Thanks frannieandejsmom - no, the test should have been the MAP 2-5, for each administration. Someone on another thread suggested asking for the 6+ version (her scores were high, possibly at the point where they become less accurate), but I think I would have to really push for the school to do that, since DC appears to have at least 2 full years of the 2-5 version ahead. Up until this year I thought MAP testing might be a nice way to get some idea of progress, since the RIT score can provide some indication of where they might perform compared to various grade levels, but this recent experience has been frustrating - I find myself wondering: what does DC have to do to show the school she might need something different? If DC does well, apparently, they can just simply chalk it up to "inflation," so the results apparently become meaningless to the school anyway. She made a great deal of progress in one subject area according to her RIT growth...or did she? Perhaps the school believes THAT is inflation, too???
DD IS a good test taker - the many, many tests she has taken show that. The ability tests also suggest, though, that one would EXPECT her to be achieving at a high level...so then how do I tell if she is actually UNDERACHIEVING, KWIM? To me, the lack of RIT growth seems as though it could potentially show just that, or perhaps a lack of sufficient/adequate challenge.
DD's lexile level isn't really very helpful anymore - it is high enough that it is a pretty useless way to track progress at this point.
I am just scratching my head at this point. The school seems determined to "group" her (and yes, she is in a high group), instead of looking at her as an individual - but I suspect this past year's "grouping" did not provide her with the exposure to material that would help her demonstrate any growth on MAP. I guess since all of the other growth measures that the school uses seem rather subjective, I am just trying to figure out how to determine what/how well she is learning/progressing at school.