Note: the ceiling on EasyCBM in math is basically the 90th %ile, so he may or may not have a significant difference between math and reading achievement. The data set does not provide enough information to determine that. (EasyCBM is intended to identify low achievers, so it doesn't need a high ceiling for its designed purpose.) If you look at this copy of the 2014 norm tables (
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED547421.pdf), you'll notice that, in winter of grade 3 (presumably the norms used for this determination), 6 points separate the 90th and 99th %iles, 6 points separate the 50th and 90th, 10 points separate the 10th and 50th, and 26 points separate the 1st and 10th. Clearly, item selection was slanted toward the bottom end of the curve. Out of 48 possible raw score points (16 each in three sections for NCTM math assessment), over half of them are distributed across the bottom 10 percent of performance.
That the school uses an instrument with that low of a ceiling (equivalent to about standard score 120 or so) to ID math GT students is quite telling; I believe it indicates that they are not looking for math-gifted students. And I agree that the program might be more accurately described as an academically advanced program than a gifted program.
