Hi Everyone! This is my first post and I was wondering if someone can help me. I've known my son is a bright kid for a while, but lately other people, as well as my husband and I are starting to wonder if it's more than just "bright". He came home with pretty high math scores, but I'm not sure I understand them. His end of kindergarten RIT math score is a 215. Can anyone give me insight into if these scores are as high as I understand, and what do you do with a kid that high going into first grade? Thank you!
If using the 2015 norms, these line up roughly with the median end-of-year performance of fourth-graders in the standardization sample.
https://www.nwea.org/content/uploads/2015/05/2015-NWEA-Normative-Data-APR15.pdfThis does not mean you should immediately skip him to fifth grade for math
, especially as there may be skills or concepts that not assessed on the test that he needs to learn, but he probably will need some kind of advancement or challenge.
This may chart may be useful in advocacy:
https://www.nwea.org/content/uploads/2015/05/2015-NWEA-Comparative-Data-One-Sheet-APR15.pdfThis shows the kind of skills expected at each RIT level:
https://www.nwea.org/content/uploads/2014/07/NWEA-RIT-Reference-Brochure-Digital.pdfKeep in mind this does not include kindergarten to first grade, so it may be possible for a child to score fairly high on the primary version without knowing all of these skills.
Thank you- the skills expected at each RIT level is very helpful. Here's the thing though, I really don't think my child can do the skills in the 215 section. I don't think he knows enough of the vocabulary, having not been exposed to instruction at that level, so even really attempt them. Your comment on the primary version possibly being a cause seems very plausible to me. My thought is he is ready to being 3rd grade math in the fall, if possible. He knows some of it, but not more than half of it so it would seem to be a good fit. Thank you for your help!
That is a high score for a kindergartner.
One thing to keep in mind, though - he probably took P-MAP or primary MAP version. In our schools, only the K-1st graders take this version. It is my understanding that this version is read to the students, usually through headphones, and has a smaller question bank than does the 2-5 test. While NWEA MAP is supposed to be consistent throughout the different versions of the test, my own reading/speaking to assessment coordinators at our schools has led me to believe that the same RIT on different versions of the test (P-MAP, 2-5, 6+) may not truly be the same. Still, great score!
Are the preliminary 2015 norms being used yet? Our schools had led us to believe that these would not be used until at least the fall, so they are still using the 2011 norms (the mean scores are actually a bit higher, I believe).
Thank you both. I got the scores on the second to last day of school, so I didn't get a lot of detail on how they interpret the scores. Thank you for your help!
My DD's 2nd grade teacher, when explaining MAP tests to parents, explicitly said that the scores are not meant to measure grade level equivalents. She said that the range of test questions for each grade level is different, and the scores measure "instructional levels". In other words, a 2nd grader and 1 3rd grader with a score of 230 in math are not at the same math level, they are away from the mean of 2nd graders and 3rd graders by the same distance. I have no idea how this works. I have searched online multiple times and never was able to find clear explanations on how this score is interpreted and how hard the problems get (and what contents each grade covers). But I tend to think the teacher had it right, because my DD's score in 3rd grade was already way beyond the 11th grade average, and at that time she had not learned anything beyond basic elementary school math, so it was impossible for her to be really at a level higher than 11th grade.
I always find it puzzling that such a popular test is not clearly explained to parents. I also don't know at all if the scores have really been useful to teachers to offer individualized teaching (I don't think my DD's teacher offered that anyways).
I'd be happy to hear if other parents were able to figure out anything about how to interpret scores.
My understanding of RIT scores is that they indicate where a student is on the continuum of learning for a particular topic. Their meaning does not vary depending upon the grade level of the child--so if a 6 year old and a 12 year old obtain the same RIT score, they performed the same on the test and their instructional level is probably the same.
I've found that teachers and administrators mostly have NO IDEA about what test scores really mean.
MAP scores should be comparable across grades *if* the same version of the test is used. There are three versions, to my knowledge: K-2, 3-5, and 6+. Scores should be close to the same across versions but it's less reliable. aeh''s links give the information you need.
Playandlearn, I believe your teacher was misinformed; scores are not calculated based on the grade of the student. What you describe is how most other standardized academic testing works, but not MAP.
Keep in mind that the average student probably hasn't learned everything the class should have taught, and many high schoolers never succeed at higher math. Someone on this board told me years ago to compare to the 90-95th percentile MAP to find the true knowledge level of the student. This worked OK for my DD. If my kid had a 215 math score, I would try a beginning of 3rd grade placement test. (Most homeschooling curricula, like Singapore or Beast Academy, offer free printable placement tests.)
Your 2nd grade teacher's explanation is not exactly correct. RIT scores are continuously scaled across grades, using a version of Rasch scaling, which attempts to line items and performance up in order of difficulty. They are not deviation scores (as WISC or WJ scores are), which assume a bell curve, and compare performance to a standardization sample of some kind of peer (grade, in this example). While it is true that the RIT score does not mean exactly the same thing for a 2nd grader as for a 3rd grader, nor should they be interpreted as absolute grade levels, a 230 does not mean that a 2nd grader is as far from the 2nd grade mean as a 3rd grader is from the 3rd grade mean. That would be the case only if it were a deviation measure.
It is possible to find grade-based percentile scores to accompany RIT scores. Those would be different for each grade (i.e, the same RIT score would be at a different percentile in a different grade).
Grade equivalents mean only that the score obtained by this student is the same as the median score on this specific task obtained (or statistically predicted to be obtained) by the members of the standardization pool who were at this named grade level. They do not mean that a student has mastered the content expected of a student at that grade level, nor that they should most appropriately be placed at that grade level for instruction. Given the number of items administered in a MAP probe (about 25, give or take), there is no way that it can be a comprehensive assessment. It's a sampling of skills that we use to predict/estimate the actual range of skills mastered.
MAP is not actually designed to individualize teaching. It's really for at-risk screening, progress monitoring, and creating instructional groupings.
DD9's first (and only) MAP score was 240 something and she has huge gaps, and missed some questions on an end of the year 5th grade test, for instance she is still shaky with computations. But I think that's what the typical student in high school might score. I think testing like this is often used incorrectly, and I'm asking for her to be moved down from 8th grade math to 6th grade math. It sounds like correct guessing on 1-2 questions could make a big difference in the score.
Hello, thanks to everyone who replied. aeh's link is great!
aeh: I find your assertion largely aligned with my observation that "MAP is not actually designed to individualize teaching. It's really for at-risk screening, progress monitoring, and creating instructional groupings." I was disappointed none the less when I realized that DD was not getting anything special at school.
But I'm still puzzled. I thought DD10's score (270 last I remember) might make sense now if the test she took was for grades 3-5. She only started to be interested in math in 3rd grade so we didn't do much additional work at home before that time. At school they use Everyday Math and she hates it; but at home she finished Singapore Math 5th grade earlier this year. But she hasn't really learned algebra, geometry (except the basics), let alone trig and calculus. But if the test she took was for grades 3-5, yep, I can see that kids could get a very high score without knowing the *advanced* materials. But after reading the reference guide in aeh's link, I'm puzzled again. The math grades 2-5 test doesn't list at all what kind of questions kids get to score higher than 230. So I still have no clue what DD did in the test. Probably not important anymore now that I realize the pitfalls of the test (small number of problems, etc that you all mentioned), and that I know the teachers weren't really doing anything different at school.