 or any combination within the parameters of the RIT Ranges. All that can truly be ascertained is that the score has fallen. Which leads to the larger question, what is the significance of this change in RIT?
As the spotlight above shows, differences in RIT may not always be what they appear. Of course this same reasoning holds true for any perceived gains, which is why it is best to look at the impact of any change in RIT from an instructional viewpoint. When we insert either of the RIT scores from the above example into DesCartes (207 or 203) we find that the student is still performing in the same RIT Band of 201-210. Fundamental to the use of DesCartes is the notion that the learning level of the student will remain the same throughout the ten point RIT Band. This holds true regardless of any perceived gains or losses between test sessions. Perhaps this student needs more practice, or alternative methods of instruction, but the content of the RIT Band is still the appropriate learning level for the student.
When first referencing DesCartes it is common to focus solely on the RIT score. While this is appropriate, the adjacent RIT Bands in DesCartes may contain useful instructional skills which relate to the student’s RIT Range. You may remember that the three adjacent RIT Bands in DesCartes represent skills which a student may answer correctly 25%, 50%, and 75% of the time respectively, with the student’s RIT score falling into the center RIT Band. Though it is important to utilize the student’s primary RIT Band during instruction, the skills in the adjacent RIT Bands should not be ignored.
DEALING WITH NEGATIVE GROWTH
It is well known that instructional decisions should not be based entirely on one data point, but in situations where negative growth pulls a student’s RIT score into a lower RIT Band this is especially true. In these instances it is essential that we rely on other sources of data to verify the child’s instructional level. By reviewing classroom assignments and assessments we may be able to determine whether the student had an off day during the test or whether there is actually a need to adjust the student’s instruction. Either way, teacher judgment is crucial in this process.
Ultimately we need to realize the importance of viewing student learning in a broader context. Though new data is useful in driving instruction and guiding discussions, utilizing additional points of data will provide a more complete picture of student performance. Consider again the student with a fall RIT score of 210 and a winter RIT score of 203. What if the student’s previous spring score was 196? Given this additional information, we would clearly see the student’s overall trend towards positive RIT growth over time.
CHANGING OUR DISCUSSIONS
We must remember that each assessment is only a snapshot of a single point in time. Negative growth does not necessarily mean a student is not learning, or that classroom instruction has not been effective, or that NWEA data is not reliable. Rather, negative growth allows for additional opportunities to change the way we discuss our students’ learning. Instead of ignoring these instances as anomalies or assigning blame for their results, we should recognize negative growth as an important element in the culture of data driven instruction. Simply put, for unexplained reasons student scores sometimes fall. How this affects instruction should be the focus of our conversations.
MOVING FORWARD: LIMITING NEGATIVE GROWTH
Negative growth is a reality of MAP assessment, but it can be limited. The following steps will create conditions for the best growth possible at your school:
- Proctors should circulate the room during testing, monitoring student progress and behavior, making students restart the test when they are not taking it seriously or rescheduling them to another day.
- Poor student behavior and discipline issues can result in poor performance on assessments. Have teachers make judgment calls on the day of testing. Rescheduling testing for these students is often a sound practice.
- Gi