Subject: English Language Arts
Grade Level(s): 3 – 12
Measures Growth: Yes
Visit Website
The Northwest Evaluation Association Measures of Academic Progress are computer adaptive assessments for benchmarking student progress in reading, language and math. MAP assessments provide immediate scores and detailed individual results within 24 hours, and are intended to identify individual areas of need to inform instruction and intervention strategies. ELA is measured at all grade levels from 3-12.
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses higher-order thinking • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
I think people who hate this test hate the fact that districts are using it to evaluate them as teachers and that should not happen. This test was not designed to evaluate the quality of teachers. The goal of this test to measure growth and it does a decent job of doing that. It is basically the same test (in terms of style of question and question banks) taken several times a year. If a student grew that year, they should be able to answer more of the same questions correctly.
Submitted by Quan in Illinois on May 12, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
While the exam is aligned with our state standards, it is unable to assess higher order thinking skills. Students often answer multiple choice questions that require them to identify incorrect grammatical structures or specific literary devices within a text, but they aren't asked why such grammatical structures lack clarity or how such literary devices affect their overall interpretation of a text.
Submitted by Kristin in North Dakota on April 30, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year
Cons: It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
The Descartes is not the most friendly format for creating student goals. The fact that I can not do an item analysis , or even see the specific questions my students missed also takes away from my ability to use the data to inform my instruction.
Submitted by Stephanie in Illinois on April 16, 2013
Pros: Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level • Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
Cons: Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
Our district has been using the MAP for quite some time. It is helpful in some ways, but the drawbacks outweigh the benefits. With few exceptions, the test doesn't tell me anything I don't already know about my students. In addition to the state testing, taking three subjects three times a year takes away valuable instruction time, not to mention the hours upon hours of wasted instructional time when the technology doesn't work. I think there is value, but a lot of improvements are needed to make this test worthwhile.
Submitted by Susan in New Jersey on April 16, 2013
Pros: Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly
Cons: Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time • It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
Our district requires that Special Education students be tested with MAPS four times a year. I think this year it will be only three as we are running out of time. The kids will have their THIRD Discovery testing in a week as well as the MAPS, a week after returning from Spring Break. The NMSBA which was given two weeks ago, just before Break.
Many of my students have processing and attention issues in addition to their SLD issues in reading, writing and Math. Consequently, most find this testing torture and don't make an honest attempt at answering the questions. One boy consistently has his MAPS test invalidated because he rushes through so quickly. At the other extreme is a 6th grader who can take up to three days to complete one test (math or reading). This year he finally said to me: "I don't want to take the test." So I reported his comment and didn't push him.
Results are helpful in only about a quarter of the students I have. I just think the kids are exhausted from so much testing and situations that tell them they are failures.
The data needs a conversion chart to be understandable.
Submitted by Millie in New Mexico on April 14, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
I find MAP testing in the fall, winter, and spring to be an effective tool in leveling students based on their different abilities. Our school uses this data rich assessment along with Fountas and Pinnel and AIMSWEB testing to determine which students may need additional reading and math interventions. Of course classroom gathered data, both quantifiable as well as anecdotal is at play when we discuss our students learning and proper group fit. MAp testing is our flagship tool for RTI. I appreciate its ability based design. One caveat, however... as with all tests, it must be viewed as one snapshot in time and not an end all and be all measurement.
Submitted by Brian in North Dakota on April 13, 2013
Pros: Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly
Cons: Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time • It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
When our district decided to purchase the NWEA MAP program, I was working with English Language Learners and students who would have qualified for Title I aid had our school been a Title I school, and I was also working with gifted students. I was pretty excited about the program at that time. Since then I've gone into full-time instruction with the gifted students. Their MAP reading scores are far above grade level, but they ping-pong up and down wildly from one test to the next. The reading they do in class stretches them in fiction (Shaskespeare, the unabridged Frankenstein), nonfiction (research and analytic reasoning for National History Day projects), poetry and figurative language, and vocabulary development. Somehow that work doesn't translate into a steady pattern of growth in MAP scores, even for stellar students in the class. And the suggestions from the MAP materials for what additional reading instruction to provide the highest scoring students are thin at best.
Submitted by Janet in Washington on April 13, 2013
Pros: Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
Cons: It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
I teach in a 5-8 School. By 7th grade, students are so sick of taking this test that they blow right through it which totally invalidates the scores. It gives you a Lexile (which is only useful if the student truly took the test seriously), but beyond that, unless your curriculum is completely aligned to the questions on the MAP, the data is too difficult to understand and therefore, too difficult to do anything with.
Submitted by Kat in New Jersey on April 12, 2013
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level • Takes students too long to complete
Cons: Results are not returned quickly • Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time • It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
The time time to administer this assessment is too long. It also doesn't give an accurate picture of where my students are regarding 7th grade standards as it pushes up the questions. Questions are difficult to comprehend and it assess what a student should know in 7th grade when they have only started 7th grade. Many students become frustrated because they haven't been taught many of these concepts.
Submitted by Bonnie in California on April 12, 2013
Pros: Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year
Cons: Difficult to administer • It is hard to use the data
My district gives the MAP test three times a year, and if administered correctly, it will allow me track student growth throughout the year and when transferring from one school to the next. The MAP scores are also imported into our online student data tool (I teach in Kentucky, so we use CIITS). I did not feel the MAP gave a genuine mastery of learning. Although many are moving toward online testing, the format of the test (scrolling for long, continuous passages) is distracting for many students. There are not targeted interventions for our students, as found with other testing systems. Another issue is the RIT score, and explaining to parents what this means. Once again, this is one measure, not the entire picture of any student's success. I feel the test is too easy for high school students, and does not give me an accurate measure of the rigorous assessments and assignments I give in my classroom.
Submitted by Jennifer in Kentucky on April 11, 2013
Pros: Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly
Cons: It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
The MAP has a really nice graph for tracking a student's growth from year to year, and it compares the student's performance with the district and norm group averages. It is a good tool for discussing student growth with parents. However, I wish the drill-down component would give student-specific information to help guide my instructional planning. The information it gives seems to be generalized for all students in that RIT band, not specifically tied to the student's answers on the test.
Submitted by Sharon in Kansas on April 10, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level
Cons: Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year
Cons: It is hard to use the data
My district gives the MAP test three times a year, allowing me to easily track student growth throughout the year. One thing I found interesting about MAP was on-grade-level score means that students answer the topic of questions half of the time. It does not show true mastery! While some students try to click through too quickly, the test either kicks them out of the system, or I have my students retake the test. The mulitple choice questions do not focus on higher-order thinking skills and at times the texts are long requiring students to scroll up and down, making it difficult to keep their place. I had many students on my team require more than 50 minutes to finish this section. The Descartes, which list skills students may be weaker on, are difficult to read and do not have targeted skills intervention for individual students. This makes the results difficult to use.
Submitted by Margaret in Rhode Island on April 10, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses higher-order thinking
Cons: Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level • Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
Cons: It is hard to use the data
No constructed response opportunity; no language arts assessment; too time and labor intensive when using data for intervention
good data to share with parents as it shows growth
Submitted by Val in Montana on April 9, 2013
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking • Takes students too long to complete
Cons: It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
I get much better information by listening to students read, talking with them about books and reading their writing. This test takes far too much instructional time and there are too many problems with administration.
Submitted by Jen in Wisconsin on April 9, 2013
Pros: Assesses higher-order thinking
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level • Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Results returned quickly
Cons: It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
Students do not have to do any writing on this assessment. They can and do click through the multiple choice answers very quickly, making their results doubtful.
Submitted by Marie in Colorado on April 9, 2013
Pros: Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level • Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year
Cons: It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
This assessment is not in any way correlated to our state standards. It frequently shows children at higher levels than they really are, which decreases the amount of growth they show over the course of the year. The Descartes information is very difficult to use when it doesn't align to standards and you have a classroom with 25 students across 6 different RIT ranges. I have no idea why our district is wasting money on this assessment.
Submitted by Jennifer in Virginia on April 9, 2013
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking
Pros: Results returned quickly
Cons: It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
An average, at best, reading test. No writing is involved so it is useless for Language Arts teachers. It does decrease time available for teaching and make it very it tough to book time in a computer lab.
Submitted by Ronald in Wisconsin on April 9, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses higher-order thinking • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
I like this test and use it to show weaknesses for writing my IEP's.
Submitted by Donna in Kansas on April 9, 2013
Pros: Assesses higher-order thinking • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level
Cons: Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Results returned quickly
Cons: Difficult to administer • Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time • It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
The test takes too long to administer. The results are difficult to see what I need to do as a teacher to help the students.
Submitted by Brad in Utah on April 9, 2013
Cons: Not aligned to the standards I teach • Does not assess higher-order thinking • Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Results returned quickly
Cons: Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time • It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
As a high school teacher of struggling algebra students I found this test was (a) invalid as it tests material unrelated to what students were learning (b) unreliable in that students' results commonly varied by 20 points from test to test.
Results were available immediately. However, the "strands" which are reported are not linked to specific areas of performance so it was futile to attempt to modify instruction based on test results, much less personalize instruction based on students' individual results. I may also have seen indications that the reported test scores were actually changed some months after the assessment was given.
Math reasoning is not assessed. Anyone who asserts this tests high level thinking is blowing hot air. It assesses computer test-taking skills.
Students were not motivated to do their best as the results were not used in grading. As a result students often blew off the test.
Seattle Schools used to give the test 3 times a year - fall, winter and spring. They since ditched the fall testing window because they found scores dropped from fall to winter, so better looking results were found based on improvement from winter to spring. Needless to say this may measure several things (e.g. the hours of sunlight per day), but math improvement is not one of them.
We did test students at the beginning of the year and assigned them to additional math support classes. Generally, students who scored extremely low on the MAP (below about 200) did indeed have low math skills (based on teacher observation) and benefited from the support. But other students would probably have benefited as well.
This test may be of some use in elementary school where the curriculum is more aligned with the test, but I do not know.
As far as reading, our reading program has been successful in increasing students' reading level quite rapidly. However our reading teachers did remark that the MAP results were inconsistent with the periodic assessments they were giving. This indicates the reading MAP is not necessarily any more valid than the math MAP at a high school level, even when students are reading anywhere from a 4th grade level to high school.
Submitted by Peter in Washington on April 9, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses higher-order thinking • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Takes students too long to complete
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
Cons: It is hard to use the data
We give the MAP tests 2-3 times each year at our school. It is a great tool to assess what the students know or do not know. The tests themselves are very long for the younger grades. We start them in 2nd grade and they have 43-52 test questions per subject level. A bit much for the younger ones or ones with a shorter attention span. You do have the option to pause it and come back which is a great feature. All in all, I have enjoyed the knowledge gained from this assessment.
Submitted by Traci in Kansas on April 9, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses higher-order thinking • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Cons: Misses growth of some students, such as those far below and/or far above grade level
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
Cons: It is hard to use the data
NWEA Map is a test which is highly dependent on students having a particular vocabulary word to access the concept. Some students which might know a great deal about something may miss serveral questions due to the manner in which it is referred. For example, if they know something is called an opinion but not argumentative, they may select the wrong answer. All answers are multiple choice and so this limits the way in which students can respond and how questions can be posed. Some of my students don't have an opportunity to show all their learning due to these limitations.
Submitted by Toni in Illinois on April 9, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses higher-order thinking • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Data is presented clearly • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
I do like the MAP test. It is easy to administer and you get results quickly. There have been testing windows where the students have an "out of the buggy" score. (i.e. students will score at the 40th percentile over time, and suddenly score at the 96th percentile......only to drop back to the 40th percentile, giving unpredictable scores).
Submitted by Sarah in Iowa on February 15, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses higher-order thinking • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year
Cons: Doesn't help me track my students' learning gains over time • It is hard to use the data • Is not helpful to my professional growth as a teacher
There are validity issues - as with all one day snapshot tests. Students' scores can vary widely from test day to test day. It's hard to say a student has shown growth if a limited number of tests have been taken (less than four).
Data is not available to show that it is a good indicator for student performance before fourth grade or after 8th. It's better than nothing, but scores have to be assessed along with variety of other factors and should not be used a sole measurement of student or teacher performance.
Submitted by Betty in Washington on February 14, 2013
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses higher-order thinking • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
These classroom resources help support the instructional planning.
Submitted by Donna in Tennessee on April 19, 2012
Pros: Aligned to the standards I teach • Assesses higher-order thinking • Assesses a range of students, including those from far below to far above grade level • Takes students a reasonable amount of time to complete
Pros: Easy to administer • Results returned quickly • Helps me track my students' learning gains over the course of the school year • Data is presented clearly • Data I receive helps me understand where I am teaching well and where I need to improve
Individual reports in Descartes are extremely helpful to ace this assessment.
Submitted by J.L. in Indiana on February 25, 2012
Copyright © 2012–2013 Assessment Advisor. All Rights Reserved.