| K-5 uses Eureka math and 6/7/8 Illustrative Math. You can look them up to find the pacing guides. |
How do you think those local norms get all skewed? And then it becomes ever closer to 99th just to get in the lottery pool. A 1 in 10 chance is better than 0 chance, and preppers clog the field. |
oh thanks, this is great. i get it now. |
we are zoned for WJ - the magnet is likely not necessary (according to this board). |
| MAP is a national test and our kids took it at our international school. So its not really focused to MCPS curriculum in particular. |
in grade six they do proofs for congruent triangles. in fourth grade they do areas of squares, rectangles, cubes combined with some algebra. they did lines and line segments in first grade, angles in third etc. |
My kid had 99.999% on their MAP-M and was not picked, whereas their friend with 95% was. Both were in the pool, but it's a lottery. |
It is not the 99th percentile to get in with any local norming. The MCCPTA GEC published them in their Facebook group. |
Where did you get those numbers from? My kid got 270 at the start of 6th and not only is unfamiliar with algebra 2, but certainly doesn’t know all of algebra 1, or likely, any geometry. |
I have a kid at TPMS currently and one before the lottery. The lottery kids are bright and capable of doing the work, but not many are 99% like before. I hope they improve their process to better identify kids who can do well in the program. The lottery seems to have a higher attrition rate than before. |
Ever closer to the 99th. Think through it. The local norms MCPS shared with MCCPTA GEC are from 2-3 years back. There should be some similarity, but anecdotal evidence, here and elsewhere, says the local 85th%ile norm for low-FARMS schools went up. Maybe from 93rd/94th to 96th or something. MCPS isn't sharing the current actuals. |
Are the 4 subscores the same or unbalanced? Are you sure your kid doesn't know any? Basic geometry ramps up through elementary school. Talented kids can work out higher level problems using their intuition, if they have had exposure to the symbols or get word problems. Most of the data&statistics topics can be solved totally intuitively as long as you know arithmetic. The 50% "RIT" standard is 50% of the content of the basic non-honors curriculum, which includes review and respin of earlier year content. Also, due to the "50%" logic, if your kid knows 100% of something and 0% of something else, the scoring algorithm can get confused trying to give a final rating. |
I’ve also had a kids in before and after and I do not share your experience. There doesn’t seem to be a significant difference and my litter kid seems to be scoring much higher on standardized tests (if that’s a reasonable measure) than older sibling. |
That's the nature of an unweighted lottery -- everyone, once in the same pool, has the same chance. 95th may have been good enough to be at or above the locally normed 85th percentile for your kid's friend's school. It's not at all surprising that some with lower scores got in and some with higher scores did not. Whether that's the right thing is another matter. With an exposure based test like MAP, prepping shifts scores of those doing so to the right. The locally normed 85th percentile shifts with them. Where MAP is used as a proxy for ability (a whole other can of worms), a highly able student who does not prep then has a higher chance of being left out of the pool entirely. Not all highly able students are exposed in class (i.e., absent prep) to the material which would tend to produce a 95th or 96th to 99th percentile score. Meanwhile, many less highly able students who do prep achieve in that range. (I'm not saying they would be of low ability, just less so; also making no specific judgement, here, about your kid or their friend.) If the magnet is about past exposure/achievement, that might be fine, but it is supposed to be there to address the needs of the highly able, and the content/pace/teaching approach is geared towards those students. None of that is to say that outside enrichment is bad, in and of itself, or that all those who pursue it are not among the highly able. Just that MCPS should be taking a close look at the characteristics of the metric they have chosen, the intent of its use, and the likely dissonant effect. Side note: while I'm sure you can impute, to a degree, extra decimal places, the percentiles only go up to 99th. Anything above that is reported as...99th. |
On the 6-8 MAP-M, MCPS uses 250 as a benchmark for being Algebra ready. 275 indicates a solid grasp of Algebra. 285 indicates a solid grasp of geometry and 300 for Algebra 2. You see problems involving polynomials and trig in the 290s. The test used for grades 2-5 is different and honestly Khan Academy ceases to function well over about 225. |