i-Ready® Diagnostic
Mathematics

Summary

Offering a continuum of scale scores from kindergarten through high school, the i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics, a web-based adaptive screening assessment, is part of i-Ready’s integrated teaching and learning system. The i-Ready Diagnostic is a valid and reliable tool aligned to rigorous state standards across the following domains: Number and Operations, Algebra and Algebraic Thinking, Measurement and Data, and Geometry, and provides actionable data and reports for each domain. The i-Ready Diagnostic is typically administered three times per academic year, with a recommended 12-18 weeks of instruction between assessments. Each screening takes approximately 45 minutes—which may be broken into multiple sittings—and may be conducted with all students or with specific groups of students who have been identified as at risk of academic failure. i-Ready Diagnostic’s sophisticated adaptive algorithm automatically selects from thousands of technology-enhanced and multiple-choice items to get to the core of each student's strengths and challenges, regardless of the grade level at which he or she is performing. The system automatically analyzes, scores, and provides reports that include student-level and aggregated (e.g., class, school, and district) results. Available as soon as a student completes the assessment, i-Ready Diagnostic’s intuitive reports provide comprehensive information (including developmental analyses) about student performance, group students who struggle with the same concepts, make instructional recommendations to target skill deficiencies, and monitor progress and growth as students follow their individualized instructional paths. Reports include suggested next steps for instruction and PDF Tools for Instruction lesson plans for the teacher to use during individual, small-group, or whole-class instruction. In addition, should educators also purchase the optional i-Ready Personalized Instruction, the system automatically prescribes online lessons that address each student’s identified academic needs.

Where to Obtain:
Curriculum Associates, LLC
info@cainc.com
153 Rangeway Road, N. Billerica MA 01862
800-225-0248
www.curriculumassociates.com
Initial Cost:
$6.00 per student
Replacement Cost:
$6.00 per student per year
Included in Cost:
$6.00/student/year for i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics; volume and multi-year subscription discounts are available. Annual license fee includes online student access to assessment, plus staff access to management and reporting suite, downloadable lesson plans, and user resources including i-Ready Central support website; account set-up and secure hosting; all program maintenance/ updates/ enhancements during the active license term; unlimited user access to U.S.-based service and support via toll-free phone and email during business hours. Professional development is required and available at an additional cost ($2,000/session up to six hours). If Curriculum Associates' minimum recommended professional development is purchased, the district will receive a 25 percent discount for a net price of $1500/session.
i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics is a web-based, vendor-hosted, Software-as-a-Service application. The per-student or site-based license fee includes account set-up and management; unlimited access to i-Ready Diagnostic, management, and reporting functionality; and unlimited access to U.S.-based customer service/technical support and all program maintenance, updates, and enhancements for as long as the license remains active. The license fee also includes hosting, data storage, and data security. Via the i-Ready Diagnostic teacher and administrator dashboards and i-Ready Central support website, educators can access comprehensive user guides and downloadable lesson plans, as well as implementation tips, best practices, video tutorials, and more to supplement our live (either onsite or remotely-facilitated), fee-based professional development. These resources are self-paced and available 24/7. The i-Ready Diagnostic includes many accommodations and accessibility features, making it accessible by most students. Among those are Universal Accessibility Features that are available to all students and do not require that an educator intervene to enable these features. In addition, there are processes and tools in the i-Ready Diagnostic that are used to support students who require accommodations. Since fall 2019, the i-Ready Diagnostic meets the Level AA standard under the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.0), with documented exceptions. Although all students have access to Universal Accessibility Features, some features of the i-Ready Diagnostic are designed to be available only to those students with IEPs or 504 plans that stipulate the use of the accommodations process or tool. The decision as to which accommodations a student receives are generally made by IEP teams and other educators within the school. Although Curriculum Associates provides guidance on how to implement various accommodations, it is up to educators who work with individual students to determine which accommodations are needed and how to correctly implement these accommodations. Universal Accessibility Features include these: • The test is untimed. • Students are also able to view closed captioning for introductory videos. • Students can also navigate through the Diagnostic using a keyboard. • Students can adjust the volume of the audio, as needed. • The i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics has universally accessible audio support available for all items in grades K-5. Locally-provided accessibility supports can include additional breaks during testing; use of an English dictionary, thesaurus, or bi-lingual dictionary (depending on domain assessed); noise buffering headphones; magnification devices to make the screen easier to read for students with low vision; and a separate setting for testing. As noted, teachers should follow each student’s IEP to determine needed and appropriate accommodations. Further information about i-Ready accessibility and accommodation is available at https://i-readycentral.com/pdfs/accessibility-and-accommodations-update/.
Training Requirements:
4-8 hours of training
Qualified Administrators:
No minimum qualifications specified.
Access to Technical Support:
Curriculum Associates provides a dedicated account manager plus unlimited access to in-house technical support during business hours to every customer.
Assessment Format:
  • Direct: Computerized
Scoring Time:
  • Scoring is automatic
Scores Generated:
  • Percentile score
  • IRT-based score
  • Developmental benchmarks
  • Composite scores
  • Subscale/subtest scores
  • Other: i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics also provides a Quantile score and criterion-referenced Grade-Level Placement scores.
Administration Time:
  • 45 minutes per student
Scoring Method:
  • Automatically (computer-scored)
Technology Requirements:
  • Computer or tablet
  • Internet connection
Accommodations:
i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics is a web-based, vendor-hosted, Software-as-a-Service application. The per-student or site-based license fee includes account set-up and management; unlimited access to i-Ready Diagnostic, management, and reporting functionality; and unlimited access to U.S.-based customer service/technical support and all program maintenance, updates, and enhancements for as long as the license remains active. The license fee also includes hosting, data storage, and data security. Via the i-Ready Diagnostic teacher and administrator dashboards and i-Ready Central support website, educators can access comprehensive user guides and downloadable lesson plans, as well as implementation tips, best practices, video tutorials, and more to supplement our live (either onsite or remotely-facilitated), fee-based professional development. These resources are self-paced and available 24/7. The i-Ready Diagnostic includes many accommodations and accessibility features, making it accessible by most students. Among those are Universal Accessibility Features that are available to all students and do not require that an educator intervene to enable these features. In addition, there are processes and tools in the i-Ready Diagnostic that are used to support students who require accommodations. Since fall 2019, the i-Ready Diagnostic meets the Level AA standard under the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.0), with documented exceptions. Although all students have access to Universal Accessibility Features, some features of the i-Ready Diagnostic are designed to be available only to those students with IEPs or 504 plans that stipulate the use of the accommodations process or tool. The decision as to which accommodations a student receives are generally made by IEP teams and other educators within the school. Although Curriculum Associates provides guidance on how to implement various accommodations, it is up to educators who work with individual students to determine which accommodations are needed and how to correctly implement these accommodations. Universal Accessibility Features include these: • The test is untimed. • Students are also able to view closed captioning for introductory videos. • Students can also navigate through the Diagnostic using a keyboard. • Students can adjust the volume of the audio, as needed. • The i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics has universally accessible audio support available for all items in grades K-5. Locally-provided accessibility supports can include additional breaks during testing; use of an English dictionary, thesaurus, or bi-lingual dictionary (depending on domain assessed); noise buffering headphones; magnification devices to make the screen easier to read for students with low vision; and a separate setting for testing. As noted, teachers should follow each student’s IEP to determine needed and appropriate accommodations. Further information about i-Ready accessibility and accommodation is available at https://i-readycentral.com/pdfs/accessibility-and-accommodations-update/.

Descriptive Information

Please provide a description of your tool:
Offering a continuum of scale scores from kindergarten through high school, the i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics, a web-based adaptive screening assessment, is part of i-Ready’s integrated teaching and learning system. The i-Ready Diagnostic is a valid and reliable tool aligned to rigorous state standards across the following domains: Number and Operations, Algebra and Algebraic Thinking, Measurement and Data, and Geometry, and provides actionable data and reports for each domain. The i-Ready Diagnostic is typically administered three times per academic year, with a recommended 12-18 weeks of instruction between assessments. Each screening takes approximately 45 minutes—which may be broken into multiple sittings—and may be conducted with all students or with specific groups of students who have been identified as at risk of academic failure. i-Ready Diagnostic’s sophisticated adaptive algorithm automatically selects from thousands of technology-enhanced and multiple-choice items to get to the core of each student's strengths and challenges, regardless of the grade level at which he or she is performing. The system automatically analyzes, scores, and provides reports that include student-level and aggregated (e.g., class, school, and district) results. Available as soon as a student completes the assessment, i-Ready Diagnostic’s intuitive reports provide comprehensive information (including developmental analyses) about student performance, group students who struggle with the same concepts, make instructional recommendations to target skill deficiencies, and monitor progress and growth as students follow their individualized instructional paths. Reports include suggested next steps for instruction and PDF Tools for Instruction lesson plans for the teacher to use during individual, small-group, or whole-class instruction. In addition, should educators also purchase the optional i-Ready Personalized Instruction, the system automatically prescribes online lessons that address each student’s identified academic needs.
The tool is intended for use with the following grade(s).
not selected Preschool / Pre - kindergarten
selected Kindergarten
selected First grade
selected Second grade
selected Third grade
selected Fourth grade
selected Fifth grade
selected Sixth grade
selected Seventh grade
selected Eighth grade
selected Ninth grade
selected Tenth grade
selected Eleventh grade
selected Twelfth grade

The tool is intended for use with the following age(s).
not selected 0-4 years old
selected 5 years old
selected 6 years old
selected 7 years old
selected 8 years old
selected 9 years old
selected 10 years old
selected 11 years old
selected 12 years old
selected 13 years old
selected 14 years old
selected 15 years old
selected 16 years old
selected 17 years old
selected 18 years old

The tool is intended for use with the following student populations.
selected Students in general education
selected Students with disabilities
selected English language learners

ACADEMIC ONLY: What skills does the tool screen?

Reading
Phonological processing:
not selected RAN
not selected Memory
not selected Awareness
not selected Letter sound correspondence
not selected Phonics
not selected Structural analysis

Word ID
not selected Accuracy
not selected Speed

Nonword
not selected Accuracy
not selected Speed

Spelling
not selected Accuracy
not selected Speed

Passage
not selected Accuracy
not selected Speed

Reading comprehension:
not selected Multiple choice questions
not selected Cloze
not selected Constructed Response
not selected Retell
not selected Maze
not selected Sentence verification
not selected Other (please describe):


Listening comprehension:
not selected Multiple choice questions
not selected Cloze
not selected Constructed Response
not selected Retell
not selected Maze
not selected Sentence verification
not selected Vocabulary
not selected Expressive
not selected Receptive

Mathematics
Global Indicator of Math Competence
selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
selected Multiple Choice
not selected Constructed Response

Early Numeracy
selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
selected Multiple Choice
not selected Constructed Response

Mathematics Concepts
selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
selected Multiple Choice
not selected Constructed Response

Mathematics Computation
selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
selected Multiple Choice
not selected Constructed Response

Mathematic Application
selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
selected Multiple Choice
selected Constructed Response

Fractions/Decimals
selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
selected Multiple Choice
selected Constructed Response

Algebra
selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
selected Multiple Choice
selected Constructed Response

Geometry
selected Accuracy
not selected Speed
selected Multiple Choice
selected Constructed Response

selected Other (please describe):
Measurement & Data

Please describe specific domain, skills or subtests:
The i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics assesses four domains (Number and Operations, Algebra and Algebraic Thinking, Measurement and Data, and Geometry). For the domain of Number and Operations, the topics addressed include counting and cardinality; base ten—whole numbers and decimals (place value, compare, add, subtract, multiply, divide); fractions (model, compare, add, subtract, multiply, divide); rational numbers (model, compare, add, subtract, multiply, divide); and real and complex numbers (model, compare, add, subtract, multiply, divide). For the Algebra and Algebraic Thinking domain, the topics addressed include operations and algebraic thinking (fluency, number relationships, properties, solving word problems); expressions and equations (variables, exponents, solving word problems); ratio and proportional relationships (percent, rate, lines, and slope); functions (linear, exponential, quadratic, polynomial, logarithmic, trigonometric, rational interpreting functions); building functions; and systems of equations and inequalities. For the Geometry domain, the topics addressed include two-dimensional shapes; three-dimensional shapes; lines, segments, points, rays, and angles; symmetry and transformations; congruence and similarity; coordinate geometry; Pythagorean theorem; circles; and proofs. For the Measurements and Data domain, the topics addressed include measurement units and tools - customary and metric (time, money, length, capacity, weight, and mass); geometric measurement; area, perimeter, surface area, volume; creating and interpreting graphs; and statistics and probability (randomness, probability distributions, collecting and analyzing data, making inferences and conclusions based on probability and expected values, and correlations).
BEHAVIOR ONLY: Which category of behaviors does your tool target?


BEHAVIOR ONLY: Please identify which broad domain(s)/construct(s) are measured by your tool and define each sub-domain or sub-construct.

Acquisition and Cost Information

Where to obtain:
Email Address
info@cainc.com
Address
153 Rangeway Road, N. Billerica MA 01862
Phone Number
800-225-0248
Website
www.curriculumassociates.com
Initial cost for implementing program:
Cost
$6.00
Unit of cost
student
Replacement cost per unit for subsequent use:
Cost
$6.00
Unit of cost
student
Duration of license
year
Additional cost information:
Describe basic pricing plan and structure of the tool. Provide information on what is included in the published tool, as well as what is not included but required for implementation.
$6.00/student/year for i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics; volume and multi-year subscription discounts are available. Annual license fee includes online student access to assessment, plus staff access to management and reporting suite, downloadable lesson plans, and user resources including i-Ready Central support website; account set-up and secure hosting; all program maintenance/ updates/ enhancements during the active license term; unlimited user access to U.S.-based service and support via toll-free phone and email during business hours. Professional development is required and available at an additional cost ($2,000/session up to six hours). If Curriculum Associates' minimum recommended professional development is purchased, the district will receive a 25 percent discount for a net price of $1500/session.
Provide information about special accommodations for students with disabilities.
i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics is a web-based, vendor-hosted, Software-as-a-Service application. The per-student or site-based license fee includes account set-up and management; unlimited access to i-Ready Diagnostic, management, and reporting functionality; and unlimited access to U.S.-based customer service/technical support and all program maintenance, updates, and enhancements for as long as the license remains active. The license fee also includes hosting, data storage, and data security. Via the i-Ready Diagnostic teacher and administrator dashboards and i-Ready Central support website, educators can access comprehensive user guides and downloadable lesson plans, as well as implementation tips, best practices, video tutorials, and more to supplement our live (either onsite or remotely-facilitated), fee-based professional development. These resources are self-paced and available 24/7. The i-Ready Diagnostic includes many accommodations and accessibility features, making it accessible by most students. Among those are Universal Accessibility Features that are available to all students and do not require that an educator intervene to enable these features. In addition, there are processes and tools in the i-Ready Diagnostic that are used to support students who require accommodations. Since fall 2019, the i-Ready Diagnostic meets the Level AA standard under the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.0), with documented exceptions. Although all students have access to Universal Accessibility Features, some features of the i-Ready Diagnostic are designed to be available only to those students with IEPs or 504 plans that stipulate the use of the accommodations process or tool. The decision as to which accommodations a student receives are generally made by IEP teams and other educators within the school. Although Curriculum Associates provides guidance on how to implement various accommodations, it is up to educators who work with individual students to determine which accommodations are needed and how to correctly implement these accommodations. Universal Accessibility Features include these: • The test is untimed. • Students are also able to view closed captioning for introductory videos. • Students can also navigate through the Diagnostic using a keyboard. • Students can adjust the volume of the audio, as needed. • The i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics has universally accessible audio support available for all items in grades K-5. Locally-provided accessibility supports can include additional breaks during testing; use of an English dictionary, thesaurus, or bi-lingual dictionary (depending on domain assessed); noise buffering headphones; magnification devices to make the screen easier to read for students with low vision; and a separate setting for testing. As noted, teachers should follow each student’s IEP to determine needed and appropriate accommodations. Further information about i-Ready accessibility and accommodation is available at https://i-readycentral.com/pdfs/accessibility-and-accommodations-update/.

Administration

BEHAVIOR ONLY: What type of administrator is your tool designed for?
not selected General education teacher
not selected Special education teacher
not selected Parent
not selected Child
not selected External observer
not selected Other
If other, please specify:

What is the administration setting?
not selected Direct observation
not selected Rating scale
not selected Checklist
not selected Performance measure
not selected Questionnaire
selected Direct: Computerized
not selected One-to-one
not selected Other
If other, please specify:

Does the tool require technology?
Yes

If yes, what technology is required to implement your tool? (Select all that apply)
selected Computer or tablet
selected Internet connection
not selected Other technology (please specify)

If your program requires additional technology not listed above, please describe the required technology and the extent to which it is combined with teacher small-group instruction/intervention:

What is the administration context?
selected Individual
selected Small group   If small group, n=
selected Large group   If large group, n=
not selected Computer-administered
not selected Other
If other, please specify:

What is the administration time?
Time in minutes
45
per (student/group/other unit)
student

Additional scoring time:
Time in minutes
0
per (student/group/other unit)
student

ACADEMIC ONLY: What are the discontinue rules?
selected No discontinue rules provided
not selected Basals
not selected Ceilings
not selected Other
If other, please specify:


Are norms available?
Yes
Are benchmarks available?
Yes
If yes, how many benchmarks per year?
Curriculum Associates recommends giving the i-Ready Diagnostic three times a year. The i-Ready Diagnostic provides benchmark scores in the form of Grade-Level Placements (Three Grades Below, Two Grades Below, One Grade Below, Early on Grade Level, Mid on Grade Level or Above). The i-Ready Diagnostic also provides intervention tiers associated with the Grade-Level Placements.
If yes, for which months are benchmarks available?
The Grade-Level Placement benchmarks are available at the beginning of the year (typically September), middle of the year (typically January or February), and end of the year (typically April or May).
BEHAVIOR ONLY: Can students be rated concurrently by one administrator?
If yes, how many students can be rated concurrently?

Training & Scoring

Training

Is training for the administrator required?
Yes
Describe the time required for administrator training, if applicable:
4-8 hours of training
Please describe the minimum qualifications an administrator must possess.
selected No minimum qualifications
Are training manuals and materials available?
Yes
Are training manuals/materials field-tested?
Yes
Are training manuals/materials included in cost of tools?
Yes
If No, please describe training costs:
In-person (either onsite or remotely facilitated) professional development is also required and available for an additional cost.
Can users obtain ongoing professional and technical support?
Yes
If Yes, please describe how users can obtain support:
Curriculum Associates provides a dedicated account manager plus unlimited access to in-house technical support during business hours to every customer.

Scoring

How are scores calculated?
not selected Manually (by hand)
selected Automatically (computer-scored)
not selected Other
If other, please specify:

Do you provide basis for calculating performance level scores?
Yes
What is the basis for calculating performance level and percentile scores?
not selected Age norms
selected Grade norms
not selected Classwide norms
not selected Schoolwide norms
not selected Stanines
not selected Normal curve equivalents

What types of performance level scores are available?
not selected Raw score
not selected Standard score
selected Percentile score
not selected Grade equivalents
selected IRT-based score
not selected Age equivalents
not selected Stanines
not selected Normal curve equivalents
selected Developmental benchmarks
not selected Developmental cut points
not selected Equated
not selected Probability
not selected Lexile score
not selected Error analysis
selected Composite scores
selected Subscale/subtest scores
selected Other
If other, please specify:
i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics also provides a Quantile score and criterion-referenced Grade-Level Placement scores.

Does your tool include decision rules?
No
If yes, please describe.
Can you provide evidence in support of multiple decision rules?
No
If yes, please describe.
Please describe the scoring structure. Provide relevant details such as the scoring format, the number of items overall, the number of items per subscale, what the cluster/composite score comprises, and how raw scores are calculated.
i-Ready Diagnostic scale scores are linear transformations of logit values. Logits are measurement units for logarithmic probability models such as the Rasch model. Logits are used to determine both student ability and item difficulty. Within the Rasch model, if the ability matches the item difficulty, then the person has a .50 chance of answering the item correctly. For i-Ready Diagnostic, student ability and item logit values generally range from around -7 to 6. When the i-Ready vertical scale was updated in August 2016, the equipercentile equating method was applied to the updated logit scale. The appropriate scaling constant and slope were applied to the logit value to convert to scale score values between 100 and 800 (Kolen and Brennan, 2014). This scaling is accomplished by converting the estimated logit values with the following equation: Scale Value = 466.41 + 25.42 × Logit Value Once this conversion is made, floor and ceiling values are imposed to keep the scores within the 100–800 scale range. This is achieved by simply recoding all values below 100 up to 100 and all values above 800 down to 800. The scale score range, mean, and standard deviation on the updated scale are either exactly the same as (range), or very similar (mean and standard deviation) to those from the scale prior to the August 2016 scale update, which generally allows year-over-year comparisons of i-Ready scale scores.
Describe the tool’s approach to screening, samples (if applicable), and/or test format, including steps taken to ensure that it is appropriate for use with culturally and linguistically diverse populations and students with disabilities.
i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics has intervention screening reports that categorize students into three colors: green identifies students who are eligible for Tier 1 instruction, yellow identifies students in need of Tier 2 intervention, and red identifies students at risk of being identified as in need of Tier 3 intervention. There are three intervention screening report views: beginning-of-year, standard, and end-of-year. Depending on the placement level of the student, he or she is designated into one of the three levels based on chronological grade level. In addition to reporting student performance by tier, i-Ready includes criterion-referenced Grade-Level Placements. Placement levels (cut points) for students’ overall performance and for each domain are presented on the Diagnostic Results for a student report. Placement levels indicate where students should be receiving instruction. i-Ready’s Grade-Level Placements are designed to help educators target instruction for each student. Grade-Level Placements also inform classroom instruction and provide domain-specific insights, allowing for targeted differentiation and remediation. i-Ready Diagnostic also provides national norms (as percentiles) for beginning-of-year, mid-year, and end-of-year testing. Test users who are more familiar with the percentile-based screening approach could also use the national norms for intervention classification. Curriculum Associates is committed to fair and unbiased product development. i-Ready Diagnostic is developmentally, linguistically, and culturally appropriate for a wide range of students at each of grade. For instance, the names, characters, and scenarios used within the programs—as well as the “study buddies” who act as onscreen guides for students—are ethnically and culturally diverse. We developed all items in i-Ready to be accessible for most students regardless of their need for accommodation. In most cases, students who require accommodations (e.g., large print or extra time) will not require additional help to complete an i-Ready Diagnostic. The design of the assessment emphasizes making necessary adjustments to the items, so that a large percentage of students requiring accommodations will be able to take the test in a standard manner and the interpretation or the purpose of the test is not compromised. According to the Standards (AERA, APA, NCME, 2014), “Universal Design processes strive to minimize access challenges by taking into account test characteristics that may impede access to the construct for certain test takers.” i-Ready Diagnostic was developed with the universal principles of design for assessment in mind and followed the seven elements of Universal Design for large-scale assessments recommended by NCEO (2002): 1. Inclusive assessment population 2. Precisely defined constructs 3. Accessible, non-biased items 4. Amenable to accommodations 5. Simple, clear, and intuitive instructions and procedures 6. Maximum readability and comprehensibility 7. Maximum legibility Differential Item Function (DIF) was investigated using WINSTEPS® by comparing the item difficulty measure for two demographics categories in a pairwise comparison. The following demographic categories were compared: Female vs. Male; Black or African American and Latino vs. Caucasian; South, West, and Northeast vs. Midwest; English Learner vs. Non–English Learner; Students with Disabilities vs. General Education Students; Economically disadvantaged vs. Not economically disadvantaged. In each pairwise comparison, estimates of item difficulty for each category in the comparison were calculated. The difference between the two groups was then evaluated using both the Welch’s t-statistics and Mantel-Haenszel method. Items with significant and large differences in difficulty between the comparison groups were flagged for content inspection. In mathematics, of the 3,103 items evaluated, the majority of items (at least 90 percent) showed negligible DIF (level A) and only 3 percent of items showed large DIF (level C). Items with significant, but small, DIF are subjected to extensive content review by a committee, who then determine whether each item should remain in the operational pool, be removed, or be revised and re-piloted.

Technical Standards

Classification Accuracy & Cross-Validation Summary

Grade Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Classification Accuracy Fall Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence
Classification Accuracy Winter Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence
Classification Accuracy Spring Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence
Legend
Full BubbleConvincing evidence
Half BubblePartially convincing evidence
Empty BubbleUnconvincing evidence
Null BubbleData unavailable
dDisaggregated data available

Smarter Balanced Assessment

Classification Accuracy

Select time of year
Describe the criterion (outcome) measure(s) including the degree to which it/they is/are independent from the screening measure.
TThe criterion measure is the Smarter Balanced Assessment (SBA) Mathematics test for grades 3-8. The SBA is an end-of-year state summative assessment administered in the spring in various states. The percentile scores defined in the Smarter Balanced 2017–18 Summative Technical Report are used to classify students. Students who scored below the score corresponding to the 20th percentile on the SBA for the given grade were classified as at-risk and students who scored at or above the score corresponding to the 20th percentile were classified as not-at-risk.
Do the classification accuracy analyses examine concurrent and/or predictive classification?

Describe when screening and criterion measures were administered and provide a justification for why the method(s) you chose (concurrent and/or predictive) is/are appropriate for your tool.
Describe how the classification analyses were performed and cut-points determined. Describe how the cut points align with students at-risk. Please indicate which groups were contrasted in your analyses (e.g., low risk students versus high risk students, low risk students versus moderate risk students).
Cut points on the criterion measure (SBA) were determined as the scale score corresponding to the 20th percentile defined in the Smarter Balanced 2017–18 Summative Technical Report for the given subject and grade. This cut point follows the definition of students in need of intensive intervention provided by NCII’s Technical Review Committee. Students who scored below the score corresponding to the 20th percentile on the SBA for the given grade were classified as at-risk and students who scored at or above the score corresponding to the 20th percentile were classified as not-at-risk. Cut points on the screening measure (i-Ready Diagnostic) were empirically identified as scores that best align with SBA’s 20th percentile scores for each subject, grade and testing window. Using these cut scores, students were classified as at-risk if they scored below the cut score in the i-Ready Diagnostic for the given testing window, or not-at-risk if they scored at or above the cut. Classification indices between at-risk/not-at-risk on i-Ready and at-risk/not-at-risk on the SBA assessment are calculated per the formulas in the classification worksheet.
Were the children in the study/studies involved in an intervention in addition to typical classroom instruction between the screening measure and outcome assessment?
Yes
If yes, please describe the intervention, what children received the intervention, and how they were chosen.
We did not collect information on whether students who were included in this analysis received an intervention in addition to typical classroom instruction between the screening measure and outcome assessment. With that said, based on the criteria for inclusion in this analysis (i.e., students scoring below the 20th percentile in spring) it is likely that students received some form of intervention.

Cross-Validation

Has a cross-validation study been conducted?
Yes
If yes,
Select time of year.
Describe the criterion (outcome) measure(s) including the degree to which it/they is/are independent from the screening measure.
The criterion measure is the Mathematics Smarter Balanced Assessment (SBA) for grades 3-8, an end-of-year state summative assessment administered in the spring. The percentile scores defined in the Smarter Balanced 2017–18 Summative Technical Report are used to classify students. Students who scored below the score corresponding to the 20th percentile on the SBA test for the given grade were classified as at-risk and students who scored at or above the score corresponding to the 20th percentile were classified as not-at-risk.
Do the cross-validation analyses examine concurrent and/or predictive classification?

Describe when screening and criterion measures were administered and provide a justification for why the method(s) you chose (concurrent and/or predictive) is/are appropriate for your tool.
Describe how the cross-validation analyses were performed and cut-points determined. Describe how the cut points align with students at-risk. Please indicate which groups were contrasted in your analyses (e.g., low risk students versus high risk students, low risk students versus moderate risk students).
For the cross-validation study, we used data from five school districts not included in the main Classification Accuracy study. In order to validate our results, we used the same cut points as the main Classification Accuracy study for both the criterion measure (SBA) and screening measure (i-Ready Diagnostic) when performing the classification analyses. Cut points on the criterion measure (SBA) were determined as the scale score corresponding to the 20th percentile defined in the Smarter Balanced 2017–18 Summative Technical Report for the given subject and grade. This cut point follows the definition of students in need of intensive intervention provided by NCII’s Technical Review Committee. Students who scored below the score corresponding to the 20th percentile on the SBA test for the given grade were classified as at-risk and students who scored at or above the score corresponding to the 20th percentile were classified as no-risk. Cut points on the screening measure (i-Ready Diagnostic) were the same scores identified as cut-points in the main Classification Accuracy study. Using these cut scores, students were classified as at-risk if they scored below the cut score in the i-Ready Diagnostic for the given testing window, or not-at-risk if they scored at or above the cut. Classification indices between at-risk/not-at-risk on i-Ready Diagnostic and at-risk/not-at-risk on the SBA are calculated per the formulas in the classification worksheet.
Were the children in the study/studies involved in an intervention in addition to typical classroom instruction between the screening measure and outcome assessment?
Yes
If yes, please describe the intervention, what children received the intervention, and how they were chosen.
We did not collect information on whether students who were included in this analysis received an intervention in addition to typical classroom instruction between the screening measure and outcome assessment. With that said, based on the criteria for inclusion in this analysis (i.e., students scoring below the 20th percentile in spring) it is likely that students received some form of intervention.

Classification Accuracy - Fall

Evidence Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Criterion measure Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment
Cut Points - Percentile rank on criterion measure 20 20 20 20 20 20
Cut Points - Performance score on criterion measure 2362 2397 2410 2423 2427 2434
Cut Points - Corresponding performance score (numeric) on screener measure 411 429 446 459 468 479
Classification Data - True Positive (a) 1918 2078 1969 2294 2248 1929
Classification Data - False Positive (b) 1569 1275 1499 1294 1182 1352
Classification Data - False Negative (c) 472 514 457 556 515 475
Classification Data - True Negative (d) 8907 9791 9605 10571 10206 9245
Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0.91 0.93 0.92 0.93 0.94 0.93
AUC Estimate’s 95% Confidence Interval: Lower Bound 0.91 0.93 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.92
AUC Estimate’s 95% Confidence Interval: Upper Bound 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.94 0.94 0.93
Statistics Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Base Rate 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.18
Overall Classification Rate 0.84 0.87 0.86 0.87 0.88 0.86
Sensitivity 0.80 0.80 0.81 0.80 0.81 0.80
Specificity 0.85 0.88 0.87 0.89 0.90 0.87
False Positive Rate 0.15 0.12 0.13 0.11 0.10 0.13
False Negative Rate 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.20 0.19 0.20
Positive Predictive Power 0.55 0.62 0.57 0.64 0.66 0.59
Negative Predictive Power 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Sample Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Date Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018
Sample Size 12866 13658 13530 14715 14151 13001
Geographic Representation New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
Male 44.1 % 44.5 % 44.1 % 44.3 % 44.7 % 49.4 %
Female 43.0 % 42.2 % 42.8 % 42.7 % 42.7 % 46.7 %
Other            
Gender Unknown 12.9 % 13.3 % 13.1 % 13.0 % 12.5 % 3.9 %
White, Non-Hispanic 19.4 % 19.5 % 20.7 % 19.4 % 18.4 % 22.6 %
Black, Non-Hispanic 3.0 % 3.3 % 3.8 % 3.1 % 3.2 % 3.9 %
Hispanic 38.0 % 38.9 % 38.0 % 42.1 % 41.7 % 44.5 %
Asian/Pacific Islander            
American Indian/Alaska Native 0.3 % 0.3 % 0.4 % 0.3 % 0.3 % 0.3 %
Other 1.7 % 1.7 % 1.6 % 1.4 % 1.3 % 1.5 %
Race / Ethnicity Unknown 31.4 % 30.2 % 28.4 % 26.7 % 28.1 % 18.8 %
Low SES            
IEP or diagnosed disability            
English Language Learner            

Classification Accuracy - Winter

Evidence Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Criterion measure Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment
Cut Points - Percentile rank on criterion measure 20 20 20 20 20 20
Cut Points - Performance score on criterion measure 2362 2397 2410 2423 2427 2434
Cut Points - Corresponding performance score (numeric) on screener measure 424 440 455 465 472 481
Classification Data - True Positive (a) 1978 2147 2039 2308 2053 1762
Classification Data - False Positive (b) 1129 1033 1340 1096 989 1065
Classification Data - False Negative (c) 474 500 508 523 500 415
Classification Data - True Negative (d) 9478 10173 10070 10711 9949 9094
Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0.94 0.94 0.93 0.94 0.94 0.94
AUC Estimate’s 95% Confidence Interval: Lower Bound 0.93 0.94 0.93 0.94 0.94 0.93
AUC Estimate’s 95% Confidence Interval: Upper Bound 0.94 0.95 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.94
Statistics Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Base Rate 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.18
Overall Classification Rate 0.88 0.89 0.87 0.89 0.89 0.88
Sensitivity 0.81 0.81 0.80 0.82 0.80 0.81
Specificity 0.89 0.91 0.88 0.91 0.91 0.90
False Positive Rate 0.11 0.09 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.10
False Negative Rate 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.18 0.20 0.19
Positive Predictive Power 0.64 0.68 0.60 0.68 0.67 0.62
Negative Predictive Power 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96
Sample Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Date Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018
Sample Size 13059 13853 13957 14638 13491 12336
Geographic Representation New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
Male 44.4 % 44.2 % 44.0 % 44.1 % 44.4 % 49.4 %
Female 42.8 % 42.3 % 43.3 % 43.0 % 42.5 % 46.5 %
Other            
Gender Unknown 12.9 % 13.4 % 12.7 % 12.9 % 13.1 % 4.1 %
White, Non-Hispanic 19.4 % 19.5 % 20.1 % 19.4 % 19.1 % 23.7 %
Black, Non-Hispanic 2.9 % 3.3 % 3.8 % 3.1 % 3.2 % 3.8 %
Hispanic 37.9 % 39.0 % 38.8 % 42.1 % 40.0 % 42.5 %
Asian/Pacific Islander            
American Indian/Alaska Native 0.3 % 0.3 % 0.4 % 0.3 % 0.3 % 0.3 %
Other 1.7 % 1.6 % 1.6 % 1.4 % 1.3 % 1.5 %
Race / Ethnicity Unknown 31.6 % 30.2 % 28.3 % 26.9 % 28.7 % 19.4 %
Low SES            
IEP or diagnosed disability            
English Language Learner            

Classification Accuracy - Spring

Evidence Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Criterion measure Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment
Cut Points - Percentile rank on criterion measure 20 20 20 20 20 20
Cut Points - Performance score on criterion measure 2362 2397 2410 2423 2427 2434
Cut Points - Corresponding performance score (numeric) on screener measure 432 446 459 467 473 481
Classification Data - True Positive (a) 1881 2044 1865 1903 1592 1293
Classification Data - False Positive (b) 785 800 1057 743 712 700
Classification Data - False Negative (c) 423 469 453 438 382 317
Classification Data - True Negative (d) 8773 9194 9066 8949 6701 5413
Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0.95 0.95 0.94 0.95 0.94 0.93
AUC Estimate’s 95% Confidence Interval: Lower Bound 0.95 0.95 0.93 0.95 0.94 0.93
AUC Estimate’s 95% Confidence Interval: Upper Bound 0.95 0.96 0.94 0.96 0.95 0.94
Statistics Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Base Rate 0.19 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.21 0.21
Overall Classification Rate 0.90 0.90 0.88 0.90 0.88 0.87
Sensitivity 0.82 0.81 0.80 0.81 0.81 0.80
Specificity 0.92 0.92 0.90 0.92 0.90 0.89
False Positive Rate 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.11
False Negative Rate 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.20
Positive Predictive Power 0.71 0.72 0.64 0.72 0.69 0.65
Negative Predictive Power 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.94
Sample Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Date Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018
Sample Size 11862 12507 12441 12033 9387 7723
Geographic Representation New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
New England (CT)
Pacific (CA, OR, WA)
South Atlantic (DE)
Male 45.7 % 46.0 % 45.4 % 43.7 % 45.1 % 48.5 %
Female 43.6 % 43.7 % 44.1 % 42.9 % 43.8 % 46.3 %
Other            
Gender Unknown 10.7 % 10.3 % 10.6 % 13.4 % 11.2 % 5.2 %
White, Non-Hispanic 20.2 % 20.8 % 21.4 % 17.4 % 13.6 % 15.3 %
Black, Non-Hispanic 3.2 % 3.6 % 4.0 % 3.2 % 3.7 % 4.5 %
Hispanic 41.0 % 42.6 % 41.9 % 44.0 % 47.9 % 51.3 %
Asian/Pacific Islander            
American Indian/Alaska Native 0.3 % 0.3 % 0.4 % 0.3 % 0.3 % 0.3 %
Other 1.7 % 1.7 % 1.6 % 0.9 % 1.0 % 0.7 %
Race / Ethnicity Unknown 26.9 % 24.2 % 23.0 % 28.0 % 29.3 % 23.0 %
Low SES            
IEP or diagnosed disability            
English Language Learner            

Cross-Validation - Fall

Evidence Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Criterion measure Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment
Cut Points - Percentile rank on criterion measure 20 20 20 20 20 20
Cut Points - Performance score on criterion measure 2362 2397 2410 2423 2427 2434
Cut Points - Corresponding performance score (numeric) on screener measure 411 429 446 459 468 479
Classification Data - True Positive (a) 950 1073 1106 1150 1066 1010
Classification Data - False Positive (b) 895 695 780 834 627 778
Classification Data - False Negative (c) 196 242 246 191 195 216
Classification Data - True Negative (d) 4077 4686 4775 4763 4579 4744
Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0.90 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.95 0.92
AUC Estimate’s 95% Confidence Interval: Lower Bound 0.90 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.94 0.92
AUC Estimate’s 95% Confidence Interval: Upper Bound 0.91 0.93 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.93
Statistics Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Base Rate 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.18
Overall Classification Rate 0.82 0.86 0.85 0.85 0.87 0.85
Sensitivity 0.83 0.82 0.82 0.86 0.85 0.82
Specificity 0.82 0.87 0.86 0.85 0.88 0.86
False Positive Rate 0.18 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.12 0.14
False Negative Rate 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.14 0.15 0.18
Positive Predictive Power 0.51 0.61 0.59 0.58 0.63 0.56
Negative Predictive Power 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.96
Sample Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Date Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018
Sample Size 6118 6696 6907 6938 6467 6748
Geographic Representation Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Male 50.7 % 50.5 % 50.5 % 50.4 % 51.0 % 51.6 %
Female 49.3 % 49.5 % 49.5 % 49.6 % 49.0 % 48.4 %
Other            
Gender Unknown            
White, Non-Hispanic 22.8 % 21.1 % 21.8 % 22.7 % 22.8 % 23.2 %
Black, Non-Hispanic 7.5 % 7.2 % 7.3 % 7.3 % 7.2 % 7.5 %
Hispanic 54.3 % 56.6 % 55.2 % 54.2 % 52.0 % 51.9 %
Asian/Pacific Islander            
American Indian/Alaska Native 0.5 % 0.4 % 0.4 % 0.5 % 0.5 % 0.4 %
Other 0.3 % 0.3 % 0.3 % 0.2 % 0.1 % 0.1 %
Race / Ethnicity Unknown 0.9 % 0.6 % 0.7 % 0.8 % 1.5 % 0.8 %
Low SES            
IEP or diagnosed disability            
English Language Learner            

Cross-Validation - Winter

Evidence Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Criterion measure Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment
Cut Points - Percentile rank on criterion measure 20 20 20 20 20 20
Cut Points - Performance score on criterion measure 2362 2397 2410 2423 2427 2434
Cut Points - Corresponding performance score (numeric) on screener measure 424 440 455 465 472 481
Classification Data - True Positive (a) 950 1115 1096 1186 1089 1026
Classification Data - False Positive (b) 629 623 626 619 576 694
Classification Data - False Negative (c) 216 219 264 193 190 228
Classification Data - True Negative (d) 4286 4654 4755 5000 4610 4796
Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0.93 0.94 0.93 0.95 0.95 0.93
AUC Estimate’s 95% Confidence Interval: Lower Bound 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.94 0.94 0.92
AUC Estimate’s 95% Confidence Interval: Upper Bound 0.94 0.95 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.94
Statistics Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Base Rate 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.19
Overall Classification Rate 0.86 0.87 0.87 0.88 0.88 0.86
Sensitivity 0.81 0.84 0.81 0.86 0.85 0.82
Specificity 0.87 0.88 0.88 0.89 0.89 0.87
False Positive Rate 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.13
False Negative Rate 0.19 0.16 0.19 0.14 0.15 0.18
Positive Predictive Power 0.60 0.64 0.64 0.66 0.65 0.60
Negative Predictive Power 0.95 0.96 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.95
Sample Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Date Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018
Sample Size 6081 6611 6741 6998 6465 6744
Geographic Representation Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Male 49.9 % 50.0 % 50.2 % 50.3 % 50.9 % 51.2 %
Female 50.1 % 50.0 % 49.8 % 49.7 % 49.1 % 48.8 %
Other            
Gender Unknown            
White, Non-Hispanic 21.9 % 20.1 % 21.1 % 22.3 % 22.5 % 22.5 %
Black, Non-Hispanic 7.7 % 7.9 % 7.8 % 7.5 % 7.5 % 7.8 %
Hispanic 54.5 % 56.9 % 55.0 % 54.1 % 52.3 % 52.2 %
Asian/Pacific Islander            
American Indian/Alaska Native 0.4 % 0.5 % 0.4 % 0.4 % 0.5 % 0.4 %
Other 0.4 % 0.3 % 0.3 % 0.2 % 0.1 % 0.1 %
Race / Ethnicity Unknown 1.0 % 0.7 % 0.7 % 0.8 % 1.6 % 0.8 %
Low SES            
IEP or diagnosed disability            
English Language Learner            

Cross-Validation - Spring

Evidence Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Criterion measure Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment Smarter Balanced Assessment
Cut Points - Percentile rank on criterion measure 20 20 20 20 20 20
Cut Points - Performance score on criterion measure 2362 2397 2410 2423 2427 2434
Cut Points - Corresponding performance score (numeric) on screener measure 432 446 459 467 473 481
Classification Data - True Positive (a) 780 834 801 824 785 720
Classification Data - False Positive (b) 385 382 436 367 385 410
Classification Data - False Negative (c) 190 181 180 180 136 149
Classification Data - True Negative (d) 3495 3937 3564 3410 2691 2591
Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0.94 0.95 0.94 0.95 0.94 0.93
AUC Estimate’s 95% Confidence Interval: Lower Bound 0.94 0.95 0.93 0.94 0.93 0.92
AUC Estimate’s 95% Confidence Interval: Upper Bound 0.95 0.96 0.94 0.96 0.95 0.94
Statistics Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Base Rate 0.20 0.19 0.20 0.21 0.23 0.22
Overall Classification Rate 0.88 0.89 0.88 0.89 0.87 0.86
Sensitivity 0.80 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.85 0.83
Specificity 0.90 0.91 0.89 0.90 0.87 0.86
False Positive Rate 0.10 0.09 0.11 0.10 0.13 0.14
False Negative Rate 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.15 0.17
Positive Predictive Power 0.67 0.69 0.65 0.69 0.67 0.64
Negative Predictive Power 0.95 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Sample Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Date Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018 Spring 2018
Sample Size 4850 5334 4981 4781 3997 3870
Geographic Representation Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Mountain (ID)
Pacific (CA)
Male 50.9 % 50.3 % 50.8 % 51.2 % 51.1 % 51.5 %
Female 49.1 % 49.7 % 49.2 % 48.8 % 48.9 % 48.5 %
Other            
Gender Unknown            
White, Non-Hispanic 25.5 % 23.6 % 25.2 % 20.9 % 19.9 % 19.5 %
Black, Non-Hispanic 6.5 % 6.2 % 6.9 % 7.2 % 8.3 % 8.8 %
Hispanic 50.1 % 52.6 % 50.0 % 53.2 % 59.9 % 61.3 %
Asian/Pacific Islander            
American Indian/Alaska Native 0.5 % 0.5 % 0.4 % 0.5 % 0.5 % 0.4 %
Other 0.4 % 0.2 % 0.3 % 0.3 % 0.1 % 0.1 %
Race / Ethnicity Unknown 1.0 % 0.7 % 0.6 % 0.7 % 1.3 % 0.8 %
Low SES            
IEP or diagnosed disability            
English Language Learner            

Reliability

Grade Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Rating Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence
Legend
Full BubbleConvincing evidence
Half BubblePartially convincing evidence
Empty BubbleUnconvincing evidence
Null BubbleData unavailable
dDisaggregated data available
*Offer a justification for each type of reliability reported, given the type and purpose of the tool.
The i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics provides two types of reliability estimates: • IRT-based reliability measures such as the marginal reliability estimate and standard error of measurement. • Test-retest reliability coefficients. Marginal Reliability: Given that the i-Ready Diagnostic is a computer-adaptive assessment that does not have a fixed form, some traditional reliability estimates such as Cronbach’s alpha are not an appropriate index for quantifying consistency or inconsistency in student performance. The IRT analogue to classical reliability is called marginal reliability, and operates on the variance of the theta scores and the average of the expected error variance. The marginal reliability uses the classical definition of reliability as proportion of variance in the total observed score due to true score under an IRT model (the i-Ready Diagnostic uses a Rasch model to be specific). Standard Error of Measurement (SEM): In an IRT model, SEMs are affected by factors such as how well the data fit the underlying model, student response consistency, student location on the ability continuum, match of items to student ability, and test length. Given the adaptive nature of i-Ready and the wide difficulty range in the item bank, standard errors are expected to be low and very close to the theoretical minimum for the test of the given length. The theoretical minimum would be reached if each interim estimate of student ability is assessed by an item with difficulty matching perfectly to the student’s ability estimated from previous items. Theoretical minimums are restricted by the number of items served in the assessment—the more items that are served up, the lower the SEM could potentially be. For mathematics, the minimum SEM for overall scores is 6.0. Test-retest Reliability: The i-Ready Diagnostic is often used as an interim assessment, and students can take the assessment multiple times a year. Therefore, the test-retest reliability estimate is appropriate to provide stability estimates for the same students who took two Diagnostic tests.
*Describe the sample(s), including size and characteristics, for each reliability analysis conducted.
Data for obtaining the marginal reliability and SEM was from the August and September administrations of the i-Ready Diagnostic from 2016 (reported in the 2016 i-Ready Diagnostic technical report). All students tested within the time-frame were included. Evidence of test-retest stability was assessed based on a sub-sample of students who, during the 2016–2017 school year, took i-Ready Diagnostic twice within the recommended 12–18-week testing window. The average testing interval is 106 days (15 weeks). Sample sizes by grade are presented in the table below.
*Describe the analysis procedures for each reported type of reliability.
This marginal reliability uses the classical definition of reliability as proportion of variance in the total observed score due to true score. The true score variance is computed as the observed score variance minus the error variance (see equation below). ρ_θ=(σ_(θ-)^2 σ ̅_E^2)/(σ_θ^2 ) where ρθ is the marginal reliability estimate, σ2θ is the observed error variance of the ability estimate, σ ̅_E^2is the observed average conditional error variance. Similar to a classical reliability coefficient, the marginal reliability estimate increases as the standard error decreases; it approaches 1 when the standard error approaches 0. The observed score variance, the error variance, and SEM (the square root of the error variance) are obtained through WINSTEPS calibrations. One separate calibration was conducted for each grade. For test-retest reliability, Pearson correlation coefficients were obtained between scores for the two Diagnostic tests. Correlations between the two Diagnostic tests were calculated. In lower grades where growth and variability are expected to be higher, test-retest correlations are expected to be relatively lower.

*In the table(s) below, report the results of the reliability analyses described above (e.g., internal consistency or inter-rater reliability coefficients).

Type of Subgroup Informant Age / Grade Test or Criterion n Median Coefficient 95% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound
95% Confidence Interval
Upper Bound
Results from other forms of reliability analysis not compatible with above table format:
Manual cites other published reliability studies:
No
Provide citations for additional published studies.
Do you have reliability data that are disaggregated by gender, race/ethnicity, or other subgroups (e.g., English language learners, students with disabilities)?
No

If yes, fill in data for each subgroup with disaggregated reliability data.

Type of Subgroup Informant Age / Grade Test or Criterion n Median Coefficient 95% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound
95% Confidence Interval
Upper Bound
Results from other forms of reliability analysis not compatible with above table format:
Manual cites other published reliability studies:
No
Provide citations for additional published studies.

Validity

Grade Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Rating Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence Convincing evidence
Legend
Full BubbleConvincing evidence
Half BubblePartially convincing evidence
Empty BubbleUnconvincing evidence
Null BubbleData unavailable
dDisaggregated data available
*Describe each criterion measure used and explain why each measure is appropriate, given the type and purpose of the tool.
The internal structure of the i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics is supported by the construct maps and the ordering of the skills addressed at different stages on the map. We recognize that coverage of skills and difficulty of items will overlap a fair amount across grades, as much material is reviewed from year to year. However, what should be apparent from the estimated item difficulties is that, generally, items measuring skills targeting lower levels of the map should be easier, and items measuring skills targeting higher levels of the map should be more difficult.
*Describe the sample(s), including size and characteristics, for each validity analysis conducted.
Active items in the current item pool for the 2016–2017 school year are included in the analysis for interval validity. The number of items per grade is listed in the table below. For K-2: Quantile grade-banded results are featured, rather than grade-specific results. The i-Ready Diagnostic mathematics scale scores are created on a vertical scale which makes the scale scores comparable across grades. Thus, for efficiency purposes, the linking sample for the Quantile study includes only students from every other grade (i.e., grades 1, 3, 5, and 7), but results are generalized across grades in various grade bands (e.g., K-2). Additional information on the Quantile study, which was conducted in concert with MetaMetrics, is available upon request. While the Quantile to i-Ready Diagnostic correlation is lower than 0.60, it was not unexpected given the differences in administration between the two assessments (i-Ready Diagnostic Math Assessment provided audio support while the Quantile Linking Test only provided a read-aloud accommodation for all students). Another difference between the i-Ready Diagnostic Math Assessment and the Quantile Linking Test is the number of answer choices, where i-Ready Diagnostic Math Assessment had three answer choices and the Quantile Linking Test had four answer choices.
*Describe the analysis procedures for each reported type of validity.
Distributions of indicator difficulties by grade level provide further evidence of internal structure. The difficulty of an indicator corresponds to a 67% probability of passing on the indicator characteristic curve aggregated across all items aligned to the indicator. The table below shows the average and standard deviation of indicator difficulties. Indicator difficulty (as shown in the figures and tables) is used in conjunction with the student’s placement level on the i-Ready Diagnostic to help to determine what students can do, and what they should work on next to continue along the proficiency continuum. These “can dos” and “next steps” are part of the feedback provided in i-Ready reports. Student domain placement levels are compared to indicator difficulties and this provides personalized feedback for each student. To provide further information to educators, a State Standards Performance Report is provided for each state. For each standard, the student’s domain scale score (which is at a finer grain than the placement level) is used to determine whether students have mastered all of the standard, part but not all of the standard, or none of the standard. This determination is again made by comparing the student’s scale score to the indicator difficulty of the skill or skills mapped to each state standard.

*In the table below, report the results of the validity analyses described above (e.g., concurrent or predictive validity, 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 Subgroup Informant Age / Grade Test or Criterion n Median Coefficient 95% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound
95% Confidence Interval
Upper Bound
Results from other forms of validity analysis not compatible with above table format:
*For K-2: Quantile grade-banded results are featured rather than grade-specific results. The i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics scale scores are created on a vertical scale, which makes the scale scores comparable across grades. Thus, for efficiency purposes, the linking sample for the Quantile study includes only students from every other grade (i.e., grades 1, 3, 5, and 7), but results are generalized across grades in various grade bands (e.g., K-2). Additional information on the Quantile study, which was conducted in concert with MetaMetrics, is available upon request. While the Quantile to i-Ready Diagnostic correlation is lower than 0.60, it was not unexpected given the differences in administration between the two assessments (i-Ready Diagnostic provided audio support while the Quantile Linking Test only provided a read-aloud accommodation for all students). Another difference between the i-Ready Diagnostic and the Quantile Linking Test is the number of answer choices, where i-Ready Diagnostic had three answer choices and the Quantile Linking Test had four answer choices. The table below shows validity evidence based on internal structure, represented by indicator difficulty. The mean and standard deviation, as well as the number of items are presented by grade. Results show that items targeting progressively higher grade levels are progressively more difficult, as indicated by the aggregate difficulty of the indicator. Differences in item difficulties between the upper grades are less dramatic than such differences between the lower grades, which reflects the reality of student performance in the classroom. Type of Validity Age or Grade Indicator Difficulty (Mean) Indicator Difficulty (SD) Number of Items Internal Structure K 371.97 21.38 241 Internal Structure 1 398.10 19.15 245 Internal Structure 2 431.24 22.00 324 Internal Structure 3 463.80 20.28 306 Internal Structure 4 483.96 24.28 354 Internal Structure 5 508.11 19.15 270 Internal Structure 6 521.85 23.29 374 Internal Structure 7 546.38 15.59 261 Internal Structure 8 548.85 19.72 223 Indicator difficulty (as shown in the figures and tables) is used in conjunction with the student’s placement level on the i-Ready Diagnostic to help to determine what students can do, and what they should work on next to continue along the proficiency continuum. These “can dos” and “next steps” are part of the feedback provided in i-Ready reports. Student domain placement levels are compared to indicator difficulties and this provides personalized feedback for each student. To provide further information to educators, a State Standards Performance Report is provided for each state. For each standard, the student’s domain scale score (which is at a finer grain than the placement level) is used to determine whether students have mastered all of the standard, part but not all of the standard, or none of the standard. This determination is again made by comparing the student’s scale score to the indicator difficulty of the skill or skills mapped to each state standard.
Manual cites other published reliability studies:
No
Provide citations for additional published studies.
Describe the degree to which the provided data support the validity of the tool.
The internal structure of the i-Ready Diagnostic for Mathematics is supported by the construct maps and the ordering of the skills addressed at different stages on the map. Skills representing the lower levels on the construct map are those generally associated with items targeted at lower grade levels, and skills representing the higher levels on the map are ones generally associated with items targeted at higher grade levels.
Do you have validity data that are disaggregated by gender, race/ethnicity, or other subgroups (e.g., English language learners, students with disabilities)?
No

If yes, fill in data for each subgroup with disaggregated validity data.

Type of Subgroup Informant Age / Grade Test or Criterion n Median Coefficient 95% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound
95% Confidence Interval
Upper Bound
Results from other forms of validity analysis not compatible with above table format:
Manual cites other published reliability studies:
No
Provide citations for additional published studies.

Bias Analysis

Grade Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Rating Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Have you conducted additional analyses related to the extent to which your tool is or is not biased against subgroups (e.g., race/ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, students with disabilities, English language learners)? Examples might include Differential Item Functioning (DIF) or invariance testing in multiple-group confirmatory factor models.
Yes
If yes,
a. Describe the method used to determine the presence or absence of bias:
Differential Item Function (DIF) was investigated using WINSTEPS® by comparing the item difficulty measure for two demographic categories in a pairwise comparison through a combined calibration analysis. The essence of this methodology is to investigate the interaction of the person-groups with each item, while fixing all other item and person measures to those from the combined calibration. The method used to detect DIF is based on the Mantel-Haenszel procedure (MH), and the work of Linacre & Wright (1989) and Linacre (2012). Typically, the group representing test takers in a specific demographic group is referred to as the focal group. The group made up of test takers from outside this group is referred to as the reference group. For example, for gender, Female is the focal group, and Male is the reference group.
b. Describe the subgroups for which bias analyses were conducted:
The latest large-scale DIF analysis included a random sample (10%) of students from the 2015–2016 i-Ready operational data. Given the large size of the 2015–2016 i-Ready student population, it is practical to carry out the calibration analysis with a random sample. The following demographic categories were compared: Female vs. Male; Black or African American and Latino vs. Caucasian; English Learner vs. non–English Learner; Students with Disabilities vs. General Education students; Economically Disadvantaged vs. Not Economically Disadvantaged. In each pairwise comparison, estimates of item difficulty for each category in the comparison were calculated.
c. Describe the results of the bias analyses conducted, including data and interpretative statements. Include magnitude of effect (if available) if bias has been identified.
Active items in the current item pool for the 2016–2017 school year are included in the DIF analysis. The total numbers of items are 3103 for Mathematics. WINSTEPS (Version 3.92) was used to conduct the calibration for DIF analysis by grade. To help interpret the results, the Educational Testing Service (ETS) criteria using the delta method was used to categorize DIF (Zwick, Thayer, & Lewis, 1999) and is presented. The number and percentage of items exhibiting DIF for each of the demographic categories are reported in the table below. It should be noted that not all students have individual demographic information and the total number of items for two exclusive groups in the categories does not necessarily equal to the total number of items. It is clear that the majority of ELA items show negligible DIF (mostly more than 90 percent), and very few items (less than 6 percent) are showing large DIF (level C) by grade.

Data Collection Practices

Most tools and programs evaluated by the NCII are branded products which have been submitted by the companies, organizations, or individuals that disseminate these products. These entities supply the textual information shown above, but not the ratings accompanying the text. NCII administrators and members of our Technical Review Committees have reviewed the content on this page, but NCII cannot guarantee that this information is free from error or reflective of recent changes to the product. Tools and programs have the opportunity to be updated annually or upon request.