Post on 03-Jun-2022
Using MAP in Conjunction with other Data to Identify TIER II and III Students
Jennifer Ruth
Elementary Student Achievement Specialist
Plano ISD
Plano ISD Formative Assessment Process
Lesson Development and
Delivery
Instructional Adaptation:
Strategies, Scaffolding Grouping
Differentiation
CogAT Verbal Battery
CogAT Nonverbal
Battery
CogAT Quantitative
Battery
How students learn
What students have learned – What they
are ready to learn
MAP Assessment
DesCartes
Plano ISD Curriculum
TEKS ELPS
Measuring Against State Standards
STAAR
TPRI/TLee
TELPAS
Classroom Assessment
Curriculum
NWEA Linking Study
NWEA Linking Study
Our Probability Ranges
Reading
Original Phase-In Plan 3rd Grade Reading
TAKS Proficiency 2011-2012 14/40 correct 35%
Phase In 1 Standard 2012-2013 Scale Score: 1331 20/40 correct 50%
Phase In 2 Standard 2014-2015 Scale Score: 1400 25/40 correct 63%
Recommended Standard 2016 and beyond Scale Score: 1468 30/40 correct 75%
Current Phase-In Plan 3rd Grade Reading
Recommended Standard 2022 and beyond Scale Score: 1468 30/40 correct 75%
Phase In 3 2019 - 2021 Scale Score: 1427 27/40 correct 68%
Phase In 2 2016 - 2018 Scale Score: 1372 23/40 correct 58% Phase In 1
2012-2015 Scale Score: 1331 20/40 correct 50% TAKS Proficiency
Gradual STAAR Standard Plan
MAP to STAAR: Reading – Grade 5
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
160 165 170 175 180 185 190 195 200 205 210 215 220 225 230 235 240 245 250 255 260
Pro
bab
ility
of
Me
eti
ng
Leve
l II S
tan
dar
d a
t Ea
ch R
IT S
core
Per
cen
t A
chie
vin
g ST
AA
R L
evel
II (
NEW
Ph
ase
-in
2)
Current Spring RIT Reading
Less than 50% Chance of Meeting Level II on STAAR
50-69% Chance of Level II 70-89% Chance of Level II
90% or higher of Level II Sufficiently Prepared
70% Chance of Level III Well Prepared
163
184
195
207
217
224
229 233
236 238
239 240
167
188
199
211
221
227
232 236
239 241
243 244
172
192
203
216
227
233
238 241
244 246
248 249
184
203
217
229
239
246
253
259 262
264 266
268
KG 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9* 10* 11*
Probability of State Standards Success
Performance Levels Level II
Sufficiently prepared for the next grade
Level III Well prepared for the next grade
Current Phase-In Plan 3rd Grade Math
Recommended Standard 2022 and beyond Scale Score: 1486 34/46 correct 74%
Phase In 3 2019 - 2021 Scale Score: 1444 31/46 correct 67%
Phase In 2 2016 - 2018 Scale Score: 1388 26/46 correct 57% Phase In 1
2012-2015 Scale Score: 1392 24/46 correct* Based on Bridge study
52% TAKS Proficiency
Current Phase-In Plan 3rd Grade Math
Recommended Standard 2022 and beyond Scale Score: 1486 34/46 correct 74%
Phase In 3 2019 - 2021 Scale Score: 1444 31/46 correct 67%
Phase In 2 2016 - 2018 Scale Score: 1388 26/46 correct 57% Phase In 1
2012-2015 Scale Score: 1392 24/46 correct* Based on Bridge study
52% TAKS Proficiency
Gradual STAAR Standard Plan
Math Probability Range
Confirmation of Ranges
MAP Range KG Fall
Standard STAAR Accommodated STAAR All Versions
Total Met Met Pct Total Met Met Pct Total Met Met Pct
Less than 50% -Pink
226 131 58% 58 10 17% 284 141 50%
Reading
MAP Range
KG Fall
Standard STAAR Accommodated STAAR Linguistically Accommodated STAAR
All Versions
Total Met Met Pct
Total Met Met Pct
Total Met Met Pct
Total Met Met Pct
Less than 50% -Pink
285 193 68% 93 15 16% 56 16 29% 434 224 52%
Math
Confirmation of Ranges MAP Range KG Fall
All Versions S A
Total Met Met Pct Total Met Met Pct Total Met Met Pct
Less than 50% - Pink 284 141 50% 226 131 58% 58 10 17%
50-69% - Orange 110 74 67% 97 72 74% 13 2 15%
70-89% - Yellow 341 246 72% 291 235 81% 50 11 22%
90% or higher - Green 952 867 91% 901 843 94% 51 24 47%
70% chance L3 - Gray 853 844 99% 843 839 100% 10 5 50%
Not Enrolled in KG 1257 1004 80% 1183 983 83% 74 21 28%
All Grade 3 Students 3797 3176 84% 3541 3103 88% 256 73 29%
Reading
Math
MAP Range KG Fall All Versions STAAR STAAR-A STAAR-L
Total Met Met Pct Total Met Met Pct Total Met Met Pct Total Met Met Pct
Less than 50% - Pink 434 224 52% 285 193 68% 93 15 16% 56 16 29%
50-69% - Orange 319 238 75% 280 220 79% 24 7 29% 15 11 73%
70-89% - Yellow 279 232 83% 249 214 86% 20 11 55% 10 7 70%
90% or higher - Green 938 875 93% 901 857 95% 27 10 37% 10 8 80%
70% chance L3 - Gray 611 608 100% 607 604 100% 4 4 100% 0 0 0%
Not Enrolled in KG 1261 978 78% 1090 903 83% 69 13 19% 102 62 61%
All Grade 3 Students 3842 3155 82% 3412 2991 88% 237 60 25% 193 104 54%
MAP Historical Record
(results over time)
STAAR Historical Record TPRI/Tejas Lee/TELPAS
(results over time)
Classroom Unit Assessments
(summative/formative)
Consistent pattern of at-risk scores (for example, less than 50% probability of success based on MAP, Level I performance on STAAR)
Identify areas of weakness (strands, reporting categories) Narrow weakness with Unit Assessments
What is the preponderance of evidence?
• At-risk score is a one time event • Unit assessments show mastery
(independent work) • Progress in both MAP and STAAR
• At-risk scores evident historically or longitudinally
• Student is in Quintile 4 or 5 but growing • One or two areas of weakness evident • Areas of weakness confirmed by unit
assessments (independent work)
• At-risk scores evident historically or longitudinally
• Student is in Quintile 4 or 5 and not growing • Many areas of weakness evident • Areas of weakness confirmed by unit
assessments (independent work) • Pattern of growth does not accelerate
Identify how the child learns best (analyze CogAT results)
TIER I - Regular Classroom Instruction
TIER II or III- Address the student's specific areas of weakness
TIER II or III- Address the student's broad needs in multiple areas of weakness
Student Needs Analysis For any student that may be in danger of being at-risk for not meeting state standards, analyze all of the following data,
as well as other relevant information, in order to make instructional decisions.
Looking at All the Data
MAP Data TPRI Data
• Overall Reading RIT – 132
• Lowest Strand Foundational Skills-120
• Ready to learn- – Matching a letter to the
beginning sound of a given picture
– Recognizes a letter that makes a given initial sound
– Identifies upper and lowercase letters
• Graphophonemic Knowledge SD – SCR 1 Letter Sound- 0
– GK 1 Letter Name ID - 6
– GK 2 Letter to Sound Linking- 0
Looking at All the Data
MAP Data TPRI Data
• Overall Reading RIT – 132
• Lowest Strand Foundational Skills-120
• Ready to learn- – Matching a letter to the
beginning sound of a given picture
– Recognizes a letter that makes a given initial sound
– Identifies upper and lowercase letters
• Graphophonemic Knowledge SD – SCR 1 Letter Sound- 6
– GK 1 Letter Name ID - 25
– GK 2 Letter to Sound Linking- 10
Goal Strand 111-120 121-130 131-140
141-150
151-160
161-170
Foundational Skills
Noah (132) Natalie (150) Tyler (154)
Comprehension Noah (132) Tyler (154) Natalie (150)
Vocabulary Noah (132) Natalie (150)
Tyler (154)
Writing and Language
Noah (132) Natalie (150)
Tyler (154)
Class by RIT or Class View
Foundational Skills 111-120
Growth vs. Acceleration
Acceleration
Math Example
Looking at All the Data
• Overall Math MAP (217) – Numerical
Representations 210
– Computations and Algebraic Relationships 212
– Geometry and Measurement 222
– Data Analysis and Monetary Transactions 219
• Have taught most of Numerical Representations and all of Computations and Algebraic Relationships.
• Unit 1 test 73%
• Unit 2 test 68%
• Unit 3 test 78%
Class by RIT or Class View Goal 181-190 191-200 201-210 211-220 221-230 231-240
Numerical Representations
Pavlis, M (193) Pineda, M (205) Pochinka, M (192) Ratliff, N (208)
Plunkett, M (213) Potluri, M (206) Trevino, S (198) Rao, N (217)
Pyun, M (218) Ramki, M (206) Rankin, M (212) Royer, P (214) Sanders, R (208) Stanley, S (214)
Ramji, M (228)
Computations & Relationships
Pavlis, M (193) Pochinka, M (192) Ramki, M (206)
Rankin, M (212) Sanders, R (208)
Pineda, M (205) Potluri, M (206) Royer, P (214) Stanley, S (214) Trevino, S (198) Rao, N (217)
Plunkett, M (213) Pyun, M (218) Ratliff, N (208)
Ramji, M (228)
Geometry & Measurement
Trevino, S (198)
Pochinka, M (192) Ramki, M (206)
Pavlis, M (193) Pineda, M (205) Potluri, M (206) Ratliff, N (208) Sanders, R (208)
Plunkett, M (213) Pyun, M (218) Rankin, M (212) Royer, P (214) Stanley, S (214) Rao, N (217)
Ramji, M (228)
Data Analysis
Pochinka, M (192)
Pavlis, M (193) Trevino, S (198) Pineda, M (205
Plunkett, M (213) Potluri, M (206) Ratliff, N (208) Royer, P (214) Sanders, R (208) Stanley, S (214)
Pyun, M (218) Ramji, M (228) Ramki, M (206) Rankin, M (212) Rao, N (217)
Computations and Algebraic Relationships Grade 5 201-210
TEKS to Target for Nico: 5.3E solve for products of decimals to the hundredths, including situations involving money, using strategies based on place-value understandings, properties of
operations, and the relationship to the multiplication of whole numbers.
• Multiplies a decimal by a whole number
• Multiplies a 2 or 3 digit number by multiples of 10 or 100
• Multiplies a 3 digit number by a 2 digit number with regrouping
Conclusion
• Compare MAP to other data sources to give context to the results.
• We should use multiple data points to make instructional decisions.
• Use the Learning Statements from the NWEA Learning Continuum to narrow the focus and target instruction as much as possible.
QUESTIONS?
Jennifer Ruth
Plano ISD
Jennifer.Ruth@pisd.edu
469-752-8022
“Teaching seems to require the sort of skills one would need to pilot a bus full of live chickens backwards, with no brakes, down a rocky road through the Andes while providing colorful and informative commentary on the scenery.”
Franklin Habit