Anonymous wrote:What other district assessments are there besides MAP & MCAP? Is that like a test for people new to the district who wouldn’t have taken the aforementioned tests?
Anonymous wrote:What other district assessments are there besides MAP & MCAP? Is that like a test for people new to the district who wouldn’t have taken the aforementioned tests?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Looks like MCPS is starting to put out definitions for the different cluster groups. They emphasize that it is not defined by any one factor, but it looks like the MAP scores they're looking for for the top/accelerated group would be at around 90th+ percentile, the second group at 80th percentile MAP scores, the grade level group 40th-80th percentile, below-level 20th-40th, and far below-level (the group that cannot be combined with the top group) as below 20th percentile.
Amazing that MCPS/Maryland wastes so much time on MCAP each year and doesn't use it for anything. You think they would consider COGAT too, but no...just a waste of time and money.[/quote
MCAP was in it too. I believe top group is 4, second-highest js 3, middle group is 2 or 3, second lowest is 1 or 2, and lowest is 1. Also district assessments and report card. No CogAT.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Have they said they are planning cluster grouping for both CKLA and math or just math?
They have mentioned cluster grouping for CKLA, but I think that is basically the same as what was supposed to be going on for "Model 2" this year which didn't seem to work well.
Correct. Model 2 for all. Supposedly the cluster grouping has been happening this year. If so, we haven’t seen any enrichment in our kid’s class.
Mine got it during her intervention block. She read books, did a writing project and is currently doing a play
This is supposed to be happening during the core instruction block, not just during WIN.
Anonymous wrote:They will probably require current 3rd graders to have a 4 on MCAP and/or a fairly high MAP or CogAT score (I would guess 95th percentile or higher) to get whatever acceleration is provided next year.
The bar will probably be lower for this year's 4th graders finishing up as a cohort, though. I don't think they will lower it as far as 50th percentile-- I think 85th percentile was what was required to originally qualify and they will probably let them stay as long as they maintain that.
Anonymous wrote:Looks like MCPS is starting to put out definitions for the different cluster groups. They emphasize that it is not defined by any one factor, but it looks like the MAP scores they're looking for for the top/accelerated group would be at around 90th+ percentile, the second group at 80th percentile MAP scores, the grade level group 40th-80th percentile, below-level 20th-40th, and far below-level (the group that cannot be combined with the top group) as below 20th percentile.
Anonymous wrote:Is there a timeline that the board has to make final decision by and tell us what it means for all these? Over this summer or early fall 2026 when school starts?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Have they said they are planning cluster grouping for both CKLA and math or just math?
They have mentioned cluster grouping for CKLA, but I think that is basically the same as what was supposed to be going on for "Model 2" this year which didn't seem to work well.
Correct. Model 2 for all. Supposedly the cluster grouping has been happening this year. If so, we haven’t seen any enrichment in our kid’s class.
Mine got it during her intervention block. She read books, did a writing project and is currently doing a play
Anonymous wrote:You might want to check out Jeannie Oakes work on tracking and the ultimate problems it causes.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Have they said they are planning cluster grouping for both CKLA and math or just math?
They have mentioned cluster grouping for CKLA, but I think that is basically the same as what was supposed to be going on for "Model 2" this year which didn't seem to work well.
Correct. Model 2 for all. Supposedly the cluster grouping has been happening this year. If so, we haven’t seen any enrichment in our kid’s class.
Anonymous wrote:Looks like MCPS is starting to put out definitions for the different cluster groups. They emphasize that it is not defined by any one factor, but it looks like the MAP scores they're looking for for the top/accelerated group would be at around 90th+ percentile, the second group at 80th percentile MAP scores, the grade level group 40th-80th percentile, below-level 20th-40th, and far below-level (the group that cannot be combined with the top group) as below 20th percentile.
Anonymous wrote:Looks like MCPS is starting to put out definitions for the different cluster groups. They emphasize that it is not defined by any one factor, but it looks like the MAP scores they're looking for for the top/accelerated group would be at around 90th+ percentile, the second group at 80th percentile MAP scores, the grade level group 40th-80th percentile, below-level 20th-40th, and far below-level (the group that cannot be combined with the top group) as below 20th percentile.