High MAP-M/compacted math eligibility-- how much of it is exposure/supplementation?

[Anonymous]

I have a 3rd grader who does RSM to supplement, but she had above a 210 on the math MAP at the end of second grade before ever she started RSM. We started her at RSM because she really likes math, wasn't being challenged at all in school and asked to do math enrichment, not to make her more advanced.

Prior to RSM, at home we did reinforce math facts over the summer so she didn't get rusty. But we didn't try to teach more advanced content.

[Anonymous]

We didn't do anything formal or organized to get scores in the range. We probably talked a bit more about math at home than some homes, when we were baking or playing board games but that's it.

[Anonymous]

The sad thing about using MAP for placement is that MAP is based on knowledge, not intelligence. If your kid wasn't accelerated informally (by being in a high math group) in 3rd grade, they simply won't recognize concepts needed to score high on the MAP.

This was my kid. One of the youngest in the grade and so a bit less 'ready' in second and third. Mid to low math group. Scored borderline for compacted math on the MAP. And then once in compacted math, she did well in the class and her MAP soared. (Because she was exposed to the material before being tested on it.).

[Anonymous]

My kid has always loved shows like Number Blocks and during the COVID years when we homeschooled for K/1 she loved decomposing and composing numbers. Reading and writing are hard for her, but she loves math. So she goes above and beyond for HW. She loves the repeat I’ve nature of Eureka and acing everything (unlike my older child who was always bored with Eureka).

Kids have different altitudes and interests. I wish McPS ran ELA like Math in grades 4 and 5. Now that she’s a better reader and writer she is bored and not getting any of the promised enrichment.

[Anonymous]

While there are those with more or less innately high Math ability, and while some of these will noodle through some questions without exposure, there are others for whom a lack of exposure, say, to the vocabulary of Math, would make it difficult to have that ability demonstrated on what is largely an exposure-based assessment.

Outside supplememtation for some of these is not the problem. Supplementation for some who may not have that high level of innate ability also is not the problem. (That is, in each case, as long as it isn't forced upon a child.)

Somewhat artificial scarcity, especially in MS & HS, of programs relative to the combined population demonstrating need via achievement and/or ability, with selection criteria having some dependency on prior placement, combined with inadequate paradigms for identification of those with that ability, combined then with differential family ability to achieve supplementation -- now that's a problem.

[Anonymous]

I have one kid that scored 250+ in third grade. No formal supplementation but he did eat up puzzle books, math games, iXL and khan academy on his own.

My other kid had compact math scores above the cutoff with nothing outside school at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The sad thing about using MAP for placement is that MAP is based on knowledge, not intelligence. If your kid wasn't accelerated informally (by being in a high math group) in 3rd grade, they simply won't recognize concepts needed to score high on the MAP.

This was my kid. One of the youngest in the grade and so a bit less 'ready' in second and third. Mid to low math group. Scored borderline for compacted math on the MAP. And then once in compacted math, she did well in the class and her MAP soared. (Because she was exposed to the material before being tested on it.).

Math classes are based on knowledge, not intelligence, so placement should be also.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The sad thing about using MAP for placement is that MAP is based on knowledge, not intelligence. If your kid wasn't accelerated informally (by being in a high math group) in 3rd grade, they simply won't recognize concepts needed to score high on the MAP.

This was my kid. One of the youngest in the grade and so a bit less 'ready' in second and third. Mid to low math group. Scored borderline for compacted math on the MAP. And then once in compacted math, she did well in the class and her MAP soared. (Because she was exposed to the material before being tested on it.).

Math is math. Smart kids can figure out how to solve problems that they have never been taught. MAP is an untimed, adaptive test where smart, interested students can spend as long as they want solving hard problems. This is officially documented by NWEA the creators of MAP.

[Anonymous]

I am a SAHM. I was teaching Math concepts - counting, reverse counting, addition, subtraction, skip counting by grouping, tally marks, sorting, pattern recognition, shapes, puzzles, time...etc to my kids since the time they were toddlers - mainly because I had to keep my kids busy the whole day.

So, even though my kids were at home with me, they were getting full exposure to math. My kids never went to Kumon or any sort of tutoring etc. We used to play "school" at home every evening and we had "homework time" in the evening. I started supplementing in all subjects using curriculum, textbooks, workbooks, websites, toys etc before they were in Kindergarten - so my kids were very advanced (not just a couple grades).

My kids are not geniuses but they are fast learners and they were in a sort of home-made STEM immersion with me. So, they were very advanced and they had no fear of learning new concepts, abstract thinking, pattern recognition in any subject. I am not a STEM student myself - but in the journey to teach my kids, I also went to community college to learn subjects that I had not been educated in in collegd. I pretty much became an expert in K-12 content in most subjects except FL.

I absolutely reject the idea that the smartest kid will learn Math organically without being taught Math concepts. Parents need to educate their children at home in addition to sending them to school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If your kid has or had fairly high MAP-M scores in 3rd grade (let's say 210ish or higher, or whatever the cutoff for compacted math is if you know it/if your kid qualified), did you do any kind of supplementation or otherwise expose them to concepts before they covered them in school? Is it common for kids with no supplementation/extra exposure to still get high scores and qualify for compacted math?

I am trying to wrap my mind around what it takes to score high, but from poking around at practice questions, I am seeing a lot about topics that they don't really cover in school until at least after the winter MAP test and sometimes not in 3rd grade at all, from decimals to fractions to various aspects of geometry. Is the idea that most bright kids can figure these things out on their own? Or are these not actually a big factor in the scoring, so kids who haven't learned these things can still score high? Or are most high-scoring kids getting exposure to this stuff outside of school (whether formal or informal, i.e. parents using teaching moments to talk about fractions and decimals and such as they come up in everyday life)? I'm not necessarily talking about the highly-gifted/super-mathy kids here, just your standard smart kids who will qualify for and succeed in compacted math and the typical honors/moderately accelerated math pathway moving forward.

Thanks for any insight... trying to make sense of to what extent my kid's math scores are telling us about aptitude compared to peers and potential for future math success and growth, vs to what extent it is an exposure issue (we don't supplement at all and aren't great about even the informal "talking about math in everyday life" stuff.)

Is 210 is really a high in 3rd? I have seen much higher scores being tossed around in DCUM. Can someone with knowledge may shed some light on this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your kid has or had fairly high MAP-M scores in 3rd grade (let's say 210ish or higher, or whatever the cutoff for compacted math is if you know it/if your kid qualified), did you do any kind of supplementation or otherwise expose them to concepts before they covered them in school? Is it common for kids with no supplementation/extra exposure to still get high scores and qualify for compacted math?

I am trying to wrap my mind around what it takes to score high, but from poking around at practice questions, I am seeing a lot about topics that they don't really cover in school until at least after the winter MAP test and sometimes not in 3rd grade at all, from decimals to fractions to various aspects of geometry. Is the idea that most bright kids can figure these things out on their own? Or are these not actually a big factor in the scoring, so kids who haven't learned these things can still score high? Or are most high-scoring kids getting exposure to this stuff outside of school (whether formal or informal, i.e. parents using teaching moments to talk about fractions and decimals and such as they come up in everyday life)? I'm not necessarily talking about the highly-gifted/super-mathy kids here, just your standard smart kids who will qualify for and succeed in compacted math and the typical honors/moderately accelerated math pathway moving forward.

Thanks for any insight... trying to make sense of to what extent my kid's math scores are telling us about aptitude compared to peers and potential for future math success and growth, vs to what extent it is an exposure issue (we don't supplement at all and aren't great about even the informal "talking about math in everyday life" stuff.)

Is 210 is really a high in 3rd? I have seen much higher scores being tossed around in DCUM. Can someone with knowledge may shed some light on this?

210 is around the 85th percentile for winter 3rd grade scores, and I think people have said that's around the cutoff for compact math? So not super high, just "standard bright kid capable of handling compact math" level, which is what the question is about.

[Anonymous]

There is a Kumon, RSM, Mathnasium, AoPS, Tutoring Club, Sunshine Acadmemy, Curie, etc. in every town and city around the DMV. Who do you think is filling up all these classes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So just to confirm, for folks saying their kid had no extra exposure/supplementation, there were no math games, workbooks, parental discussions, or other ways they would have been taught about things like fractions, decimals, area, angles, multi-digit multiplication or division, etc, before they came up in school, correct? But they were still able to score above 210ish/above the 85th percentile or so?

Correct, at least for our kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sad thing about using MAP for placement is that MAP is based on knowledge, not intelligence. If your kid wasn't accelerated informally (by being in a high math group) in 3rd grade, they simply won't recognize concepts needed to score high on the MAP.

This was my kid. One of the youngest in the grade and so a bit less 'ready' in second and third. Mid to low math group. Scored borderline for compacted math on the MAP. And then once in compacted math, she did well in the class and her MAP soared. (Because she was exposed to the material before being tested on it.).

Math is math. Smart kids can figure out how to solve problems that they have never been taught. MAP is an untimed, adaptive test where smart, interested students can spend as long as they want solving hard problems. This is officially documented by NWEA the creators of MAP.

Check deeper into the site. Their own evidence says the results are influenced by exposure. Their own guidance says not to use MAP as a gate to GT programming, instead using it to support decisions more principally based on at least one ability-focused metric.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a SAHM. I was teaching Math concepts - counting, reverse counting, addition, subtraction, skip counting by grouping, tally marks, sorting, pattern recognition, shapes, puzzles, time...etc to my kids since the time they were toddlers - mainly because I had to keep my kids busy the whole day.

So, even though my kids were at home with me, they were getting full exposure to math. My kids never went to Kumon or any sort of tutoring etc. We used to play "school" at home every evening and we had "homework time" in the evening. I started supplementing in all subjects using curriculum, textbooks, workbooks, websites, toys etc before they were in Kindergarten - so my kids were very advanced (not just a couple grades).

My kids are not geniuses but they are fast learners and they were in a sort of home-made STEM immersion with me. So, they were very advanced and they had no fear of learning new concepts, abstract thinking, pattern recognition in any subject. I am not a STEM student myself - but in the journey to teach my kids, I also went to community college to learn subjects that I had not been educated in in collegd. I pretty much became an expert in K-12 content in most subjects except FL.

I absolutely reject the idea that the smartest kid will learn Math organically without being taught Math concepts. Parents need to educate their children at home in addition to sending them to school.

Well, it sounds like you are aware your kids aren’t the smartest kids? And if you wanted to prove your worth as a SAHM by doing all of that I guess it’s not bad. But my kids go to school 6.5 or whatever hours a day. They are always ahead based on their natural abilities and my willingness to talk through things they are interested in. But they don’t want to do extra math or reading so I can tell everyone I’m super mom! They want to do playdates and sports and dance and read what they like to read. So I let them.

The older one still tests consistently over 99th percentile and is in compacted math. That’s what the question from OP was. Yes you can probably do enough to get your borderline kid into the program but it really is not every kid who needs that. If my younger one ends up below the cutoff, which is possible, even though their scores are high now, I won’t regret feel any differently.