I see that NWEA has decided to get rid of the class view on the learning continuum. I would love to give some feedback that I think this removal is a mistake. I have read your rationale as to why the report was changed and I wanted to express my disappointment with taking away the class view and showing which students fall within certain skills or standards on the learning continuum. I do feel it is part of data informed and effective best practices as long as it is not the ONLY data point considered. The rationale that teachers were using it as thier only means to teach is nonsense. I have yet to find a teacher that looks at just one standardized data point to inform ALL classroom instruction. Did you ask teachers about this shift to make a data informed decision yourselves?

As an instructional coach that works with all teachers in my school the learning continuum was an ENTRY point that we used for small group instruction. It was one of the data points that we used in conjunction with other student evidence collected in the classroom to allow us to plan small group instruction. Now teachers will have to do that all by hand. The beauty of the learning continuum for a secondary education teacher, that teaches 100+ students, was that it provided us a place to look and question if we see any gaps in learning and a starting place to investigate with students.

I would love it if the company would re-consider adding that feature back into the learning continuum. Without that feature MAP is good for individual students, but not to really dig into understanding groups of students in your class other than at the surface level. I am not sure the district will continue to use this product as the data it provides now is a simple surface level dig into classroom performance, which we can get with IAR results (our state test).

Thanks for taking the time to read and consider my feedback on behalf of the junior high teachers in LaGrange School District 102.

-Samantha Siegfried