bubbledFull bubbled
  1. Justification for each type of reliability reported, given the type and purpose of the tool:

None provided

 

  1. Description of the sample(s), including size and characteristics, for each reliability analysis conducted:

None provided

 

  1. Description of the analysis procedures for each reported type of reliability:

None provided

 

  1. Reliability of performance level score (e.g., model-based, internal consistency, inter-rater reliability).

Type of Reliability

Age or Grade

n

Coefficient

Confidence Interval

Internal Consistency-Cronbach’s Alpha

1

597

0.94

0.93-0.95

Internal Consistency-Cronbach’s Alpha

2

786

0.98

0.98-0.98

Internal Consistency-Cronbach’s Alpha

3

838

0.98

0.98-0.98

Internal Consistency-Cronbach’s Alpha

4

670

0.97

0.97-0.98

Internal Consistency-Cronbach’s Alpha

5

532

0.97

0.96-0.97

Internal Consistency-Cronbach’s Alpha

6

213

0.94

0.93-0.96

Test-Retest

1

597

0.78

0.74-0.81

Test-Retest

2

786

0.94

0.94-0.95

Test-Retest

3

838

0.95

0.94-0.95

Test-Retest

4

670

0.92

0.91-0.93

Test-Retest

5

532

0.91

0.89-0.92

Test-Retest

6

213

0.88

0.84-0.90

 

Disaggregated Reliability

The following disaggregated reliability data are provided for context and did not factor into the Reliability rating.

Type of Reliability

Subgroup

Age or Grade

n

Coefficient

Confidence Interval

Internal Consistency

Black

2

19

0.96

0.91-0.99

Internal Consistency

Black

3

20

0.82

0.59-0.93

Internal Consistency

Black

4

25

0.90

0.78-0.96

Internal Consistency

Black

5

25

0.92

0.83-0.97

Internal Consistency

Black

6

9

0.98

0.92-1.00

 

Validity

Grade123456
RatingFull bubbledFull bubbledFull bubbledFull bubbledFull bubbledHalf-filled bubbled
  1. Description of each criterion measure used and explanation as to why each measure is appropriate, given the type and purpose of the tool:

The Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) was used as the outcome measure. Published by the NWEA the MAP is regarded as a highly valid and reliable measure of broad reading ability. The NWEA website states, “Our tools are trusted by educators in 140 countries and more than half the schools in the US” which indicates it can be considered an excellent outcome measure for classification studies on the Oral Reading measure studied here. See  https://www.nwea.org/normative-data-rit-scores/ for more information. The MAP is an external measure.

 

A second criterion used in our analysis is the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment (MCA) and reading. The MCA is the state accountability test for Minnesota and has been established by the Minnesota Department of Education to be a highly reliable and valid measure or reading. See http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/dse/test/mn/Tech/ for more technical information. The MCA is an external measure.

 

  1. Description of the sample(s), including size and characteristics, for each validity analysis conducted:

For the Concurrent and Predictive validity analyses for Passage Reading and MAP there was a total sample of 9,410 students (grades 1-6). Demographic data indicated 48.4% of the sample was female, 12.4% was special education, 24.0% received Title services, 7.5% was served in a gifted program, 38.2% received free or reduced lunch, and 5.1% received ELL service. Ethnic percentages for this sample were 1.3% for American Indian, 4.9% for Asian American, 10.3% for Hispanic American, 7.7% for Black American, and 75.8% for White American.

 

For the Concurrent and Predictive validity analyses for Passage Reading and MCA there was a total sample of 11,094 students (grades 3-6). Demographic data indicated 48.2% of the sample was female, 12.4% was special education, 27.2% received Title services, 9.3% was served in a gifted program, 27.6% received free or reduced lunch, and 7.7% received ELL service. Ethnic percentages for this sample were 2.6% for American Indian, 4.0% for Asian American, 9.4% for Hispanic American, 12.2% for Black American, and 71.8% for White American.

 

  1. Description of the analysis procedures for each reported type of validity:

Two types of validity analysis were conducted; Concurrent and Predictive. The Concurrent study used Pearson Product Moment Correlational analysis to examine the relationship between Passage Reading (Words Read Correctly) and the MAP and the MCA. All measures were administered in the Spring of 2017. The Predictive study used Pearson Product Moment Correlational analysis to examine the relationship between Passage Reading (Words Read Correctly) and the MAP and the MCA. Passage Reading was administered in the Winter of 2017 and the criterion measures of MAP and MCA were administered in the Spring of 2017, approximately three months later.

 

  1. Validity for the performance level score (e.g., concurrent, predictive, evidence based on response processes, evidence based on internal structure, evidence based on relations to other variables, and/or evidence based on consequences of testing), and the criterion measures.

Type of Validity

Age or Grade

Test or Criterion

n

Coefficient

Confidence Interval

Concurrent

1 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

1,212

0.75

0.72-0.77

Concurrent

2 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

2,038

0.80

0.78-0.82

Concurrent

3 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

2,108

0.76

0.73-0.77

Concurrent

4 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

2,004

0.72

0.70-0.74

Concurrent

5 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

1,699

0.66

0.63-0.69

Concurrent

6 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

372

0.62

0.55-0.68

Concurrent

3 (Spring)

MCA (Spring)

3,751

0.77

0.76-0.78

Concurrent

4 (Spring)

MCA (Spring)

3,709

0.74

0.73-0.75

Concurrent

5 (Spring)

MCA (Spring)

3,053

0.69

0.67-0.71

Concurrent

6 (Spring)

MCA (Spring)

634

0.68

0.64-0.72

Predictive

1 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

1,191

0.71

0.68-0.74

Predictive

2 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

2,024

0.79

0.77-0.81

Predictive

3 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

1,972

0.75

0.73-0.77

Predictive

4 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

2,069

0.69

0.67-0.71

Predictive

5 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

1,736

0.65

0.62-0.68

Predictive

6 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

487

0.58

0.52-0.64

Predictive

3 (Winter)

MCA (Spring)

3,638

0.76

0.75-0.77

Predictive

4 (Winter)

MCA (Spring)

3,770

0.73

0.72-0.75

Predictive

5 (Winter)

MCA (Spring)

3,195

0.68

0.66-0.70

Predictive

6 (Winter)

MCA (Spring)

487

0.58

0.52-0.64

 

  1. Results for other forms of validity (e.g. factor analysis) not conducive to the table format:

None provided

 

  1. Describe the degree to which the provided data support the validity of the tool:

Validity coefficients for both concurrent and predictive validity are typically high. The median correlation coefficient for concurrent validity is 0.73 and is 0.70 for predictive validity.  

 

 

Disaggregated Validity

The following disaggregated validity data are provided for context and did not factor into the Validity rating.

Type of Validity

Subgroup

Age or Grade

Test or Criterion

n

Coefficient

Confidence Interval

Concurrent

Black

1 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

80

0.72

0.60-0.81

Concurrent

Black

2 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

208

0.78

0.72-0.83

Concurrent

Black

3 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

133

0.70

0.60-0.78

Concurrent

Black

4 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

146

0.75

0.67-0.81

Concurrent

Black

5 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

118

0.62

0.50-0.72

Concurrent

Black

3 (Spring)

MCA (Spring)

452

0.79

0.75-0.82

Concurrent

Black

4 (Spring)

MCA (Spring)

497

0.74

0.70-0.78

Concurrent

Black

5 (Spring)

MCA (Spring)

361

0.70

0.64-0.75

Predictive

Black

1 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

78

0.72

0.59-0.81

Predictive

Black

2 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

205

0.80

0.75-0.85

Predictive

Black

3 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

127

0.67

0.56-0.76

Predictive

Black

4 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

155

0.70

0.61-0.77

Predictive

Black

5 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

113

0.59

0.46-0.70

Predictive

Black

3 (Winter)

MCA (Spring)

436

0.77

0.73-0.81

Predictive

Black

4 (Winter)

MCA (Spring)

498

0.71

0.66-0.75

Predictive

Black

5 (Winter)

MCA (Spring)

364

0.69

0.63-0.74

Concurrent

Hispanic

1 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

134

0.76

0.68-0.82

Concurrent

Hispanic

2 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

225

0.81

0.76-0.85

Concurrent

Hispanic

3 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

180

0.80

0.74-0.85

Concurrent

Hispanic

4 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

176

0.72

0.64-0.79

Concurrent

Hispanic

5 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

173

0.66

0.57-0.74

Concurrent

Hispanic

6 (Spring)

MAP (Spring)

62

0.58

0.39-0.73

Concurrent

Hispanic

3 (Spring)

MCA (Spring)

329

0.83

0.79-0.86

Concurrent

Hispanic

4 (Spring)

MCA (Spring)

321

0.78

0.73-0.82

Concurrent

Hispanic

5 (Spring)

MCA (Spring)

306

0.66

0.59-0.72

Concurrent

Hispanic

6 (Spring)

MCA (Spring)

77

0.64

0.49-0.76

Predictive

Hispanic

1 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

134

0.72

0.63-0.79

Predictive

Hispanic

2 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

226

0.79

0.74-0.83

Predictive

Hispanic

3 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

172

0.82

0.76-0.86

Predictive

Hispanic

4 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

175

0.68

0.59-0.75

Predictive

Hispanic

5 (Winter)

MAP (Spring)

170

0.65

0.55-0.73

Predictive

Hispanic

3 (Winter)

MCA (Spring)

329

0.84

0.81-0.87

Predictive

Hispanic

4 (Winter)

MCA (Spring)

319

0.76

0.71-0.80

Predictive

Hispanic

5 (Winter)

MCA (Spring)

306

0.66

0.59-0.72

Predictive

Hispanic

6 (Winter)

MCA (Spring)

77

0.65

0.50-0.76

 

Results for other forms of disaggregated validity (e.g. factor analysis) not conducive to the table format:

None provided

Sample Representativeness

Grade123456
RatingHalf-filled bubbleHalf-filled bubbleHalf-filled bubbleHalf-filled bubbleHalf-filled bubbleHalf-filled bubble

Primary Classification Accuracy Sample

Representation: National (East North Central).  17 school districts in Minnesota with 22,842 students administered the Oral Reading Passages.

Date: Winter 2017 and Spring 2017 

 

Criterion 1: Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) administered in Spring

Time of Year: Winter

 

Grade 1

Grade 2

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Size

1,168

1,989

1,943

2,033

1,694

479

Male

51.50%

51.60%

50.80%

51.10%

51.20%

50.70%

Female

48.50%

48.40%

49.20%

48.90%

48.80%

49.30%

Other SES Indicators (Title I)

NA

30.80%

20.40%

22.70%

20.7%

NA

Free or reduced-price lunch

27.50%

29.90%

24.60%

24.00%

26.70%

33.00%

White, Non-Hispanic

75.30%

71.70%

78.10%

77.60%

77.60%

78.10%

Black, Non-Hispanic

6.70%

10.30%

6.50%

7.60%

6.70%

5.40%

Hispanic

11.50%

11.40%

8.90%

8.60%

10.00%

12.90%

American Indian/Alaska Native

1.20%

1.50%

1.10%

1.20%

1.30%

0.40%

Asian/Pacific Islander

5.30%

5.10%

5.50%

5.00%

4.40%

3.10%

Other

Not provided

Not provided

Not provided

Not provided

Not provided

Not provided

Unknown

Not provided

Not provided

Not provided

Not provided

Not provided

Not provided

Disability classification

14.00%

11.20%

11.70%

13.00%

12.30%

8.40%

English Language Learner

5.70%

9.80%

5.00%

2.90%

2.20%

2.70%

 

Criterion 1: Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment (MCA) - Reading administered in Spring

Time of Year: Winter

 

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Size

3,587

3,721

3,137

792

Male

50.90%

52.40%

Unknown

Unknown

Female

49.10%

47.60%

Unknown

Unknown

Free or reduced-price lunch

37.70%

37.00%

37.60%

37.90%

Other SES Indicators (Title I)

27.60%

28.10%

26.40%

17.00%

White, Non-Hispanic

71.70%

71.50%

72.30%

81.20%

Black, Non-Hispanic

12.20%

13.40%

11.60%

4.00%

Hispanic

9.20%

8.60%

9.80%

9.70%

American Indian/Alaska Native

2.30%

2.50%

2.80%

2.30%

Asian/Pacific Islander

4.70%

4.00%

3.60%

2.80%

Other

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown

Disability classification

12.30%

13.90%

12.50%

10.10%

English Language Learner

10.00%

7.80%

5.50%

2.10%

 

Cross Validation Sample

Representation: National: East North Central.  Cross validation file represents 1 school from Minnesota.

Date: 2009

Size

465

Male

51.80%

Female

48.20%

Free or reduced-price lunch

15.80%

White, Non-Hispanic

68.40%

Black, Non-Hispanic

13.50%

Hispanic

11.50%

American Indian/Alaska Native

0.90%

Asian/Pacific Islander

5.60%

Disability classification

13.80%

Home Language English

85.10%

Home Language Spanish

4.50%

 

Bias Analysis Conducted

Grade123456
RatingNoNoNoNoNoNo
  1. Description of the method used to determine the presence or absence of bias:

None provided

 

  1. Description of the subgroups for which bias analyses were conducted

None provided

 

  1. Description of the results of the bias analyses conducted, including data and interpretative statements:

None provided

 

Administration Format

Grade123456
Data
  • Individual
  • Individual
  • Individual
  • Individual
  • Individual
  • Individual
  • Administration & Scoring Time

    Grade123456
    Data
  • 15 minutes
  • 15 minutes
  • 15 minutes
  • 15 minutes
  • 15 minutes
  • 15 minutes
  • Scoring Format

    Grade123456
    Data
  • Manual
  • Manual
  • Manual
  • Manual
  • Manual
  • Manual
  • Types of Decision Rules

    Grade123456
    Data
  • None
  • None
  • None
  • None
  • None
  • None
  • Evidence Available for Multiple Decision Rules

    Grade123456
    Data
  • No
  • No
  • No
  • No
  • No
  • No