"Prior term" cut scores on linking studies are no longer used in the Projected Proficiency report. Instead, we use the norms. This means that, for example, if a student takes a test in fall (the "prior term" as compared to the proficiency exam), and the proficiency exam is taken in spring (the "current term"), the Projected Proficiency report uses the norms to project typical growth for the student, and compares that growth projection to the linking study's spring ("current term") cut scores. It does not use the cut scores listed for fall in the linking study.
Why did we make this change? Why doesn't it use the linking study's cut scores for "prior terms"?
This change provides a better proficiency projection for each individual student by using growth projections for each student. The growth projections are updated with each new norms study, while the linking study may not be updated at the same time. Additionally, the linking study does not take into account your customized weeks of instruction settings.
This also allows us to project proficiency based on winter MAP Growth scores as well as fall and spring results.
How does the Projected Proficiency report use my organization's customized instructional weeks?
The Projected Proficiency report uses your customized instructional weeks for the "prior terms" (that is - terms prior to when the proficiency exam is taken), but not for the "current term" (the term the proficiency exam is taken - usually spring).
In more detail: Growth projections are generated based on the district-defined number of instructional weeks. Reports displaying growth, rather than proficiency, use the district's customized number of instructional weeks for both the beginning and ending terms. When used for proficiency projections, only the customized instructional weeks for the starting term are used. For the “current season” the NWEA default number of instructional weeks is used. This is done to project RIT levels as close in time to the normal state testing season as possible. |
