Preliminary Findings on the Computer-Administered Multiple-Choice Online Causal Comprehension Assessment, a Diagnostic Reading Comprehension Test

Mark L. Davison; Gina Biancarosa; Sarah E. Carlson; Ben Seipel; Bowen Liu

doi:10.1177/1534508417728685

Preliminary Findings on the Computer-Administered Multiple-Choice Online Causal Comprehension Assessment, a Diagnostic Reading Comprehension Test

Mark L. Davison, Gina Biancarosa, Sarah E. Carlson, Ben Seipel, Bowen Liu

Educational Psychology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

6 Scopus citations

Abstract

The computer-administered Multiple-Choice Online Causal Comprehension Assessment (MOCCA) for Grades 3 to 5 has an innovative, 40-item multiple-choice structure in which each distractor corresponds to a comprehension process upon which poor comprehenders have been shown to rely. This structure requires revised thinking about measurement issues (e.g., reliability and interpretation of incorrect responses for diagnostic purposes). Using data from a pilot study, the article presents descriptive statistics on correct responses, incorrect responses, and comprehension rate. It also presents reliability data for correct responses and incorrect responses as well as construct validity data on correct responses. Implications for diagnosis and remediation of poor inferential comprehension are discussed.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	169-181
Number of pages	13
Journal	Assessment for Effective Intervention
Volume	43
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508417728685
State	Published - Jun 1 2018

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The research reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305A140185 to the University of Oregon. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2017, © Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2017.

Keywords

computerized assessment
diagnostic/analytic
reading/literacy

Publisher link

10.1177/1534508417728685

Find It

Find It at U of M Libraries

Cite this

@article{38cf4742afd64042a92a22dbe36296be,

title = "Preliminary Findings on the Computer-Administered Multiple-Choice Online Causal Comprehension Assessment, a Diagnostic Reading Comprehension Test",

abstract = "The computer-administered Multiple-Choice Online Causal Comprehension Assessment (MOCCA) for Grades 3 to 5 has an innovative, 40-item multiple-choice structure in which each distractor corresponds to a comprehension process upon which poor comprehenders have been shown to rely. This structure requires revised thinking about measurement issues (e.g., reliability and interpretation of incorrect responses for diagnostic purposes). Using data from a pilot study, the article presents descriptive statistics on correct responses, incorrect responses, and comprehension rate. It also presents reliability data for correct responses and incorrect responses as well as construct validity data on correct responses. Implications for diagnosis and remediation of poor inferential comprehension are discussed.",

keywords = "computerized assessment, diagnostic/analytic, reading/literacy",

author = "Davison, {Mark L.} and Gina Biancarosa and Carlson, {Sarah E.} and Ben Seipel and Bowen Liu",

note = "Funding Information: The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The research reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305A140185 to the University of Oregon. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2017, {\textcopyright} Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2017.",

year = "2018",

month = jun,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1177/1534508417728685",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "43",

pages = "169--181",

journal = "Assessment for Effective Intervention",

issn = "1534-5084",

publisher = "Council for Exceptional Children, Council for Educational Diagnostic Services",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Preliminary Findings on the Computer-Administered Multiple-Choice Online Causal Comprehension Assessment, a Diagnostic Reading Comprehension Test

AU - Davison, Mark L.

AU - Biancarosa, Gina

AU - Carlson, Sarah E.

AU - Seipel, Ben

AU - Liu, Bowen

N1 - Funding Information: The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The research reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305A140185 to the University of Oregon. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education. Publisher Copyright: © 2017, © Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2017.

PY - 2018/6/1

Y1 - 2018/6/1

N2 - The computer-administered Multiple-Choice Online Causal Comprehension Assessment (MOCCA) for Grades 3 to 5 has an innovative, 40-item multiple-choice structure in which each distractor corresponds to a comprehension process upon which poor comprehenders have been shown to rely. This structure requires revised thinking about measurement issues (e.g., reliability and interpretation of incorrect responses for diagnostic purposes). Using data from a pilot study, the article presents descriptive statistics on correct responses, incorrect responses, and comprehension rate. It also presents reliability data for correct responses and incorrect responses as well as construct validity data on correct responses. Implications for diagnosis and remediation of poor inferential comprehension are discussed.

AB - The computer-administered Multiple-Choice Online Causal Comprehension Assessment (MOCCA) for Grades 3 to 5 has an innovative, 40-item multiple-choice structure in which each distractor corresponds to a comprehension process upon which poor comprehenders have been shown to rely. This structure requires revised thinking about measurement issues (e.g., reliability and interpretation of incorrect responses for diagnostic purposes). Using data from a pilot study, the article presents descriptive statistics on correct responses, incorrect responses, and comprehension rate. It also presents reliability data for correct responses and incorrect responses as well as construct validity data on correct responses. Implications for diagnosis and remediation of poor inferential comprehension are discussed.

KW - computerized assessment

KW - diagnostic/analytic

KW - reading/literacy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85046011093&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85046011093&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1534508417728685

DO - 10.1177/1534508417728685

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85046011093

SN - 1534-5084

VL - 43

SP - 169

EP - 181

JO - Assessment for Effective Intervention

JF - Assessment for Effective Intervention

IS - 3

ER -

Preliminary Findings on the Computer-Administered Multiple-Choice Online Causal Comprehension Assessment, a Diagnostic Reading Comprehension Test

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Publisher link

Find It

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this