Eval. Measures of Academic Progress Program on Student Reading (MAP)

This study was designed to address questions from Midwestern states and districts about the extent to which benchmark assessment may affect teachers’ differentiated instructional practices and student achievement. The study investigated one primary and two secondary confirmatory research questions: 1. Did the MAP program (that is, training plus formative testing feedback) affect the reading achievement of grade 4 students after Year 2 of implementation, as measured by the Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT) reading scale scores or the MAP composite test scores in reading and language use? 2. Were MAP resources (training, consultation, web-based materials) delivered by NWEA and received and used by teachers as planned? 3. Did MAP teachers apply differentiated instructional practices in their classes to a greater extent than their control counterparts? xi The report also addressed one exploratory question: 4. Did the MAP program affect the reading achievement of grade 5 students after Year 2 of implementation, as measured by the Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT) reading scale scores or the MAP composite test scores in reading and language use?

The results of the study indicate that the MAP program was implemented with moderate fidelity but that MAP teachers were not more likely than control group teachers to have applied differentiated instructional practices in their classes. Overall, the MAP program did not have a statistically significant impact on students’ reading achievement in either grade 4 or grade 5.