Norm shifts can raise achievement percentiles for schools serving struggling students even when RIT gains and projected proficiency do not improve¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · theoretical r2 · q1
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2029: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q1 i? National declines concentrated among lower-achieving students can raise median achievement percentiles and CGPs for schools serving struggling readers even when RIT gains are unchanged or weaker and projected proficiency rates decline. → Hashim 2026

Evidence¶

Hashim 2026¶

Hashim, A. K. (2026). How post-COVID norm shifts change the meaning of MAP Growth metrics for school accountability. NWEA White Paper. https://www.nwea.org/research/publication/how-post%e2%80%91covid-norm-shifts-change-the-meaning-of-map-growth-metrics-for-school-accountability/

q1 · i? · theoretical · r2

The paper's charter/accreditation illustration for reading: a third-grade spring RIT of 180 ranks at the 15th achievement percentile under 2020 norms but the 22nd under 2025 norms. Illustrative, no effect size printed.

"a third-grade spring RIT score of 180 in reading would place at the 15th achievement percentile under prior 2020 norms, but at the 22nd percentile under the 2025 norms."

Hashim 2026 (2)¶

Hashim, A. K. (2026). How post-COVID norm shifts change the meaning of MAP Growth metrics for school accountability. NWEA White Paper. https://www.nwea.org/research/publication/how-post%e2%80%91covid-norm-shifts-change-the-meaning-of-map-growth-metrics-for-school-accountability/

q1 · i? · theoretical · r2

The paper's charter/accreditation illustration for math: a third-grade spring RIT of 188 ranks at the 20th percentile under 2020 norms but the 28th under 2025 norms, reflecting lower-end achievement declines.

"a third-grade spring RIT score of 188 in math would place at the 20th achievement percentile under prior 2020 norms, but at the 28th percentile under 2025 norms."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Under the 2025 norms, higher math growth expectations lower conditional growth percentiles for higher-growth students — related
• Under the 2025 MAP Growth norms, the same reading RIT score can rank higher in achievement percentile due to national declines in achievement — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Norm shifts can change teacher evaluation CGP outcomes independently of instructional quality — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Static percentile screening cut points carried across norm sets can under-identify students who remain below grade level — related
• The published norms allow normative interpretation of both status and fall-to-spring growth, e.g., an Algebra 1 student at the 55th fall percentile has an expected gain of 8 RIT with growth SD of 9, and an 11-RIT gain places the student at the 62nd growth percentile. — related
• Proficiency projections estimate the probability of reaching Meets proficiency on the state test from fall, winter, or spring RIT scores — related
• Post-COVID norm shifts and NWEA's enhanced item selection algorithm change the interpretation of MAP Growth metrics for school accountability — a broader claim this one bears on
• After eight months of eSpark usage in first-grade ELA classrooms, NWEA reading percentile scores showed no pattern of increasing achievement — related
• The 2020 norms report states the MAP Growth scale remains stable while status patterns shifted relative to the 2015 norms — related
• The conditional growth index serves as a descriptive indicator of student learning progress — related