Banda Speaks Out on MAP

MAP Update:

From The Stranger Slog:

"..the boycotting teachers state that the district has failed to respond, point by point, to the list of criticisms levied at the MAP test. Furthermore, teachers say it's unclear if the district’s effort to undermine the boycott will be successful because students seem to hate the tests as much as teachers. "Indications early this morning are that there is wide spread 'opting out' of the test by students," their press release states. "For the first hour, only nine students are in the testing center. Sixty students were signed up to use the library but were displaced. Typically 90 students use the library before school and at lunch. These students are not allow access during testing."
Janet Woodward, Garfield’s librarian, said, “I’m sorry about all the students who are being displaced. It makes me sad.”

Good for those students and their parents. 

Also this from the University of Washington chapter of the Association of University Professors:

[W]e support the decision of teachers at Garfield, Ballard, Sealth, the Center School, Orca K-8 and other Seattle Public Schools who have decided to refuse to administer the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP®), a standardized test that has been imposed despite teachers' principled objections on pedagogic grounds. In keeping with our organization's commitment to faculty oversight of academic matters, AAUP-UW contends that teachers should be regarded as educated professionals fully qualified to advise the School District with regards to assessment of students learning. AAUP-UW therefore calls upon the Seattle Public Schools superintendent to work with teachers to develop a more adequate measure of student progress, and opposes punitive measures against Seattle teachers who are boycotting the MAP test.

Bravo to the idea that teachers are "educated professionals."  

End of update.

The Superintendent issued this statement which has a few puzzlers in it.  My comments in red.

Dear Garfield staff and families:

I want to thank you for sharing your concerns about MAP assessments.  After careful consideration of what is in the best interest of all of our students across the district, I have asked schools to proceed with administering the MAP assessment as scheduled.  (I don't know if this means the administrators will give the test or if they are ordering the teachers and seeing what happens.  Update: checked with Communications.  They hired some subs to give the test but some administrators may be as well.)

I have met with Garfield High School staff on two separate occasions to listen to their concerns and the important issues they raise regarding the limitations of the MAP assessment. While I feel the teachers at Garfield are sincere in their efforts to postpone the administration of the MAP, I also have a strong obligation to the students and parents of this school district to ensure we are measuring student progress in a consistent manner across all schools. (I was not aware the Superintendent had met with teachers; they have said he didn't.  Teachers?)

The MAP assessment is administered to over 6 million students across the nation and in 209 school districts with in Washington State. Thousands of educators find the MAP data useful in determining student progress. Using the MAP assessment, combined with other measures, helps us to identify students who are achieving at various levels, regardless of the grade, allowing us to provide additional support or perhaps more challenging curriculum. In partnership with the City of Seattle, Office of Education, MAP results are also used to measure the effectiveness of programs we implement through the Family and Education Levy. (I appreciate that MAP is used across the country.  It doesn't make it a good test and I believe if our teachers have serious issues with it, I would go with their opinion.)  (I also question how often MAP results bring more attention to any given student.)

The district acted in good faith to address the concerns raised by the Garfield High School staff and other educators in Seattle Public Schools. This is why I set into motion a task force comprised of teachers, principals and community representatives. The goal of this task force is to engage in thoughtful, collaborative conversations in an effort to land on a solution that will benefit our students. The task force will review the MAP assessment in its present iteration and review the landscape of a comprehensive system of assessments that will lead us into the future as we implement the Common Core State Standards. Throughout this process we will be seeking input from parents and educators via survey to ensure we hear multiple perspectives. I will look to this task force to provide recommendations regarding the future of MAP assessments.

I remain hopeful that we will continue to work together in support of our students. I look forward to future conversations with our staff and community about assessments and other important topics.

End of statement

But one last thing (and I hope to tell the Superintendent this at some point) - we have had MANY taskforces and committees.  I would say, just off the top of my head, that most of their work is for naught and the Board and district don't follow most of what is recommended.  (This is one reason that while I truly understand and appreciate the hard work of FACMAC, they are learning what others of us know - the district won't always go with what any given committee says.) 


Anonymous said…
Very interested to hear how things are going today at Garfield. Students were encouraging fellow students to opt out on their own today - stay seated in class.

-Wish I was a fly on the wall
Wish I was there to give them support.
Anonymous said…
There has been some brief coverage on King5. Nothing new. Anyone heard anything from students inside at Garfield?

- also curious.
Anonymous said…
Is it only Garfield that is doing the MAP today? I have requested to opt my daughter out at Nathan Hale but haven't been told what I need to do to opt her out. Can students opt out on their own? I am going to make sure my daughter opts out if requested to take the test.

jd said…
I also question how often MAP results bring more attention to any given student.

I'm sure that MAP does very little to help the majority of kids in the middle, and thus it's likely to feel like a "waste" for most. I really get the urge to scrap it, especially in the higher grades when there are a lot of other assessment tools being used.


If your kid is one of the ones that MAP flags as potentially having an issue, it's a godsend. Honestly, MAP was absolutely critical in our noticing a problem, documenting its existence, and getting my kid the help that was needed. It took a kid who cried all the time about feeling stupid and hating school and transformed them into someone who actually has some academic self-esteem for the first time in a couple years.

So for me, I 100% support -not- getting rid of MAP until there's something else in place, at least at the <4th grade level. It may be a "waste of time" for your typically developing kid, but it's absolutely vital for some of the rest of us.
Go, garfield! said…
Parents can opt their kids out of the MAP by writing a letter. Is there an example letter anywhere? More info on opting out is available at
mirmac1 said…
It's not rocket science. I've sent emails since '09. I would say the only imperative to direct the person you addressed the email to, to inform every staff person in the building who is involved with your child's MAP test. It was because of right hand not knowing about the left that my child was tested for math MAP last fall. I was pissed.

Despite our prerogative to opt out, my child was subjected to hyping "this was your score last time! Look for your score on the screen this time! It's so NIFTY!"

I would rather she was taught math!
Just saying said…
Banda blew it. I will have a hard time respecting a guy that would pull my kid out of class for a useless test. But hey..Tim Burgess will be happy ..even though the test was never meant for such an effort. I'm hoping Mirimac reposts the document with this information
suep. said…
For the record, and some perspective, the MAP® test product is being used in a reported 5,200-6,000 school districts -- out of a total of 40,000 school districts nationwide. That means MAP® is used in about only one seventh of all districts around the nation. That's not huge, widespread use/buy-in/marketshare, especially for a product that has apparently been around for about 20+ years.

And there may be 6 million students around the nation who are given the MAP® test, but again, that's out of a total of over 50 million public ed students nationwide. ( National Center for Education Statistics)

Which in turn calls into question the whole notion of how "nationally normed" MAP® truly is. It's not a nationwide test in the same way that something like SAT is.

As for MAP marketshare, here in Seattle, as we all now know, NWEA, Inc. put our superintendent on its board just in time for a no-bid contract with SPS, which bought its product. (SPS Leaks offers some background on this cozy arrangement here:

But apparently there may be another way that MAP® is getting adopted by districts -- through coercion. Apparently, among other demands, the Gates Foundation is mandating that the Hartford School District use MAP® in order to get a $5 million grant from Gates.

(See: OP-ED | Beware of Foundations Bearing Gifts)

Another Gates stipulation apparently states that NWEA, Inc. will provide (student? test scores? private info?) information to Gates Partners?

“In addition, the State of Connecticut is moving to NWEA providing additional information to Gates Partners.”

(Also see:

There is an entire discussion that we also should be having about where all this student "data" (and the private information that's attached to it) is going.

Anonymous said…
Folks: The issue with the MAP is the MAP! It's not a good test, takes too long, occurs too often, and contrary to the promises by SPS, is intended to become a large component, perhaps the most decisive component, in teacher evaluations. Bad Science, Bad Practice, Bad Quality of Evaluation.

It's not enough that it helps a few kids when it's useless to so many others. Could it be kept around simply as a diagnostic tool, like its designed to be in the first place? Sure, why not have it available as an option to parents, if they want it? I'd be fine with that. But that is not what we are dealing with here.

Anonymous said…
how do the pros/cons of MAP in high school correlate with grade school? i support the high school teachers based on their reasoning i've read, but am still wondering if this applies the same to elementary, and if so, why aren't more elementary schools getting involved in the boycott?

my problem with MAP in the elementary realm (beyond computers crashing, necessitating retakes, postponements, lost computer class time, etc.) is more about how my kids score so inconsistently - do they really have bad days every other time they are tested? is this is along the same lines of the high school MAP argument regarding margin of score error being more than the actual projected gains each time a child tests?

plus teachers seemed untrained in interpreting scores - if we are to trust and use the data. i've noticed big dips in strand scores, for example a very low "phonological awareness" score on a K reading MAP test.. and the teacher was not able to tell me what the term even means, or what sort of questions would be in that category. or in math, what does it mean if my child is very high in "number sense" but much lower in all other math strands? if the teachers aren't trained on interpreting this "great data", that it's really of no value.
jd said…

I agree completely that its not a great test or a perfect metric and that it has been totally misused by the district in many cases (teacher evaluation, advance learning qualification, etc). I just don't think it's right to get rid of it until another option is in place.

Which I think is what Banda is saying.

I don't want there to be a year without any screening that could help kids who might otherwise be falling through the cracks.
suep. said…
re: I just don't think it's right to get rid of it until another option is in place.

Why not?

We managed without the MAP before, we can do it again.

Think of all the classtime, energy, anxiety and money that will be saved.

I should be doing something fun instead said…
This was a good comment: "There is an entire discussion that we also should be having about where all this student "data" (and the private information that's attached to it) is going."

Hey! I know the answer to that. "Longitudinal databases." Longitudi-what? Picture a great big database filled with information about every child in the nation, including MAP scores, dental records, race, tardies, you name it. This is available to any local education agency that wants it. Theoretically, they don't get personally identifying information along with it. It follows you from cradle to career.
Anonymous said…
jd, I'm so glad your kiddo got some help that was needed. There definitely needs to be a way to identify the help kids need. How sure are you/we that it's another similar test in its place? What about teacher evaluations of a student and the needs that the teacher cites at intervention meetings?

What I have been seeing is that MAP holds back the access to additional help that kids need. "Well, this kid is up 3% points on MAP so let's just take another look in six months." Meanwhile, said kiddo keeps slipping through the additional cracks that MAP has provided in the process of acquiring additional help.

I know I asked it on another thread, but anyone have an idea of when the task force members will be announced?
I should be doing something fun instead said…
Almost forgot to mention. That "Calder Center" that is so excited about longitudinal databases. Who runs that? Dan Goldhaber. Who's he? Part of the Center on Reinventing Public Education. Who funds that? Gates Foundation, Waltons, etc. Anybody keeping a close eye on these folks to see what they are doing with our kids' data?

I would, but like I said in my tag, "I should be doing something fun instead."
Anonymous said…
UGH - frozen iPad, that was me right above.

I ask about the task force because I didn't think it was publicized well and the first meeting is in two days. There's no receipt of application (just an email... no auto reply) and I fear what was mentioned above. Often the work of task forces is ignored and I wonder if that will not be the case this time.

I was also going to mention to jd that before MAP I felt my voice, as a teacher, was heard in a different and more important way by the district in getting kids extra help. Now I feel MAP gives scores all over the board and it's honored more than my professional judgement. I see it hurting kids. Without a test to replace it, would we go back to teacher evaluation - the people who spend 30 hours a week with our kids?

I put a link to the opt-out letter in a previous thread on MAP. Or go to Scrap the MAP.

"There is an entire discussion that we also should be having about where all this student "data" (and the private information that's attached to it) is going."

Absolutely Sue. The Gates Foundation is getting access to info they have no right to have and most people do NOT know it is happening.

Uh, there is another option to MAP - teachers who know their students. If there is a doubt, give them a diagnostic test (also available) but widespread MAP is a waste of time and money.
jd said…
What about teacher evaluations of a student and the needs that the teacher cites at intervention meetings?

In our family's case, the teachers thought she was fine. She wasn't disruptive, and was clever enough to fake her way through lots of things. MAP revealed a systematic slide from "somewhat above average" to single digits over the space of 3 years. In other words, she was steadily falling further and further behind what her peers were capable of. Single year, one-off assessments and classroom worksheets wouldn't have picked this up. A normed, consistent test given 2x a year over several years did.

jd said…
And Kate -- I totally agree that MAP should never be used as an excuse -not- to listen to a teacher's instinct. Or as -any- kind of high stakes evaluation. That's gotta be incredibly frustrating for a teacher.

For what it's worth, after my kid started getting help, we asked the teacher if she saw a difference, and she gave a very emphatic "YEEEESSSS". She could only see the impairment after it was mitigated. And she was a great, experienced teacher.
Anonymous said…
jd, thanks. Yep - I get it.

As a teacher, I see this test helping kids very very very rarely. Thanks for the reminder that at times, it does.

Anonymous said…
Yay for a great teacher and Yay YAY for kiddo getting the help she needed.
Mark Ahlness said…
You're absolutely right, especially about wildly unreliable scores looked on as some sort of truth. Reminds me of a conflict between science and religion in a Ken Follett novel :)
seattle citizen said…
I should be doing something fun writes about a longitudinal data base, perhaps nationwide, perhaps including student names, etc(tho' they say it won't...remember OSC getting parent/teacher info?)

As an FYI, the district already maintains a Risk Management document, a spreadsheet that includes a variety of data points (MSP, MAP, grades, absences..etc) and uses those to identify students at risk.

Pros: Triangulation of various data points over time help identify students who might be at risk. This data might then, hopefully, be assessed by a building SIT team (which looks at students in a building, as called for, to determine who might need help) and then the data might come in handy for these discussions.

Cons: It's data - numbers. Increasingly, society seems to be quantifying people. As some of the data is subject to all sorts of variables, it might skew risk assessment. (triangulated, as described above, it might be helpful as trends are spotted.)
Cons: Widespread disemmination of said data - who knows to what purposes it will be put? Anyone hacking the district, right now, could obtain such a document and put it to all sorts of bad uses. If this data is combined with other data, "out there," that spells doom for a humane society as a society built on quantification, categorization, and standardization builds more pretty little boxes to place children in.

Discuss. Risk Management data base: good or bad?
Anonymous said…
Mr. Banda wrote:
" I also have a strong obligation to the students and parents of this school district to ensure we are measuring student progress in a consistent manner across all schools."

I think that the MSP measures students in at least as consistent manner as the MAP and the MSP tests student knowledge of the Washington Standards.

So what has the district done about the huge performance difference in Math at the 8th grade level at Aki Kurose, when low-income students are compared with any other middle school?

So we know a lot about student progress within the district from MSP results .... and yet what was the response?

More TFA teachers were placed at AKI than elsewhere

Instead of focusing on providing effective interventions to students and treating teachers as professionals --- the focus has been on MAP testing 2 or 3 times a year. So where is the data that the expenditures of time and money on MAP are producing positive results for students.

This MAP tool may be measuring something ..... but is it improving instruction?

The Common Core State Standards may be an equally large boondoggle ... only time will tell.

I like Mr. Banda and wish him well. He did not produce the current mess ... but he needs to deal with it.

The SEA union leadership certainly contributed to the current math mess.

Hierarchy exists for the benefit of hierarchy and in the case of SEA and WEA actions over the last few years very little else.

-- Dan Dempsey
Anonymous said…
My kid has scored all over on the MAP -- a little over 50 % to high 60's to upper 80's to lower 90's, all in the course of 2.5 years. He bounces around in one grade for each of the last 3 grades thus far, so the test makes absolutely no sense to me. His learning is progressive and steady, so why doesn't the MAP match?

Anonymous said…
Correction above:

The SEA union leadership certainly contributed to the current MAP mess.

-- Dan Dempsey
Anonymous said…
....and just to clarify, my kid goes up 20 points, then down 20 points, up again, then down again...anywhere from 50's-90's percent-wise, same randomness for math and reading. There is no pattern or correlation to his actual learning. I question the validity of the test. Something doesn't add up, yet this is the test that is supposed to flag the need for advanced placement or special services?

Anonymous said…

Dan Dempsey is mostly correct - the SEA union leadership has contributed to the MAP mess. But teachers of Seattle, we do not get a pass, either. I am a teacher in training and have watched this closely over the last 12 to 18 months. Only 25% of the teachers even bothered to vote in the last SEA election...

- Teacher in training and parent of SPS middle schooler
Anonymous said…
Here's a question about opting out and it's potentially negative impact. My 4th grader took the Math MAP test this week and scored well over 250, the threshold for Algebra 1 placement in 6th grade (a 5th grade winter math MAP over 250 is the sole qualifier for 6th grade algebra 1 placement). If I opt my kid out of the useless MAP from now on, will he not qualify for Algebra 1 even though he easily met the testing standard a year early? Will families that opt out get punished when it comes to 6th grade Math placement?
-- 4th grade parent with a math MAP over 250.
Mark Ahlness said…
Ann, those big swings in scores for your child, whose progress you call progressive and steady, indicate a test that is unreliable.

This was my biggest criticism of the MAP. I gave it to my 3rd graders in Seattle for several years. I would estimate that *at least* one third of my students every year had scores just like you describe for your child - all over the map (sad grin).

The MAP scores that I saw were not an accurate indicator of progress (reliability), nor of real learning (validity).
Anonymous said…
At this point, how can any of these kids take any standardized tests seriously? Do we parents and teachers now choose which test is acceptable? Why didn't we do this at the beginning? Why did SEA agreed to MAP usage for eval? What happens to kids who do score consistently? What about HSPE or EOC as a one time test. How good is that since it's taken only once? What happens if the kid was sick, had an off day, etc.? When do test count? Should we do it like the SAT, provide test prep, mulitple tries until you get the right score?

absolutely confused
Anonymous said…
Right before the adoption of MAP, the district testing policy was "updated" to take out any language about statistical reliability and such around tests. The language would have probably kept MAP from being used.

-not a MAP fan
Anonymous said…
The SEA (teacher's union) has its own self to blame for this mess. It allowed MAP to be used for teacher evaluation purposes. It never took the lead in saying it was a bad test for screening for advanced placement and all the other places the district has snaked MAP into place.

No, the SEA didn't do a darn thing until some bold teachers took the issue into its own hands. Jesse Hagopian at Garfield is part of the SEE movement, I think.

The business interests who pushed MAP for an evaluation mechanism have the egg on their face that they deserve. Looking straight at Alliance for Education and the Tim Burgess crowd and the LEV-ites and Stand-ites here. But the SEA has egg on its own face too. It didn't lead this rejection of MAP. It followed*

*Except for the faction of the SEA which as Social Equity Educators who refuted MAP from the get-go as a testing mechanism and ran its own slate, including brilliant Ballard science teacher Eric Muhs for president, in the last election. Muhs lost. Primarily because only 25 percent of the community bothered to vote.

Teachers need to wake up and realize they have power when they pull it together. And they need some strong SEA leadership. Time to get righteous or get left behind!

Charlie Mas said…
I remember one time when I was part of a group that got a meeting with district officials. We came into the meeting and stated our concerns. They did not answer. They actually refused to speak.

Then, later, they told the Board "Hey, we met with them." as if to suggest that we were impossible to satisfy.
Anonymous said…
You are impossible.

Anonymous said…
Wow! I'll have to try that the next time I have a parent complain about something. If it works for my supervisors ...

Sped Staffer
Okay Annie, I'll bite. What does your comment mean?
GHS student said…
I am a freshman at Garfield. There have been flyers handed out with information for opt-out for about a week they have been saying to fill in the form with a parent signature or email Kris Mcbride (testing coordinator). This morning as people arrived at school, ASB was giving out flyers all over saying that you can opt out verbally, without any consequences,or a need for parent consent.

Today was a day they were starting to give (reading)MAP tests, proctored by administrators because the teachers are refusing. Administrators came into LA classes, and very few people went with them because pretty much everyone verbally opted out. This happened until about 3rd period, when something changed-teachers and students don't know exactly what. Students could no longer verbally opt out, they need a parent's written consent. We were told if we verbally refused, we would face the severe consequences of disobeying an administrator, even though we could tell the admin didn't want to give the test either (they are being put under lots of pressure to give it though. I don't think anyone ended up verbally refusing after the rule change was made, so no one knows exactly what those consequences are.
I have LA 6th period,and many people in my class had not yet gotten written consent, even though they didn't want to take the MAP. I wasn't sure if my parent had emailed yet, along with most of the class, so we went down to the computer lab to check the opt out list. If you were not on it, the administrators allowed us to use our cell phones and call our parents to get them to email Ms. Mcbride in the next 5 minutes. Most people were able to get a hold of their parents, so managed not to take it. Those who took it ALL went through as fast as possible, picking random answers. If the test is completed in under 15 minutes, it tells you that your scores are invalid. Since that was the case for everyone, hopefully that is making a point too. About 40 people took it today. I am not sure how many were scheduled to take it, I know it was at least 120.
One of the main reasons the students dislike the MAP test is not only because of the waste of time, but it closes the library. We were told today that the library and all ~4 computer labs will be closed at all times for the rest of February for MAP testing. That means no books, computers, internet, or printing-which many students rely on.
Also, there were Kiro7 TV reporters/cameras there after school interviewing people, and someone put on Facebook the Democracy Now portion about it-but I don't know if that was from today.
Anonymous said…
Interesting tactic...It is true that the test could be invalidated due to short duration, but the minimum time may be less than 15 min. Does the district set the minimum time, or does NWEA?

NWEA reasons for test invalidation
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said…
My daughter has been told that Nathan Hale 9th graders will be taking the MAP test on Thursday. I have requested that she be opted out and have told her not to take the test.

Thank you GHS student for that input.
Unknown said…
Maybe I missed it in this thread or elsewhere, but has there been any reporting from Garfield teachers about their meeting with Banda?

Thanks to GHS student for your filling us in on the student actions.
Anonymous said…
I have been on committees, at meetings, and debated Charlie on this blog about many issues re the district. Chralie is absolutely fervent about his beliefs but is not always accurate even though he wants people to believe he is. At meetings he comes across as too opinionated with only seeking his ideal as the truth. It is for these reasons that me and others view him as impossible. Many times in life the truth is hard to swallow. Seems like Charlie has heard this before but refuses to swallow.

Really, Annie? What committee was that?

Jack, what I read in the Times is that it was basically what Charlie said. The district stated its position, didn't offer compromise, didn't ask about a compromise and then they get to say they had a meeting.

Any teachers present for the meeting?
Anonymous said…
Anonymous said…
I've never been on a committee with Charlie, but based on this blog and what I've heard from others, that's his rep. Ever since his Cheryl Chow posts, I don't read anything he posts. It's a shame - he's got some good ideas about lots of stuff, but is so 100% sure of himself and unwilling to look at other points of view, that it is offputting. He is a great blogger, if you like the echo chamber thing. WOuld be a terrible candidate for a committee or school board where you need to listen to others. It's hard to hear "If only everyone would listen to ME, it would be fine! I have all the answers and it is so simple!" all the time. The truth is a little more complex. And program placement? For the record, I agree. But enough dude. We get it. They dropped the ball. But we don't need to read another rehashing again about it. It's long since ceased to be informative. So that's why I skip his posts - still like your informative ones, MW!
-sorry charlie
mirmac1 said…
Banda says:

"In partnership with the city of Seattle, Office of Education, MAP results are also used to measure the effectiveness of programs we implement through the Family and Education Levy."

Here's how the FEL schools plan to measure "effectiveness". There only school that relies solely on MAP is Beacon Hill. Good luck with that. Most use the MSP.

Interestingly, many schools use, as an indicator, the percentage of "ELL students making annual typical growth on MAP". The City Office of Education (which is full of bureacrats and ed reformistas) placed their bets ($212M) on the discredited VAM/typical growth methodology?

Another thing you will notice; there is targeted focus on students of color, Level 1 MSP math and ELL, but not one school proposed specific interventions for students in special education.

We are the forgotten gappers.
Anonymous said…
Can soemone answer a MAP question for me? I understand it is formative. I understand it adapts to the student. How is the data reported to the teacher? I know I get the numbers (RIT, strand) as a parent but what does the teacher get specifically that helps form instruction? Do the teachers get every question and every answer from my child's test, thereby knowing she did OK on fractions, but geometry concepts need work? Otherwise, how does knowing she got a 226 tell the teacher anything about what she actually missed and needs to work on?

Also, something my middle schooler said made a related question come up. She said in the Reading MAP the questions started off as being about things they were studying, then all of a sudden veered off into latin roots and other things they hadn't studied. (so that's the adaptive part.) BUT, does the teacher find out that the questions she may have missed are on LA subjects she hasn't studied yet?

-sps mom
Anonymous said…
My 3rd grader came home today telling me her MAP reading score along with the scores of 5 or 6 classmates! She stated the computer flashes your score as you finish. And all the kids were sharing their number! Is this true? If so, how terrible that must have been for any child who didn't score as well as the others. And trust me - we've seen some dismal/inconsistent scoring with our own children.

I did jot down the score she gave me. We were told scores would be available Monday on the Source, so I will verify.

NE Mom of 2 Considering Going Private
GHS Student said…
For people with questions about what students see of MAP scores--
As you take the test, it shows the question ID number (not if it is the 3rd question, but what number in their question bank, like 458362) in the corner. The higher the number, the harder the question. I know in middle school everyone in my classes looked at the numbers.

When you finish the test, it shows you your final (composite) score, and below it a list of about six categories and your scores for each one. (for example in the reading MAP, there is a vocabulary category, analysis, comprehension, etc.).

Then, the computer asks you if you would like to print your scores-The librarians always tell you to click no. Pretty much everyone compares scores, at least at the schools where I have been.

The teachers don't know what to teach to because they are not allowed to see the test. They can't even walk around and look over people's shoulders.

I know as I have taken the test it goes to subjects I have no clue about, and just have to guess. A disadvantage of the computer format is that you can't go back to questions, once you've answered you've answered.

-GHS student
Anonymous said…
Oh yes, both my kids, at two different elementaries, knew the scores of many classmates. The kids share and compare, and also sometimes see scores on others' screens. That's another thing that has always bothered me about MAP--and judging by the obviously inflated scores reported by some kids, it bothers them, too.


Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Seattle Public Schools and Their Principals

COVID Issues Heating up for Seattle Public Schools