First of all, from what my DS's (3rd grade) and DD's (1st grade) teachers have explained to us about NWEAs, when they are in the 99th percentile, it is harder to get points and the assessment isn't as accurate for your student.
I'm not sure what they're telling you makes sense. The tests go to 300, so there is plenty of room to grow, and 99th percentile is only for that grade level -- the same number is a lower percentile for a higher grade. I can see what they *might* mean, in a way -- it's hard to gain points when they aren't actually teaching anything at the level he needs to be learning. But the assessment is perfectly capable of showing that growth, if they manage to make it.
What I mean, for the OP here, is that 204 in fall math is 99th percentile for 1st grade (197 is where 99th percentile starts), and 97th percentile for 2nd grade, and 83rd percentile for 3rd grade. He sits there looking good for the school's record, but gaining no ground -- in order to gain a year's growth starting from 204, he should be hitting about 213 to 216 by the same time next year. The purpose of NWEA is to show growth, and it should be a year's growth for a year's time, regardless of where they start.
And jwertz hits the nail on the head, there -- he's not learning anything, as demonstrated by their tests, and so obviously he has to be doing *something*, which in this case is sleeping, stirring up the other kids, and being bored.
It's a good idea to substitute "not being challenged" for "bored" in that statement when speaking to school people. Sometimes they don't like that, either.
--Edited because my figures were off the first time. Found the right chart.--
