Publication Date
| In 2025 | 0 |
| Since 2024 | 0 |
| Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 1 |
| Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 2 |
| Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 2 |
Descriptor
Source
| Grantee Submission | 2 |
Author
| Ben Seipel | 1 |
| DeBoer, George E. | 1 |
| Hardcastle, Joseph | 1 |
| Herrmann-Abell, Cari F. | 1 |
| Mark L. Davison | 1 |
| Patrick C. Kennedy | 1 |
| Sarah E. Carlson | 1 |
| Virginia Clinton-Lisell | 1 |
Publication Type
| Reports - Research | 2 |
| Numerical/Quantitative Data | 1 |
| Speeches/Meeting Papers | 1 |
Education Level
| Elementary Education | 1 |
| Higher Education | 1 |
| Postsecondary Education | 1 |
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Peer reviewed
Download full textBen Seipel; Sarah E. Carlson; Virginia Clinton-Lisell; Mark L. Davison; Patrick C. Kennedy – Grantee Submission, 2022
Originally designed for students in Grades 3 through 5, MOCCA (formerly the Multiple-choice Online Causal Comprehension Assessment), identifies students who struggle with comprehension, and helps uncover why they struggle. There are many reasons why students might not comprehend what they read. They may struggle with decoding, or reading words…
Descriptors: Multiple Choice Tests, Computer Assisted Testing, Diagnostic Tests, Reading Tests
Hardcastle, Joseph; Herrmann-Abell, Cari F.; DeBoer, George E. – Grantee Submission, 2017
Can student performance on computer-based tests (CBT) and paper-and-pencil tests (PPT) be considered equivalent measures of student knowledge? States and school districts are grappling with this question, and although studies addressing this question are growing, additional research is needed. We report on the performance of students who took…
Descriptors: Academic Achievement, Computer Assisted Testing, Comparative Analysis, Student Evaluation
