In my many years of teaching and educational experiences, I have witnessed schools putting children through multitudes of assessments for many different reasons. When I taught in Illinois, my fourth graders had to be trained to take the ISAT, or Illinois Standard Achievement Test. At the end of the year, when they should know everything the state demands, they were required to sit in rows with a giant test booklet, listen to my scripted directions, and then sit for over an hour for each test (reading, math, and science) filling in bubble after bubble. I remember after my first year teaching there I experienced the true measure of dread these tests held over teachers. We were at our end of the year teacher celebration and our principal gave word that the test results were in. Our fourth graders did not do well- I was made to feel like a failure, like I was in the wrong profession, and I had no idea how I could go through the stress over and over for years to come.

I taught in Florida for 3 years and there the students were forced to train, stress, and exhaust themselves over the FSA, or Florida Standard Achievement Test. We had daily intervention groups focusing on questions “they may see” on the FSA. We had meetings telling teachers what percentage of the test would be on what skills, and the areas we should really be focusing on while we were teaching. We were completely and utterly teaching to the test. I moved back up to Illinois 2 years ago and it makes me so sad to see the social media posts from teachers down there saying they had students getting physically ill over the stress.

The question that needs to be asked is, what is being done with those scores? From what I witnessed, the only way the scores were used were to help determine the school report card and ultimately school funding. Kids weren’t able to see their answers, the questions they got wrong and learn why and how to improve. They weren’t given any feedback on how to do better the next year. Students went in knowing that how they performed would just be a reflection of their school and would not truly affect the way they were taught or help them improve upon themselves. I think this is where summative standardized tests are at fault. If you are going to put students and teachers through the stress of assessment then it needs to be done for a purpose that will benefit the student. I believe that computer adaptive tests are the answer to these issues. Since I moved up to Illinois, I teach 1st grade just over the border in Wisconsin. My students take a test called the Northwest Evaluation Association Measures of Academic Progress, or the MAP test. My students take it 3 times a year, and we focus on the growth they make each time. Teachers use the data to help the students improve on the different areas being assessed based on their scores. We do not stress them out over it, but celebrate the fact that they get to show us what they know and grow from it. It is a truly innovative and precise way to measure student ability level. I decided that I wanted to know more about it and how I can use it to benefit my students to the best of my ability. I will be looking into the concepts and theories behind the MAP test, how it can be properly applied in the educational setting, evidence to support its use, and critiques to understand why some people may not think it’s the best option.

The MAP test is a computer adaptive test. A computer adaptive test is a test that adapts the questions based on student responses. “Every student gets a unique set of test questions based on responses to previous questions. As the student answers correctly, questions get harder. If the student answers incorrectly, the questions get easier. By the end of the test, most students will answer about half the questions correctly.” ("A Parent's Guide to MAP. NWEA", 2016) CATs are know for finding student ability level more quickly and precisely than traditional tests. They can narrow down what a student knows in a smaller amount of questions. This saves time and overtesting stress. The video below gives a good example of what the answer path may look like for a student taking the test. Notice when they get a question right, the question becomes harder, and vice versa. The rate of error gets smaller with the more questions that are administered.

The MAP test results are displayed as a numerical RIT (Rasch Unit scale) score. This score is used to measure a student’s achievement level at different times of the school career and helps to calculate growth. “Think of this like marking height on a growth chart. You can tell how tall your child is at various points in time and how much they have grown between one time and another.” ("A Parent's Guide to MAP. NWEA", 2016) The MAP test is more of a measurement tool than a summative assessment. It is often given several times a year in order to help create meaningful instruction. You can see the sample report below to help give more information.

The MAP test can be administered to grades K-12. The tests are in reading, language usage, mathematics, and science. In the early grades (K-1) the test is read to the students and is only available for mathematics and reading. The audio helps ensure you are testing the child’s ability level and not their reading capability.

The RIT scale that is used for scoring was developed by the IRT or the Item Response Theory. The Item Response Theory plays a huge role in most computer adaptive tests. IRT is a model “for the design, analysis, and scoring of tests, questionnaires, and similar instruments measuring abilities, attitudes, or other variables.” ("Item response theory", 2019) It focuses on individual questions rather than the traditional modes which focus on the test as a whole. This is why it is used for adaptive testing. The single item analysis paves the way for item banks. Item banks provide a large set of test questions to be chosen from to administer to the examinee, helping to find their level by adapting to their performance with more difficult or easier questions.

I believe that another theory that is deeply connected in this kind of testing is the growth mindset. The growth mindset is based around the idea that not matter where we are in our current knowledge, we have the ability to grow and learn. This is different than the fixed mindset which says that people are born with innate abilities and it ends there. These adaptive tests that are used for opportunities of growth support the idea that everyone can improve from where they are. The types of tests, like traditional standardized tests, are summative in nature and are basically saying whatever your score is, this is how smart you are. The video below helps explain the growth mindset a little more.

We use the MAP test scores in my school to shape interventions. We are able to pull groups of children that may not know a skill yet, and help them learn and practice it. We are then able to see how they grow over time with the RIT score. Every child at every score range is given something to work on to help them improve on themselves. We do not just focus on the low groups, but challenge all of the children to push themselves to continuously get better and explore new things they are interested in.

The MAP test was made as an interim assessment. The research to support interim assessment is slim, and more needs to be done. It is aligned with the learning standards, and its purpose is to aid in the improvement of summative standardized state tests by providing teachers with specific data points on student ability levels. Teachers are to use this data to shape instruction.

I found a dissertation that went in to study the effects of using this interim assessment and the growth that occurred in 2 middle schools in Pennsylvania. The students in question were in grades 6-8 in the year 2018. In Pennsylvania, those students are required to take the PSSA, or the Pennsylvania State Standards Assessment. The researcher chose these schools because they were also using the MAP test as an interim test to help improve test scores on the PSSA by the end of the year. The researchers results over many longitudinal studies resulted in this conclusion, “This analysis suggests that repeated administrations of the NWEA MAP interim assessments provided minimal improvements in the predictive value of existing student achievement data and therefore may not be justified based upon a predictive purpose. Viewed through an instructional or evaluative frame, the additional assessment data often replicated existing student achievement data and did not provide an overwhelming justification of student growth.” ( Finnerty, 2018)

The results from his study are very interesting. He does take into account that he did not study how the teachers were using the assessment data provided from the MAP tests. They were only looking at how it matched up with the growth in the PSSA. It is important to take into account the reliability of paper pencil summative assessments vs. computer adaptive assessments. Computer adaptive assessments interim assessments predict proficiency 80-90% accurately. ( Finnerty, 2018) The way in which schools choose to use the data is something that needs to studied further and how to properly use it to improve student achievement over time.

Like stated above, the MAP test was made to be given as an interim test. An interim test is used to help build and shape instruction in order to help raise student achievement levels. Schools choose to give the test 3-5 times a year. It can be given to students grades K-12, in subjects such as reading, math, science and social studies. Grades K-2 are only able to take the reading and mathematics test. The tests give all sorts of data reports for teachers to use. Below is an example of what the class report could look like based on each learning standard strand.

This report shows a lot of assessment data to aid in teacher instruction.(Set, 2016)

Another report that we use at my school is the learning continuum which can be seen below. This helps us create groups for intervention/enrichment time. The learning continuum groups students based on their scores in each area of the learning standards. We are able to see where the students may need extra practice on very specific elements, and can provide that to them.

The Learning Contiuum helps shape instruction.

Another great feature of the MAP assessment is the area for creating student goals. Based on their performance and where you want them to be by the end of the year, you can create goals for them to reach. We take this information a step further in 1st grade by having them track their scores in a data folder. The can look at this and feel proud of themselves to watch their growth over time.

(Set, 2016)

More information and examples on the different data reports provided to teachers can be found here.

One of the biggest criticisms I could find on the MAP test is that it is giving in to the idea of overtesting students. This is something that people all over our country are worried about. When it is used as an interim assessment, students could take it up to 3 times a year, on top of the required state test and all of the other tests from various classes. This is not an issue and something I ever really thought about with the way we use it in first grade at my school. Students in grades 3-12 are required to take the state standardized test at the end of every school year. This is the stressful assessment that has school funding, school report cards, and even teacher evaluations connected to it in many districts. Based on the data I found, with the MAP test results not lining up with the growth of the PSSA in the Pennsylvania study, I can see how this is a very valid point.

An article I found from Seattle, Washington reported that a school district had teachers going on strike because they felt the MAP test was an unnecessary addition to their students academic year. They focused heavily on the issue I stated above, excessive testing, but also made this point, “The MAP results take training to interpret, and while they point to possible areas of concern, it’s not the type of exam that can tell teachers what specific questions their students answered wrong. They “tell you where a kid may be,” said Eric Anderson, the district’s director of research, assessment and evaluation.  The protesting teachers — roughly 100 of them in four different schools — bluntly say the MAP is not worth the time and energy it takes to give.” (Shaw, 2013)

"Jesse Hagopian, left, a Garfield teacher, spoke out against MAP testing during a noontime teacher rally in February." (Shaw, 2013)

The NWEA MAP test is truly an innovative experience. Students are given a personal set of questions to help precisely, and quickly gauge their ability level. The results and data reports are available to teachers in less than 24 hours which enables them access to shape instruction and differentiate the education of each child. I think there is a way to properly use this assessment, and I appreciate that I have the ability to give it to my first grade students. I understand the concern, as students get older, of unnecessary excessive testing. I think that teachers need proper training on how to use the data appropriately in order to meet the desired outcomes of improved student achievement, so that we aren’t just piling another test on the shoulders of these young minds. Incorporating assessment throughout the learning experience is the answer to less stress and a true curriculum aimed toward helping each student reach their own personal level of excellence.

N. (2016, May). A Parent's Guide to MAP. NWEA [Scholarly project]. In ERIC. Retrieved April 11, 2019, from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED567830

Finnerty, D. (2018). The Predictive Utility and Longitudinal Student Growth of NWEA MAP Interim Assessments in Two Pennsylvania Schools. Lehigh University Lehigh Preserve, 1-127. Retrieved April 14, 2019, from https://preserve.lehigh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5231&context=etd.

Item response theory. (2019, February 03). Retrieved April 11, 2019, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Item_response_theory

NCLEX Item Selection. (2013). Retrieved April 11, 2019, from https://www.ncsbn.org/5906.htm

Michelle. (2017, January 01). NWEA MAP Report Coming Home. Retrieved April 11, 2019, from http://hayoshshelpinghands.blogspot.com/2017/09/nwea-map-report-coming-home.html

Set, A. (2016, November 23). Top 10 MAP Reports for Teachers - #edchat #MAPtest. Retrieved from https://www.nwea.org/blog/2016/top-10-map-reports-teachers/

Shaw, L. (2013, March 31). Educators debate validity of MAP testing. Retrieved April 14, 2019, from https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/educators-debate-validity-of-map-testing/

Sprouts. (2016, April 15). Retrieved April 14, 2019, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUWn_TJTrnU