Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Active Threads This Week

MAP testing is designed for child-find--IOW, to identify students at-risk of academic failure or underachievement. Its use for identifying above-level students is rather secondary to the original intent.

You may find this reference from NWEA on average test durations interesting: https://www.nwea.org/content/uploads/2018/08/Average-MAP-Growth-Test-Durations.pdf
Take a look especially at page four, which pulls out the 90th %ile and above of testers, and then breaks them further into where they fall by test duration. So the 90th %ile of high performers really does test for about 1.5- over 2 hours per MAP test.

Note also that they are allowed to take breaks, and to test over multiple days, so that sessions don't become excessively long.

To address only the 100% extended time question: yes. The CB requires test-takers to stay for the entire time provided. You cannot leave early. This is the case for all of the CB's extended time accommodations (on APs, SAT, etc.).

Regarding +50% vs +100% on the SAT suite: given the conversion of the suite to adaptive digital testing, starting from the SAT and apparently moving its way down (currently at the PSAT/NMSQT), I suspect that +100% will become less critical in the future, since the low-level questions will not be presented to high-achieving students. I do find that many students are drained by the end of +100%, especially the ones who are taking multiple AP exams in the same cycle.

Does his IEP have accommodations for reduced items or assignments? Items sufficient only to demonstrate mastery of standards? Oral elaboration of written responses (complete assignment first on paper, and then orally elaborate to fill in details that didn't make it to the page)? Is he using assistive technology for written products (speech-to-text, typing), at least for first drafts?

And you can compete quite easily with honors/AP and facilities by looking into dual enrollment options at your local 2- or 4-year state colleges. Even if he doesn't place into say, college science courses that require calc, an intro science course aimed at non-science majors would still move faster than a college prep high school class. At this level, you're not looking to build a college transcript, just to keep his mind stimulated, so it doesn't matter that these might not be the level he would want on his college transcript later. (Besides, a lot of colleges will just consider them as part of the application package, not for transfer credit.)

Both my kids recently attended Ivy League colleges or equivalents, and my observation is that broad statements like the one above hide a lot of information as to what's happening under the surface.

The most selective employers, such as those in finance or consulting, and the most selective PhD programs, will continue to disproportionately choose students from the Ivy+ colleges, regardless of what's going on at these colleges. Why? Because that's where a disproportionate level of talent ends up after high school. For example, roughly half of the national science award winners typically end up in either MIT or Harvard. Those students will have no problem getting the post-bachelors outcome they desire, despite any protests.

The Ivy League students that will be affected are those outside the top echelon. There are a good number of students at these colleges that are academically indistinguishable from the top students at a typical state flagship. Their employment prospects were going to take longer anyway, and no with the unwanted attention from the protests, they could very well end up underemployed relative to their degrees.