APS Math instruction

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAP testing isn’t new. It’s new to APS. I wouldn’t be so dismissive.

I don't think you get it. The point is that you can't draw much of a conclusion based on only 2 years of data for this test within APS.

No, I do get it. You mentioned that it’s a new test, and it’s not. It’s not like they need to work out some bugs.

I agree that more years of data will help draw conclusions.

It's new to APS. Don't be pedantic.

They may have to work out bugs for administering it - there may be discrepancies from one year to the next.

What discrepancies? The iPad is either on, or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAP testing isn’t new. It’s new to APS. I wouldn’t be so dismissive.

I don't think you get it. The point is that you can't draw much of a conclusion based on only 2 years of data for this test within APS.

How did APS compare with other districts across those two years?
How did teachers administer it year 1 vs. year 2?
Did the test algorithm change?
etc.

We shouldn't dismiss it completely but it's not really a full picture of student performance.

Decreasing scores are okay as long as neighboring districts are decreasing, too? Come on.

And it’s administered on an iPad. That doesn’t change.

There are many variations that could affect performance - timing, environment, etc. Was that consistent from one year to the next? Two data points aren't enough for a trend.

And comparing against other districts puts the performance into context. Compare against one of the shthole red states if you want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAP testing isn’t new. It’s new to APS. I wouldn’t be so dismissive.

I don't think you get it. The point is that you can't draw much of a conclusion based on only 2 years of data for this test within APS.

No, I do get it. You mentioned that it’s a new test, and it’s not. It’s not like they need to work out some bugs.

I agree that more years of data will help draw conclusions.

It's new to APS. Don't be pedantic.

They may have to work out bugs for administering it - there may be discrepancies from one year to the next.

What discrepancies? The iPad is either on, or not.

When and where was the test given? Were kids given extra time last year but not this year? Did they do it in smaller groups as a pilot but then did whole classrooms this year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAP testing isn’t new. It’s new to APS. I wouldn’t be so dismissive.

I don't think you get it. The point is that you can't draw much of a conclusion based on only 2 years of data for this test within APS.

How did APS compare with other districts across those two years?
How did teachers administer it year 1 vs. year 2?
Did the test algorithm change?
etc.

We shouldn't dismiss it completely but it's not really a full picture of student performance.

Decreasing scores are okay as long as neighboring districts are decreasing, too? Come on.

And it’s administered on an iPad. That doesn’t change.

There are many variations that could affect performance - timing, environment, etc. Was that consistent from one year to the next? Two data points aren't enough for a trend.

And comparing against other districts puts the performance into context. Compare against one of the shthole red states if you want.

I wouldn’t be so smug. It was huge increases in reading scores in freaking Mississippi that clued people in that we might need to start teaching phonics again after all. 😆

[Anonymous]

And it's an adaptive test. Have the algorithm or question pool changed at all?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAP testing isn’t new. It’s new to APS. I wouldn’t be so dismissive.

I don't think you get it. The point is that you can't draw much of a conclusion based on only 2 years of data for this test within APS.

Duran drew conclusions and reported them to the school board. APS has said over and over again that MAP tests provide a lot of solid data.

SOL scores, even recalibrated to fluff them, are also way down over pre-pandemic scores. You have to look at the big picture. APS SOL scores aren't good either.

[Anonymous]

Pointless to argue with this clown. I’m very anti-voucher. But I also choose to live in reality. It’s possible to be both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pointless to argue with this clown. I’m very anti-voucher. But I also choose to live in reality. It’s possible to be both.

Sorry to disrupt your narrative with facts and questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pointless to argue with this clown. I’m very anti-voucher. But I also choose to live in reality. It’s possible to be both.

Sorry to disrupt your narrative with facts and questions.

Questions are fine, but you’re choosing to ignore the facts that others — including the VDOE — provided. But, whatever, enjoy having your head in the sand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pointless to argue with this clown. I’m very anti-voucher. But I also choose to live in reality. It’s possible to be both.

Sorry to disrupt your narrative with facts and questions.

Questions are fine, but you’re choosing to ignore the facts that others — including the VDOE — provided. But, whatever, enjoy having your head in the sand.

What facts did the VDOE provide? Op-eds from disgruntled RWNJs don’t count.

[Anonymous]

I don't know the details of NWEA testing norms or if the conditions changed, but here are the math RIT scores starting last year for my kid:
215, 222, 225, 221, 225

It's sure looks like he hasn't learned much new material over the last year and a half.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pointless to argue with this clown. I’m very anti-voucher. But I also choose to live in reality. It’s possible to be both.

Sorry to disrupt your narrative with facts and questions.

Questions are fine, but you’re choosing to ignore the facts that others — including the VDOE — provided. But, whatever, enjoy having your head in the sand.

What facts did the VDOE provide? Op-eds from disgruntled RWNJs don’t count.

Go look at their website, lazy pants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pointless to argue with this clown. I’m very anti-voucher. But I also choose to live in reality. It’s possible to be both.

Sorry to disrupt your narrative with facts and questions.

Questions are fine, but you’re choosing to ignore the facts that others — including the VDOE — provided. But, whatever, enjoy having your head in the sand.

What facts did the VDOE provide? Op-eds from disgruntled RWNJs don’t count.

Go look at their website, lazy pants.

I did. They say that APS SOL scores have been rising every year since the pandemic. Need me to link that for you again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pointless to argue with this clown. I’m very anti-voucher. But I also choose to live in reality. It’s possible to be both.

Sorry to disrupt your narrative with facts and questions.

Questions are fine, but you’re choosing to ignore the facts that others — including the VDOE — provided. But, whatever, enjoy having your head in the sand.

What facts did the VDOE provide? Op-eds from disgruntled RWNJs don’t count.

Go look at their website, lazy pants.

I did. They say that APS SOL scores have been rising every year since the pandemic. Need me to link that for you again?

https://www.doe.virginia.gov/Home/Components/News/News/314/227

I can explain it to you, but I can’t understand it for you.

[Anonymous]

“Proficiency cut scores were lowered between the 2018-2019 and 2020-2021 test administration. These lowered cut scores enabled students to pass that would not have otherwise received a passing score.”

Per VDOE.