The thing that the MAP test seems most good at is giving a general idea of how far ahead (or behind) a student is, and to me that information was quite helpful. The information in the report is minimal. My son's report had the following categories:
Math: Numbers and operations, algebra, geometry and measurement, and probability and data
Reading: Word skills/strategies, reading comprehension, text components, think critically and analyze, and read for a variety of purposes
The performance was listed as "high" for every category, with no indication of whether it was really high, average high, or on the low side of high, and also no indication of the range of high.
The ITBS, on the other hand, has far more categories and indicates the student's performance (percent correct) as compared to the national average in each one. So, for example, when my son was in K and took the 1st grade ITBS, the report says that for phonemic awareness and decoding, he got 94% correct and the national average was 68%. That particular subscore was part of the word analysis section of the test, which had a percentile rank given.
So, what I'm trying to say is that the MAP gives minimal information on the details compared to a test like the ITBS, but unlike the ITBS, it is much easier to get a sense of how far ahead a child is working.