1

FALL TO SPRING MAP GROWTH VS PROFICIENCY 2014

ELEMENTARY MATH

About these graphs The NWEA MAP test assigns each student a “typical fall-to-spring” growth value based on the typical students in the nation that started at the same RIT score in the same grade. As a way to measure a school’s growth, we calculate the percent of students who met or exceeded this assigned fall-to-spring growth. This value is on the horizontal axis of the graphs. In addition, MAP scores are correlated with state testing scores. Using this linking study, we can calculate the percent of students projected to meet standard on the corresponding state test. This value is on the vertical axis of the graphs. Each school is a data point (% met growth target, % met standard). The graph is separated into 4 quadrants by drawing lines for the district % met growth and the district % percent met standard value. Schools that fall closer to the top right exhibited high growth and high proficiency on standards. Schools in the top left exhibited lower growth with high proficiency scores. Schools towards the bottom right exhibited high growth, but lower proficiency. Schools in the bottom left exhibited lower growth and lower proficiency.

Date: May 15, 2014

2

3

4

5

6

FALL TO WINTER MAP GROWTH VS PROFICIENCY 2014

ELEMENTARY READING

About these graphs The NWEA MAP test assigns each student a “typical fall-to-spring” growth value based on the typical students in the nation that started at the same RIT score in the same grade. As a way to measure a school’s growth, we calculate the percent of students who met or exceeded this assigned fall-to-spring growth. This value is on the horizontal axis of the graphs. In addition, MAP scores are correlated with state testing scores. Using this linking study, we can calculate the percent of students projected to meet standard on the corresponding state test. This value is on the vertical axis of the graphs. Each school is a data point (% met growth target, % met standard). The graph is separated into 4 quadrants by drawing lines for the district % met growth and the district % percent met standard value. Schools that fall closer to the top right exhibited high growth and high proficiency on standards. Schools in the top left exhibited lower growth with high proficiency scores. Schools towards the bottom right exhibited high growth, but lower proficiency. Schools in the bottom left exhibited lower growth and lower proficiency.

Date: May 15, 2014

7

8

9

10

11

FALL TO SPRING MAP GROWTH VS PROFICIENCY 2014

MIDDLE SCHOOL MATH

About these graphs The NWEA MAP test assigns each student a “typical fall-to-spring” growth value based on the typical students in the nation that started at the same RIT score in the same grade. As a way to measure a school’s growth, we calculate the percent of students who met or exceeded this assigned fall-to-spring growth. This value is on the horizontal axis of the graphs. In addition, MAP scores are correlated with state testing scores. Using this linking study, we can calculate the percent of students projected to meet standard on the corresponding state test. This value is on the vertical axis of the graphs. Each school is a data point (% met growth target, % met standard). The graph is separated into 4 quadrants by drawing lines for the district % met growth and the district % percent met standard value. Schools that fall closer to the top right exhibited high growth and high proficiency on standards. Schools in the top left exhibited lower growth with high proficiency scores. Schools towards the bottom right exhibited high growth, but lower proficiency. Schools in the bottom left exhibited lower growth and lower proficiency.

Date: May 15, 2014

12

13

14

15

16

FALL TO SPRING MAP GROWTH VS PROFICIENCY 2014

MIDDLE SCHOOL READING

About these graphs The NWEA MAP test assigns each student a “typical fall-to-spring” growth value based on the typical students in the nation that started at the same RIT score in the same grade. As a way to measure a school’s growth, we calculate the percent of students who met or exceeded this assigned fall-to-spring growth. This value is on the horizontal axis of the graphs. In addition, MAP scores are correlated with state testing scores. Using this linking study, we can calculate the percent of students projected to meet standard on the corresponding state test. This value is on the vertical axis of the graphs. Each school is a data point (% met growth target, % met standard). The graph is separated into 4 quadrants by drawing lines for the district % met growth and the district % percent met standard value. Schools that fall closer to the top right exhibited high growth and high proficiency on standards. Schools in the top left exhibited lower growth with high proficiency scores. Schools towards the bottom right exhibited high growth, but lower proficiency. Schools in the bottom left exhibited lower growth and lower proficiency.

Date: May 15, 2014

17

18

19

20

21

22

FALL TO SPRING MAP GROWTH VS PROFICIENCY 2014

HIGH SCHOOL Math

About these graphs The NWEA MAP test assigns each student a “typical fall-to-spring” growth value based on the typical students in the nation that started at the same RIT score in the same grade. As a way to measure a school’s growth, we calculate the percent of students who met or exceeded this assigned fall-to-spring growth. This value is on the horizontal axis of the graphs. In addition, MAP scores are correlated with state testing scores. Using this linking study, we can calculate the percent of students projected to meet standard on the corresponding state test. This value is on the vertical axis of the graphs. Each school is a data point (% met growth target, % met standard). The graph is separated into 4 quadrants by drawing lines for the district % met growth and the district % percent met standard value. Schools that fall closer to the top right exhibited high growth and high proficiency on standards. Schools in the top left exhibited lower growth with high proficiency scores. Schools towards the bottom right exhibited high growth, but lower proficiency. Schools in the bottom left exhibited lower growth and lower proficiency.

May 15, 2014

23

24

25

FALL TO SPRING MAP GROWTH VS PROFICIENCY 2014

HIGH SCHOOL READING

About these graphs The NWEA MAP test assigns each student a “typical fall-to-spring” growth value based on the typical students in the nation that started at the same RIT score in the same grade. As a way to measure a school’s growth, we calculate the percent of students who met or exceeded this assigned fall-to-spring growth. This value is on the horizontal axis of the graphs. In addition, MAP scores are correlated with state testing scores. Using this linking study, we can calculate the percent of students projected to meet standard on the corresponding state test. This value is on the vertical axis of the graphs. Each school is a data point (% met growth target, % met standard). The graph is separated into 4 quadrants by drawing lines for the district % met growth and the district % percent met standard value. Schools that fall closer to the top right exhibited high growth and high proficiency on standards. Schools in the top left exhibited lower growth with high proficiency scores. Schools towards the bottom right exhibited high growth, but lower proficiency. Schools in the bottom left exhibited lower growth and lower proficiency.

May 15, 2014

26

27