I averaged 69 words per minute with 94 percent accuracy on the 10FastFingers typing test, which is not bad but below the 73
words per minute I scored on the 12 - inch MacBook.
Not exact matches
Composite z -
score on three project reading measures: spring reading
words residual, spring retelling at reading level residual, and spring
words - correct -
per -
minute residual 2.
The number of correct
words per minute from the passage is the oral reading fluency
score.
Under the «Fall» and «Spring» columns are the students»
scores (number of
words read correct
per minute) for those benchmark seasons.
For every 10 % increase in the coding of coaching in
word recognition strategies, students» fluency
score increased by 8.9
words correct
per minute on average.
If we note that students increased their
scores by an average of 20
words correct
per minute per year (see Table 7) and that school
scores on the collaborative leadership scale ranged from 1.1 to 1.9 with a mean of 1.7 (out of a high
score of 3), then we can surmise that, at least in principle, a school gaining one additional point on the collaborative leadership scale could make up a year's worth of fluency performance.
For every 10 % increase in the coding of higher - level questioning, students» fluency
scores increased by an average of 8.8
words correct
per minute.
Grade 1 was analyzed separately from grades 2 - 3 since different fall
scores (e.g.,
word dictation in grade 1 versus
words correct
per minute, Gates comprehension, or writing
score in grades 2 - 3) were used as explanatory variables in the analyses.
For every 10 % increase in the coding of active responding, students» fluency
score increase on average by 5.4
words correct
per minute.
For every 10 % increase in the coding of small - group instruction, students» fluency
score increased by an average of 2.1
words correct
per minute.
For every 10 % increase in the coding of phonics instruction, students» fluency
score decreased by 3.0
words correct
per minute on average.
Across all schools, the mean school fluency
score was 104.5
words correct
per minute.
For every 10 % increase in the coding of a teacher - directed stance, students» fluency
score decreased by a mean of 4.0
words correct
per minute.
To determine if a student needs a reading fluency intervention, compare his or her average
words - correct -
per -
minute (wcpm)
score from two or three unpracticed readings of grade - level assessment passages to oral reading fluency norms, such as the Hasbrouck - Tindal Oral Reading Fluency Norms.
The software automatically calculates the student's
words - correct -
per -
minute (wcpm)
score on each passage and averages the
scores.
An individual report for each student provides the student's average
words - correct -
per -
minute (wcpm)
score and general recommendations based on the student's results.
On the Ten Thumbs Typing Test, we
scored 50
words per minute, compared to our usual 55 wpm.
Using the So You Think You Can Type app, we
scored anywhere from 102
words per minute to 48 wpm, depending on which sample sentence we were given to copy.
On the Ten Thumbs Typing Test, we
scored an average of 74
words per minute with an error rate of 1 percent using the Transformer Book's keyboard.
When using the Ten Thumbs Typing Tutor test, we
scored a rate of 86
words per minute with a 2 percent error rate, around the same rate we get on a full - size ThinkPad.
The first time we took the Ten Thumbs Typing Tutor test, we registered an awful error rate of 7 percent, but after being a lot more deliberate in our strokes, we managed a 1 percent error rate with a 74
word -
per -
minute speed, about 11
words per minute below our typical
score.
On the 10fastfingers.com typing test, I
scored a rate of 105
words per minute with a 6 - percent error rate, which is faster but more error - prone than I usually am.