MAP – Focusing on STAAR

1. MAP – Focusing on STAAR A clumsy and contrived play on words for the title . . .But a challenging discussion of how to use MAP and other complementary data sources to understand and serve our students.

2. Let’s Chat • Using longitudinal data to understand the growth paths of students • Looking at data in ways that can lead to better instructional decisions • How we can look at complementary data • A hint of the effects of changing standards

3. Longitudinal Data • Cohort of students • 7th grade 2011-12 • Matched MAP data each year to 2008-09 • Split the cohort into smaller groups • Quartiles, but quintiles would have served as well • Looking for relevant characteristics in the smaller groups • Group composition • Growth patterns

4. Math Cohort Grade 7 (2011-12) 99.2 98.1 91.0 66.7

5. Quartile 2 Math 99.2 98.1 The 9% that did not meet Level II (1) ??? 91.0 66.7 From the end of 4th grade these kids began to fall behind

6. Economic Disadvantage 99.2 Reduced academic growth rate leading to drop-out shows up in grades 3 – 4 98.1 91.0 76.6 52.1 56.4

7. The Summary 99.2 98.1 91.0 66.7

8. Cognitive Similarities

9. Additional Data and Observation Students who may not be performing to their ability

10. Matching MAP to STAAR Standards • Equipercentile equating • Regression of MAP prior spring scores to STAAR scores • Identifying MAP scores that may be used as indicators to support instruction • A visual of the effects of new standards

11. MAP Reading – Grade 4 Level II (1) Level II (2) Level II (R) Level III Mean 207

12. MAP Math – Grade 4 Level II (1) Level II (2) Level II (R) Level III Mean 214

13. MAP Reading – Grade 7 Level II (1) Level II (2) Level II (R) Level III Mean 223

14. MAP Math – Grade 7 Level II (1) Level II (2) Level II (R) Level III Mean 237