[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-499760-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-499760-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","default-cut-scores-for-map-growth-reading-and-mathematics-assessments-june-2022","Default Cut Scores for MAP Growth Reading and Mathematics Assessments - June 2022","","Default Cut Scores for MAP Growth Reading and Mathematics Assessments specifies subject- and grade-level thresholds for classifying students into Below Standards, Proficient, or Advanced on MAP Growth for Grades 3–8. The report updates default cut scores by deriving median Rasch Unit (RIT) cut scores from published NWEA linking studies across 39 states and mapping them to percentiles from the 2020 norms. Guidance distinguishes these default thresholds from results of partner-specific linking studies and clarifies appropriate use.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/exam/","Exam",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/default-cut-scores-for-map-growth-reading-and-mathematics-assessments-june-2022/499760/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/default-cut-scores-for-map-growth-reading-and-mathematics-assessments-june-2022/499760.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"mieayamfan","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-07","2026-10-03",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",21,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What are the default cut scores used for in MAP Growth?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"They classify students into Below Standards, Proficient, or Advanced performance levels on MAP Growth for reading and mathematics in Grades 3–8 when a partner does not have its own linking study.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How were the updated default cut scores derived?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"They were derived from the median Rasch Unit (RIT) cut scores from published NWEA linking studies across 39 states and matched to associated percentiles from the 2020 norms.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Can default cut scores be used to predict performance on summative assessments?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"No. The report states default cut scores should not be used to predict student performance on summative assessments, and partner-specific linking study cuts are always preferred.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},499760,1791342553,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,95,100,105,110,115,120,123,127],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":93,"slug":94},70,"exam",{"id":96,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":112,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":117,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":119},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":118,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":122},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":124,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":125,"show_sort_weight":124,"slug":126},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":128,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":129,"show_sort_weight":96,"slug":130},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":132},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":133,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":33,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":118,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":103,"preview_page_count":4},962090893677,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_3d24733baf745e90a7e4bdd5f77d97b2","Default Cut Scores for MAP Growth Reading and Mathematics Assessments  \nJune 2022  \nSarah-Truclinh Tran Rudraxi Majumdar Ann Hu  \nJ. Patrick Meyer  \nDocument History  \n\n| Date | Description |\n| --- | --- |\n| 2021-11-17 | Initial draft created by Sarah-Truclinh Tran |\n| 2022-01-20 | Approved by Ann Hu and Patrick Meyer |\n| 2022-06-10 | Written report published |\n\nAcknowledgements: This report benefited from the project management of Debbie Baumanand the editorial assistance of Kelly Rivard. We also appreciate our colleagues at NWEA who contributed their expertise and insights that helped us identify the most appropriate default cut scores: Michael Dahlin, Jenna Gifford, Nate Jensen, Nick Kalakailo, Peyton Rodriguez, Dave Runnion, Kristy Smith, and Adam Wolfgang.  \nTable of Contents  \nExecutive Summary ....................................................................................................................4  \n1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................5  \n2. Methodology ...........................................................................................................................6  \n3. Results ....................................................................................................................................8  \n3.1. Default Cut Scores ........................................................................................................8  \n3.2. Variability in Percentiles ................................................................................................8  \n4. Conclusion and Discussion ...................................................................................................11  \n5. References............................................................................................................................12  \nAppendix A: Proficient Percentile Cuts by State—Reading .......................................................13  \nAppendix B: Proficient Percentile Cuts by State—Mathematics ................................................15  \nAppendix C: Advanced Percentile Cuts by State—Reading ......................................................17  \nAppendix D: Advanced Percentile Cuts by State—Mathematics ...............................................19  \nList of Tables  \nTable 2.1. Study Sample .............................................................................................................7  \nTable 3.1. MAP Growth Default Cut Scores and Associated Margin of Error...............................8  \nTable 3.2. Percentile Ranges Across States ...............................................................................9  \nExecutive Summary  \nThis document presents the default cut scores that can be used by partners without their own linking study to classify students into Below Standards , Proficient, or Advanced performance levels on MAP® Growth™ for reading and mathematics in Grades 3–8. The default cut scores , presented in Table E. 1, were derived from the median Rasch Unit (RIT) cut scores from published NWEA® linking studies across 39 states (Hu, 2021) and their associated percentiles from the 2020 norms (Thum & Kuhfeld, 2020) . They are known as the “default” cut scores because they are automatically applied to score reports when a partner does not have their own linking study between MAP Growth and their summative assessment.  \nTable E.1. MAP Growth Default Cut Scores  \n\n|  | Proficient | Advanced |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| Grade | Median RIT Percentile | Median RIT Percentile |\n\nReading  \n\n| 3 | 201 59 | 214 85 |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| 4 | 208 58 | 220 82 |\n| 5 | 214 57 | 226 83 |\n| 6 | 218 57 | 230 82 |\n| 7 | 221 56 | 236 86 |\n| 8 | 224 56 | 238 83 |\n\n\n| Mathematics\u003Cbr>|  |  |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| 3 | 202 53 | 214 82 |\n| 4 | 213 56 | 226 84 |\n| 5 | 224 62 | 237 86 |\n| 6 | 227 59 | 240 84 |\n| 7 | 232 61 | 246 85 |\n| 8 | 237 63 | 252 86 |\n\nFor many y","cbCaibCIoznRmM5Q","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaibCIoznRmM5Q","pdf",484088,"English","# Executive Summary\n# Introduction\n# Methodology\n# Results\n## Default Cut Scores\n## Variability in Percentiles\n# Conclusion and Discussion\n# References\n# Appendix A: Proficient Percentile Cuts by State—Reading\n# Appendix B: Proficient Percentile Cuts by State—Mathematics\n# Appendix C: Advanced Percentile Cuts by State—Reading\n# Appendix D: Advanced Percentile Cuts by State—Mathematics","[{\"question\":\"What are the default cut scores used for in MAP Growth?\",\"answer\":\"They classify students into Below Standards, Proficient, or Advanced performance levels on MAP Growth for reading and mathematics in Grades 3–8 when a partner does not have its own linking study.\"},{\"question\":\"How were the updated default cut scores derived?\",\"answer\":\"They were derived from the median Rasch Unit (RIT) cut scores from published NWEA linking studies across 39 states and matched to associated percentiles from the 2020 norms.\"},{\"question\":\"Can default cut scores be used to predict performance on summative assessments?\",\"answer\":\"No. The report states default cut scores should not be used to predict student performance on summative assessments, and partner-specific linking study cuts are always preferred.\"}]","Default Cut Scores for MAP Growth Reading and Mathematics Assessments - June 2022 | PDF",1791003159]