Predicting Proficiency on the Florida B.E.S.T. End-of-Course (EOC) Assessments - January 2025 NWEA MAP Growth Linking Study Updates

Oct 3, 2026

Report analyzes how NWEA MAP Growth RIT scores can predict student performance levels on Florida Benchmarks for Excellent Student Thinking (B.E.S.T.) End-of-Course (EOC) assessments in Algebra 1 and Geometry. Using Spring 2024 test score data from 5,542 students across 13 Pasco County schools, the study develops RIT cut scores for fall, winter, and spring MAP Growth administrations. Correlations, classification accuracy, and proficiency projections support educator use for identifying students at risk and guiding targeted instruction toward state proficiency standards.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryExam

FormatPDF

Pages17

Reading Time43 min

AccessFree to download

Executive Summary

1. Introduction

1.1 Purpose of the Study

1.2 Assessment Overview

2. Methods

2.1 Data Collection

2.2 Post-Stratification Weighting

2.3 Descriptive Statistics

2.4 MAP Growth Cut Scores Generation

2.5 Classification Accuracy

2.6 Proficiency Projections

3. Results

3.1 Study Sample

3.2 Descriptive Statistics

3.3 MAP Growth Cut Scores

3.4 Classification Accuracy

3.5 Proficiency Projections

References

Predicting Proficiency on the Florida Benchmarks for Excellent Student Thinking (B.E.S.T.) End-of-Course (EOC) Assessments Based on NWEA MAP Growth Scores January 2025 NWEA Psychometrics and Analytics Linking Study Updates | Date | Description | | --- | --- | | 2025-01-22 | Initial study was conducted for Florida B. E.S.T. End-of-Course (EOC) assessments in Algebra 1 and Geometry using Spring 2024 data, incorporating the 2020 MAP Growth norms. | Acknowledgments: This report was made possible with the contributions of Yan Zhou, Ann Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 1 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 4 1.1. Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................... 4 1.2. Assessment Overview.................................................................................................. 4 2. Methods ................................................................................................................................. 5 2.1. Data Collection............................................................................................................. 5 2.2. Post-Stratification Weighting ........................................................................................ 5 2.3. Descriptive Statistics .................................................................................................... 5 2.4. MAP Growth Cut Scores Generation............................................................................ 6 2.5. Classification Accuracy ................................................................................................ 6 2.6. Proficiency Projections ................................................................................................. 7 3. Results ................................................................................................................................... 9 3.1. Study Sample .............................................................................................................. 9 3.2. Descriptive Statistics ...................................................................................................10 3.3. MAP Growth Cut Scores .............................................................................................11 3.4. Classification Accuracy ...............................................................................................11 3.5. Proficiency Projections ................................................................................................12 References ...............................................................................................................................14 List of Tables Table E.1 . MAP Growth RIT Cut Scores for B.E.S.T. EOC Level 3 or higher ............................. 2 Table 2.1. Description of Classification Accuracy Summary Statistics ........................................ 7 Table 3.1. Linking Study Sample Demographics (Unweighted) .................................................. 9 Table 3.2. Linking Study Population Demographics ................................................................... 9 Table 3.3. Linking Study Sample Demographics (Weighted) .....................................................10 Table 3.4. Descriptive Statistics of Test Scores.........................................................................10 Table 3.5. State and RIT Cut Scores for B.E.S.T. Algebra 1 and Geometry ..............................11 Table 3.6. Classification Accuracy Results ................................................................................12 Table 3.7. Proficiency Projections Based on RIT Scores—Algebra 1 ...................

FAQs

What is the purpose of this linking study?

The study creates MAP Growth RIT cut scores that correspond to Florida B.E.S.T. EOC performance levels, enabling prediction of students’ proficiency on state summative assessments.

Which assessments and populations are used to build the projections?

The report links MAP Growth Algebra 1 and Geometry scores with corresponding B.E.S.T. Algebra 1 and Geometry EOC test results from Spring 2024 for 5,542 students across 13 Pasco County schools.

How can educators use the resulting RIT cut scores?

Educators can classify students into performance levels using RIT cut scores, identify students at risk of not meeting state proficiency standards, and provide targeted instruction to improve outcomes.

Oct 3, 2026

Uploaded by RuangKosong