Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment NWEA MAP different tests

Hi there,

Does anyone have any information about different versions of the MAP Reading test. My DD came home and said that she took the MAP Reading and that there were only 16 questions. I've looked into it a bit, and it looks like there is a version of the test that is shorter and gives the school less information. She has not scored as high as she did when she was younger -- in fact, she has grown only 3 RIT points in four school years. She just started extremely high, so no one is worried about it. I'm wondering if she should be taking the longer version of the test to get a more accurate picture of her abilities. Here's blurb from NWEA referring to what I'm talking about: https://legacysupport.nwea.org/node/4649

Yes, there are two versions. One samples each area, and the other is more in-depth. I expect no one at the school is concerned about the lack of RIT growth on the brief version, because they are screening for low-achieving students, who may be in need of academic intervention, not high-achieving students.

Well, that would make sense, but that's not the case. They are using it to place kids into gifted programming with it. My daughter, who used to be in the gifted program, has been not placed into it in middle school and it's hurting her in a number of ways.

Ah. That's unfortunate.

Another factor in RIT score change over this particular past four years is that the 2015 norms are substantially different from the 2011 norms, with median RIT scores down across the board. There is a corresponding increase in percentile scores for specific RIT scores, but if a school is using RIT cutoffs, instead of percentiles, that might remove children from GT programs, instead of adding them.

https://www.nwea.org/content/uploads/2015/12/2015-MAP-Norms-FAQ-NOV15.pdf

Thanks, again! No, they aren't looking at the RIT, but I am. She is a 232 in Reading in the winter of 6th grade, which I think places her in only the 88th percentile. In third grade she was at 229.

I poked around. Her percentile is 89th, down from 98th in 3rd grade (assuming both were winter tests). That is nearly a standard deviation difference, so approaching a significant stall out, though not unheard of, as the grade 3 test top items would be limited in comprehension depth, while the grade 6 top items could be substantially more abstract inferential comprehension questions; the ceiling on grade 3 reading is likely lower than that on grade 6 reading (even though it's adaptive, it's limited by the level of the start point, and the number of items). I do also see in the norms documents, though, that in addition to overall RIT scores falling from the 2011 to 2015 norms, the standard deviations also rose. So a number of qualities of the norms changed, which may make it more difficult for schools to interpret these numbers clearly.

I think my main question would be whether the school may be able to administer a more in-depth measure of reading.

My concern is that they switched from the more in-depth test to this truncated version.

She took the CogAT in 3rd grade and got a 150, with no questions wrong.

Mostly, SHE cries about not wanting to go to school and is very upset because she used to be in the gifted program (which was not much at all) and now is separated from her friends who are in the program. I don't think that she should have had to re-test.

Are there other options for entry into the program? Or other ways she can spend time with her friends?

Thanks, aeh, for thinking about it! I appreciate it so much.

I'm trying to advocate for her. I got the principal to agree that she has basically "flat-lined" on the MAP, and that she needs more. Hopefully they will do something.