Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes, I am hearing from the class teachers that there will be no testing other than MAP and VALLs next year for second graders.
Wow so with VALLS being irrelevant to AAP since the focus is to diagnose problems, all is left is MAP fall and HOPE?!
VALLS was included in last years packet (DC is a current AAP 3rd grader) so I wouldn’t say it’s irrelevant
Dp, not irrelevant, but limited. A kid with a so-so score will likely be hurt by VALLS, but there are probably many kids with good scores that a good score doesn't reveal much.
The test wasn't intended to determine how well a kid reads, and so once a kid can read, they'll score well. There's little info about how well a kid reads.
What's a so-so score?
Sometimes people post VALLS on the AAP decisions or appeals threads, which is why I think there is a cutoff, but not enough people post to see a clear trend line.
If we collectively started to record VALLS on threads like those, we could probably sus out a number that is at least in the ballpark.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes, I am hearing from the class teachers that there will be no testing other than MAP and VALLs next year for second graders.
Wow so with VALLS being irrelevant to AAP since the focus is to diagnose problems, all is left is MAP fall and HOPE?!
VALLS was included in last years packet (DC is a current AAP 3rd grader) so I wouldn’t say it’s irrelevant
Dp, not irrelevant, but limited. A kid with a so-so score will likely be hurt by VALLS, but there are probably many kids with good scores that a good score doesn't reveal much.
The test wasn't intended to determine how well a kid reads, and so once a kid can read, they'll score well. There's little info about how well a kid reads.
What's a so-so score?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes, I am hearing from the class teachers that there will be no testing other than MAP and VALLs next year for second graders.
Wow so with VALLS being irrelevant to AAP since the focus is to diagnose problems, all is left is MAP fall and HOPE?!
VALLS was included in last years packet (DC is a current AAP 3rd grader) so I wouldn’t say it’s irrelevant
Dp, not irrelevant, but limited. A kid with a so-so score will likely be hurt by VALLS, but there are probably many kids with good scores that a good score doesn't reveal much.
The test wasn't intended to determine how well a kid reads, and so once a kid can read, they'll score well. There's little info about how well a kid reads.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes, I am hearing from the class teachers that there will be no testing other than MAP and VALLs next year for second graders.
Wow so with VALLS being irrelevant to AAP since the focus is to diagnose problems, all is left is MAP fall and HOPE?!
VALLS was included in last years packet (DC is a current AAP 3rd grader) so I wouldn’t say it’s irrelevant
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes, I am hearing from the class teachers that there will be no testing other than MAP and VALLs next year for second graders.
Wow so with VALLS being irrelevant to AAP since the focus is to diagnose problems, all is left is MAP fall and HOPE?!
Anonymous wrote:Yes, I am hearing from the class teachers that there will be no testing other than MAP and VALLs next year for second graders.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Maybe they want parents to pay for testing to save money. If parents are interested in the program they can provide private test results?
But equity!
Anonymous wrote:Maybe they want parents to pay for testing to save money. If parents are interested in the program they can provide private test results?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:yeah, so my guess would be that it will now be based on parent referral, HOPE and samples from teachers. There will be even more variability in the admission process next year. I am guessing this is a move to make it more inclusive.
There's still MAP and VALLS, but I don't see how removing data points would make the process more inclusive.
Without NGAT or COGAT, more parents would be incentivized to get a WISC. If they disallow for consideration of WISC scores, it would disadvantage 2E kids who are more likely, when younger, to have difficulty consistently producing work samples that reflect their cognitive abilities (and thus also affect their HOPE scores). Either way, the result is not more inclusive.