Does MAP-M go up to 350?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s much easier to get 300+ once completed Geometry. There is a small cohort taking algebra in 6th grade and geometry in 7th. ~50% scores 300+ in 8th fall map-m.

I've heard many of the students from the wealthier schools take Geometry in 7th. This apparently gives them another advantage.

Enough with the drama. Kids in some DCC schools also take it.

If it isn't clear by now to everyone on this thread, MAP-M is a measure of exposure to mathematical content, not intelligence. Yes, students in a higher level math class will (should) score higher. Yes, students can "prep" (i.e receive math education outside of school). But the score itself does not create some "ranking" for who should be admitted to a magnet program in HS, despite the wishes/beliefs of some folks. Students aren't "numbers" in isolation from other students. The top scoring student in an Algebra 1 class may actually be a stronger math student than a student taking Geometry who has a higher MAP-M score. The score doesn't tell the whole story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s much easier to get 300+ once completed Geometry. There is a small cohort taking algebra in 6th grade and geometry in 7th. ~50% scores 300+ in 8th fall map-m.

I've heard many of the students from the wealthier schools take Geometry in 7th. This apparently gives them another advantage.

Enough with the drama. Kids in some DCC schools also take it.

If it isn't clear by now to everyone on this thread, MAP-M is a measure of exposure to mathematical content, not intelligence. Yes, students in a higher level math class will (should) score higher. Yes, students can "prep" (i.e receive math education outside of school). But the score itself does not create some "ranking" for who should be admitted to a magnet program in HS, despite the wishes/beliefs of some folks. Students aren't "numbers" in isolation from other students. The top scoring student in an Algebra 1 class may actually be a stronger math student than a student taking Geometry who has a higher MAP-M score. The score doesn't tell the whole story.

I'm the PP with 300+ 8th grader kid at TPMS. As far as I know from the "300 club" kids, they are all in the math varsity team since 6th grade, and ranked among the tops last year. That's not easy task if your kids have experienced the TPMS math varsity team. They had weekly competition with HS teams around the country (taking full benefit of the virtual world), and tried their best for each of the test in order to make to the tops. They took the MAP test seriously for the enjoyment of winning their teammates by a few points but they are all good friends. So a higher score for them is mostly for bragging among themselves, little for getting a seat at Blair or RMHS. I don't see any difference for bragging about a higher MAP score versus winning a baseball/swim game for these kids. They are awesome and TPMS provides a healthy environment for the "competition" (thanks to Mrs. M mostly).

I guess my ultimate point that I'm trying to make after reading the above posts is, don't over-interpret the 300+ score, but don't be sour grapes either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s much easier to get 300+ once completed Geometry. There is a small cohort taking algebra in 6th grade and geometry in 7th. ~50% scores 300+ in 8th fall map-m.

I've heard many of the students from the wealthier schools take Geometry in 7th. This apparently gives them another advantage.

Enough with the drama. Kids in some DCC schools also take it.

If it isn't clear by now to everyone on this thread, MAP-M is a measure of exposure to mathematical content, not intelligence. Yes, students in a higher level math class will (should) score higher. Yes, students can "prep" (i.e receive math education outside of school). But the score itself does not create some "ranking" for who should be admitted to a magnet program in HS, despite the wishes/beliefs of some folks. Students aren't "numbers" in isolation from other students. The top scoring student in an Algebra 1 class may actually be a stronger math student than a student taking Geometry who has a higher MAP-M score. The score doesn't tell the whole story.

Yes, in the same way exposing a kid to a sport will help them do well at that sport, but the vast majority will not score 300 even after taking Algebra or Geometry. Exposure is only part of this equation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s much easier to get 300+ once completed Geometry. There is a small cohort taking algebra in 6th grade and geometry in 7th. ~50% scores 300+ in 8th fall map-m.

I've heard many of the students from the wealthier schools take Geometry in 7th. This apparently gives them another advantage.

Enough with the drama. Kids in some DCC schools also take it.

If it isn't clear by now to everyone on this thread, MAP-M is a measure of exposure to mathematical content, not intelligence. Yes, students in a higher level math class will (should) score higher. Yes, students can "prep" (i.e receive math education outside of school). But the score itself does not create some "ranking" for who should be admitted to a magnet program in HS, despite the wishes/beliefs of some folks. Students aren't "numbers" in isolation from other students. The top scoring student in an Algebra 1 class may actually be a stronger math student than a student taking Geometry who has a higher MAP-M score. The score doesn't tell the whole story.

Yes, in the same way exposing a kid to a sport will help them do well at that sport, but the vast majority will not score 300 even after taking Algebra or Geometry. Exposure is only part of this equation.

Of course. What the PP said is absolutely true. Exposure contributes significantly to the MAP M score. My kids have gone to both Takoma and Blair SMACs. And I can do so some math myself. Without knowing basics of algebra and geometry, it is impossible to have 300+ scores. MAP is definitely not an intelligence test. It tests understanding of content.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s much easier to get 300+ once completed Geometry. There is a small cohort taking algebra in 6th grade and geometry in 7th. ~50% scores 300+ in 8th fall map-m.

I've heard many of the students from the wealthier schools take Geometry in 7th. This apparently gives them another advantage.

Enough with the drama. Kids in some DCC schools also take it.

If it isn't clear by now to everyone on this thread, MAP-M is a measure of exposure to mathematical content, not intelligence. Yes, students in a higher level math class will (should) score higher. Yes, students can "prep" (i.e receive math education outside of school). But the score itself does not create some "ranking" for who should be admitted to a magnet program in HS, despite the wishes/beliefs of some folks. Students aren't "numbers" in isolation from other students. The top scoring student in an Algebra 1 class may actually be a stronger math student than a student taking Geometry who has a higher MAP-M score. The score doesn't tell the whole story.

I'm the PP with 300+ 8th grader kid at TPMS. As far as I know from the "300 club" kids, they are all in the math varsity team since 6th grade, and ranked among the tops last year. That's not easy task if your kids have experienced the TPMS math varsity team. They had weekly competition with HS teams around the country (taking full benefit of the virtual world), and tried their best for each of the test in order to make to the tops. They took the MAP test seriously for the enjoyment of winning their teammates by a few points but they are all good friends. So a higher score for them is mostly for bragging among themselves, little for getting a seat at Blair or RMHS. I don't see any difference for bragging about a higher MAP score versus winning a baseball/swim game for these kids. They are awesome and TPMS provides a healthy environment for the "competition" (thanks to Mrs. M mostly).

I guess my ultimate point that I'm trying to make after reading the above posts is, don't over-interpret the 300+ score, but don't be sour grapes either.

So true. Good to see the kids enjoying themselves- which they are. But yeah, you can’t over interpret these scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^Why on earth would anyone inflate their scores on an anonymous board?!? Your skepticism is misplaced.

Additionally, no need to be skeptical, when it is plain to see in black and white in Tables 2-6 that the maximum end of the MAP-Ms are 314 and 324, fall and spring, respectively. And, that was for the 2015-16 school year.

Interesting that 314 for 7th, 324 for 8th, but the highest recorded MAP-M for Spring of 6th was 288. Big jump between 6th and 7th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about MAP-R? same upper limit?

Yes, but a score of 270 is above the 99% for grade 12 to put things in perspective.

Yeah.. many CES kids are well above 270 in 5th grade. That tells you where the rest of the students are on that NWEA scales

[Anonymous]

> Interesting that 314 for 7th, 324 for 8th, but the highest recorded MAP-M for Spring of 6th was 288. Big jump between 6th and 7th.

Based on my kid's score and what questions they remembered but didn't understand (280, and didn't know volume of a cone or sin/cosine), I suspect that jump is kid(s) learning Geometry in summer or fall after 6th grade, and then hitting the soft max score.

See https://www.nwea.org/resource-center/resource/map-growth-rit-reference-charts/

As I read that chart, math MAP-M *content* basically stops at RIT = 250-260, which is high school geometry. Similar to SAT: no Algebra 2, Precalc, or Calculus.

I think the MAP scoring system assigns the score at the RIT level where the student gets 50% correct of the questions at that level, after the "adaptive" process at the beginning of the test finds the "50%" level.

Now, students who know all the algebra and geometry and stats in the content, will get more than 50% correct at the highest level RIT content, so they get even higher scores (like a 2500-level chess player playing 2000-level opponents). They get 260+ scores, perhaps by fitting their percentile to the overall bell curve (which is mean=214-224 std.deviation = 16-19pts, for grades 6-8, nationally.)

https://sites.google.com/view/nweapercentilecalculator

By that guess, the so-called "300 club" in 8th grade is about 4 std.dev above mean, which ks about 99.995%ile nationally, 5/100K, the tier that would be getting sports scholarships to NCAA D1 colleges if they were grade 12 and this was football instead of math

The MAP system has max score of 350, but it's not necessary possible for any student to ever get that score.
tps://nwea.force.com/nweaconnection/s/article/Is-there-a-max-RIT-score-a-student-can-get?language=en_US

I'd guess it requires getting every question right, perhaps at a very young age,
and perhaps for multiple test sessions, if the test's adaptiveness affects the starting difficulty based on previous test sessions.
ht

Remember, NWEA MAP is designed for measuring individual progress ("Growth") toward the goal of college readiness in math knowledge/ability (and language skills). I think 235 is passing "Algebra 1" for MCPS HS diploma, and 260 to 290+ is (maybe?) basic to strong competence in Geometry.

If your kid is growing toward that goal, they are doing well. There is so much to learn that is not even on that test at all, both outside and inside of math. The race is long, and in the end, it's only with yourself. Please be kind to yourself and to each other.

(P.S. Everyone's opinions and feelings about equity and bias and SES and wealth and outside enrichment are valid concerns. But no one benefits from comments triggering fights and factual disputes in tangential topic threads. Please make dedicated threads for political discussions, and link to them from other threads if appropriate, without derailing the main topic of a thread. Thank you.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about MAP-R? same upper limit?

Yes, but a score of 270 is above the 99% for grade 12 to put things in perspective.

Yeah.. many CES kids are well above 270 in 5th grade. That tells you where the rest of the students are on that NWEA scales

Don't elementary and middle schools have different scales?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about MAP-R? same upper limit?

Yes, but a score of 270 is above the 99% for grade 12 to put things in perspective.

Yeah.. many CES kids are well above 270 in 5th grade. That tells you where the rest of the students are on that NWEA scales

Don't elementary and middle schools have different scales?

There is only 1 scale progressive from K to 12

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:> Interesting that 314 for 7th, 324 for 8th, but the highest recorded MAP-M for Spring of 6th was 288. Big jump between 6th and 7th.

Based on my kid's score and what questions they remembered but didn't understand (280, and didn't know volume of a cone or sin/cosine), I suspect that jump is kid(s) learning Geometry in summer or fall after 6th grade, and then hitting the soft max score.

See https://www.nwea.org/resource-center/resource/map-growth-rit-reference-charts/

As I read that chart, math MAP-M *content* basically stops at RIT = 250-260, which is high school geometry. Similar to SAT: no Algebra 2, Precalc, or Calculus.

I think the MAP scoring system assigns the score at the RIT level where the student gets 50% correct of the questions at that level, after the "adaptive" process at the beginning of the test finds the "50%" level.

Now, students who know all the algebra and geometry and stats in the content, will get more than 50% correct at the highest level RIT content, so they get even higher scores (like a 2500-level chess player playing 2000-level opponents). They get 260+ scores, perhaps by fitting their percentile to the overall bell curve (which is mean=214-224 std.deviation = 16-19pts, for grades 6-8, nationally.)

https://sites.google.com/view/nweapercentilecalculator

By that guess, the so-called "300 club" in 8th grade is about 4 std.dev above mean, which ks about 99.995%ile nationally, 5/100K, the tier that would be getting sports scholarships to NCAA D1 colleges if they were grade 12 and this was football instead of math

The MAP system has max score of 350, but it's not necessary possible for any student to ever get that score.
tps://nwea.force.com/nweaconnection/s/article/Is-there-a-max-RIT-score-a-student-can-get?language=en_US

I'd guess it requires getting every question right, perhaps at a very young age,
and perhaps for multiple test sessions, if the test's adaptiveness affects the starting difficulty based on previous test sessions.
ht

Remember, NWEA MAP is designed for measuring individual progress ("Growth") toward the goal of college readiness in math knowledge/ability (and language skills). I think 235 is passing "Algebra 1" for MCPS HS diploma, and 260 to 290+ is (maybe?) basic to strong competence in Geometry.

If your kid is growing toward that goal, they are doing well. There is so much to learn that is not even on that test at all, both outside and inside of math. The race is long, and in the end, it's only with yourself. Please be kind to yourself and to each other.

(P.S. Everyone's opinions and feelings about equity and bias and SES and wealth and outside enrichment are valid concerns. But no one benefits from comments triggering fights and factual disputes in tangential topic threads. Please make dedicated threads for political discussions, and link to them from other threads if appropriate, without derailing the main topic of a thread. Thank you.)

Reasonable advice..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about MAP-R? same upper limit?

Yes, but a score of 270 is above the 99% for grade 12 to put things in perspective.

Yeah.. many CES kids are well above 270 in 5th grade. That tells you where the rest of the students are on that NWEA scales

Don't elementary and middle schools have different scales?

There is only 1 scale progressive from K to 12

But the content tested changes every few grades, so, while there is rough progression from one grade ro another, a difference might be noted at 3rd, 6th & 9th.

The most recent national norms (2020) place any student exceeding 290 in the spring of their Senior year in the 99th %ile.

[Anonymous]

An issue, here, is access to magnet programs. Should MCPS have a means to identify and place a genius who has not been exposed to content (and, as a result, does not score at the highest levels of a highly exposure-influenced test like MAP)? The administration supplies no answer to this question, despite the impact of not doing so likely being highly inequitable on a socio-economic basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An issue, here, is access to magnet programs. Should MCPS have a means to identify and place a genius who has not been exposed to content (and, as a result, does not score at the highest levels of a highly exposure-influenced test like MAP)? The administration supplies no answer to this question, despite the impact of not doing so likely being highly inequitable on a socio-economic basis.

This is exactly the most severe caveat to drop CoGAT test as one of the GT admission criteria. Kids with better socio-economic status and/or opportunities to speed-up in some MSs are given a leg-up in MAP testing. The extremely high MAP score certainly reflects aptitudes to certain extent, 270 - 290 range is not a good differentiator by all means of student's intelligence versus work ethic. Unfortunately, both IQ and work ethic are necessary to survive through the rigorous magnet HS curriculum, as well as lead to the success in the long run.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about MAP-R? same upper limit?

Yes, but a score of 270 is above the 99% for grade 12 to put things in perspective.

Yeah.. many CES kids are well above 270 in 5th grade. That tells you where the rest of the students are on that NWEA scales

Most of those kids will experience a 15-20 point drop at the beginning of the 6th grade when they get the test for older kids.