MAP Growth Validation Study: An Evaluation of the Alignment of Selected MAP Growth Assessments to the Virginia Standards of Learning and an Exploration of the Utility of MAP Growth Reports for Determining Student Performance Relative to Grade Level
Author: Gareis, Christopher R.
Date: 2021-08-05
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Achievement Tests,Academic Standards,State Standards,Alignment (Education),Academic Achievement,Educational Indicators,Computer Assisted Testing,Test Items,Reading Tests,Mathematics Tests,Algebra,Standardized Tests,Norm Referenced Tests,Scores,Elementary School Students,Secondary School Students,Progress Monitoring

The purpose of this study was to gauge the degree to which selected NWEA MAP Growth assessments are aligned to the Virginia Standards of Learning (SOL) and the extent to which MAP Growth reports can be used by school divisions to gauge student achievement relative to grade level and to identify learning gaps. The study was delimited to four MAP Growth assessments: Reading 2-5, Reading 6+, Mathematics 2-5, and Mathematics 6+. The review of technical adequacy was largely dependent upon the NWEA-created technical report. Additionally, the stratified random sample of items for review was delimited to a range of four grade levels per test and therefore not representative of the full grade-level range of possible items in the test item pools. The study drew item reviewers and focus group participants from four selected school divisions. Three processes were used to collect information and data for analysis: (1) a review of technical information about MAP Growth assessments provided by NWEA, as well as other literature concerning MAP Growth assessments and computer adaptive testing; (2) a review of 2,400 MAP Growth test items in Grades 2-9 in Reading and Grades 2-Algebra in Mathematics for content and depth of knowledge match with Virginia SOLs; and (3) two focus group interviews with end-users of MAP Growth reports, including subject-matter experts, instructional specialists, and division-level leaders responsible for assessment and evaluation. From the analysis of collected data, four conclusions were drawn: (1) MAP Growth assessments have very strong technical adequacy, and test items are well aligned to the Virginia Standards of Learning. (2) Due to limits of computer-based standardized testing and the purpose of the assessment itself, MAP Growth assessments do not assess the full range of SOL content, nor do they assess at the highest levels of cognitive demand; therefore, the use of MAP Growth assessments should be complemented by the use of other trustworthy indicators of student learning in order to assess the full range of the curriculum. (3) MAP Growth assessments provide end-users (namely, division- and school-level leaders and classroom teachers) accurate, useful, and timely information about student, small-group, and school-level achievement, which, when supported by additional evidence of student performance, can be used to make near- and long-term instructional decisions to further student growth. (4) Given the limitations of norm-based, computer-adaptive testing, results regarding categorical determinations of at, above, and below grade-level performance must be interpreted with caution and complemented by other trustworthy indicators of student learning.