MAP-M 6+ in 5th grade

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid's score growth has been smooth from ES to MS. Looking at the score history there's no clue where the switch from 2-5 to 6+ was.

Im guessing you didn’t have an outlier kid? Kids scoring in the 270s in the 3-5 version usually see a big drop. Kids scoring in the 240s or below may not.

Mine didn't drop, but does study next-level math over the summer, so maybe that covered the gap.

You had a kid scoring in the 270s in 5th who increased from that in 6th because of studying over the summer?

I can't prove it's "because", but besides that, yes. We've done Beast Academy / AoPS material at home since 2nd grade, including summers.

Spring scores were 240s in 2nd, with ~10pts/yr growth every year 2nd-6th. (Interpolating to estimate the covid-missing Spring 2020 score)

There is some jitter with the Fall and Winter scores, probably because my kid likes testing, and so puzzled and educated-guessed on material not studied yet, and there are multiple choice questions, and the rest is short.

So what were the actual scores end of 5th and beginning of 6?

276 and 282

282 in the 6+ MAP suggests strong knowledge of both algebra 1 and geometry. I don’t buy it.

On MAP 6+ you can restrict the material being tested so it doesn’t cover algebra 1 and geometry. So it’s possible the scores are still for on grade material. For unrestricted MAP 6+ you’ll start hitting algebra 1 questions like slope and intercepts around 220. Around 240 they’ll get questions on quadratic roots, parabolas etc. The NWEA threshold for Algebra readiness is 235, and the one for Geometry is 245.

The way to know what was actually tested is to look at the Learning Continuum report, that will tell you what concepts the student knows at accuracy levels of 75, 50 and 25%.

I find it hilarious when parents show off their kids MAP scores as proof of genius level ability when they have no idea how that testing works. 288 administered to 12th graders is 99 percentile. I’m sure that 6th grader is smart, but chances are he’s not on par with the top students in 12th grade.

Mocking parents for not knowing information that teachers and admins refuse to share, isn't the flex you may think it is.

On math specifically, I do believe there a student who shows mastery of Algebra 1 and Geometry is very high percentile among high school seniors.

The MAP-M median for 12th grade is 233, which is below that "Algebra Readiness" level of 235.

I’m not mocking them, I just found it entertaining. It shows just how some parents are so enamored with their child being an outlier that they’ll hold on to even the slightest piece of information that shows so, even when it goes against common sense.

Not sure why that hit a sore spot with you, perhaps you are the poster that rushed to display the picture with the 288 MAP score. Congratulations to that student, he sounds like a smart kid, but it was a little annoying to see how the other poster expressing doubt was lectured on what it takes to raise smart kids.

We're talking about math curriculum level, not "smart".

In MCPS ,"common sense" is that most students are in fact not making rapid progress through the curriculum. This district flat out dropped material during 2020-2021, because students and teachers were unable to make virtual learning effective. MCPS waiving testing requirements because almost no one passed the tests the county/state administered.

Common sense says that students and parents who picked up the slack at home advanced farther.

If published MAP norms and percentiles aren't real, how should a parent identify the appropriate curriculum level for their child, since apparently exceeding the MAP Readiness scores is not sufficient?

And why does Google search show documents from districts all over the country laying out the qualifications for courses, but MCPS does not provide similar info to students and guardians?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid's score growth has been smooth from ES to MS. Looking at the score history there's no clue where the switch from 2-5 to 6+ was.

Im guessing you didn’t have an outlier kid? Kids scoring in the 270s in the 3-5 version usually see a big drop. Kids scoring in the 240s or below may not.

Mine didn't drop, but does study next-level math over the summer, so maybe that covered the gap.

You had a kid scoring in the 270s in 5th who increased from that in 6th because of studying over the summer?

I can't prove it's "because", but besides that, yes. We've done Beast Academy / AoPS material at home since 2nd grade, including summers.

Spring scores were 240s in 2nd, with ~10pts/yr growth every year 2nd-6th. (Interpolating to estimate the covid-missing Spring 2020 score)

There is some jitter with the Fall and Winter scores, probably because my kid likes testing, and so puzzled and educated-guessed on material not studied yet, and there are multiple choice questions, and the rest is short.

So what were the actual scores end of 5th and beginning of 6?

276 and 282

282 in the 6+ MAP suggests strong knowledge of both algebra 1 and geometry. I don’t buy it.

On MAP 6+ you can restrict the material being tested so it doesn’t cover algebra 1 and geometry. So it’s possible the scores are still for on grade material. For unrestricted MAP 6+ you’ll start hitting algebra 1 questions like slope and intercepts around 220. Around 240 they’ll get questions on quadratic roots, parabolas etc. The NWEA threshold for Algebra readiness is 235, and the one for Geometry is 245.

The way to know what was actually tested is to look at the Learning Continuum report, that will tell you what concepts the student knows at accuracy levels of 75, 50 and 25%.

I find it hilarious when parents show off their kids MAP scores as proof of genius level ability when they have no idea how that testing works. 288 administered to 12th graders is 99 percentile. I’m sure that 6th grader is smart, but chances are he’s not on par with the top students in 12th grade.

Mocking parents for not knowing information that teachers and admins refuse to share, isn't the flex you may think it is.

On math specifically, I do believe there a student who shows mastery of Algebra 1 and Geometry is very high percentile among high school seniors.

The MAP-M median for 12th grade is 233, which is below that "Algebra Readiness" level of 235.

I’m not mocking them, I just found it entertaining. It shows just how some parents are so enamored with their child being an outlier that they’ll hold on to even the slightest piece of information that shows so, even when it goes against common sense.

Not sure why that hit a sore spot with you, perhaps you are the poster that rushed to display the picture with the 288 MAP score. Congratulations to that student, he sounds like a smart kid, but it was a little annoying to see how the other poster expressing doubt was lectured on what it takes to raise smart kids.

We're talking about math curriculum level, not "smart".

In MCPS ,"common sense" is that most students are in fact not making rapid progress through the curriculum. This district flat out dropped material during 2020-2021, because students and teachers were unable to make virtual learning effective. MCPS waiving testing requirements because almost no one passed the tests the county/state administered.

Common sense says that students and parents who picked up the slack at home advanced farther.

If published MAP norms and percentiles aren't real, how should a parent identify the appropriate curriculum level for their child, since apparently exceeding the MAP Readiness scores is not sufficient?

And why does Google search show documents from districts all over the country laying out the qualifications for courses, but MCPS does not provide similar info to students and guardians?

If you are asking for outside of school curriculum, most of them have a placement or diagnostic test so that should be a good guide.

The MAP scores are real, but who knows how the district uses the testing features, there’s not enough detail in the report to know.

Let’s be real here, if your 6th grade kid got a 288 on MAP, you can’t possibly imagine he’s on the same level with the top 1% of the 12th graders, who btw usually take AP Calculus BC and pass the AP exam with a 5. If you actually believe that, I suggest you enroll him in Calculus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid's score growth has been smooth from ES to MS. Looking at the score history there's no clue where the switch from 2-5 to 6+ was.

Im guessing you didn’t have an outlier kid? Kids scoring in the 270s in the 3-5 version usually see a big drop. Kids scoring in the 240s or below may not.

Mine didn't drop, but does study next-level math over the summer, so maybe that covered the gap.

You had a kid scoring in the 270s in 5th who increased from that in 6th because of studying over the summer?

I can't prove it's "because", but besides that, yes. We've done Beast Academy / AoPS material at home since 2nd grade, including summers.

Spring scores were 240s in 2nd, with ~10pts/yr growth every year 2nd-6th. (Interpolating to estimate the covid-missing Spring 2020 score)

There is some jitter with the Fall and Winter scores, probably because my kid likes testing, and so puzzled and educated-guessed on material not studied yet, and there are multiple choice questions, and the rest is short.

So what were the actual scores end of 5th and beginning of 6?

276 and 282

282 in the 6+ MAP suggests strong knowledge of both algebra 1 and geometry. I don’t buy it.

On MAP 6+ you can restrict the material being tested so it doesn’t cover algebra 1 and geometry. So it’s possible the scores are still for on grade material. For unrestricted MAP 6+ you’ll start hitting algebra 1 questions like slope and intercepts around 220. Around 240 they’ll get questions on quadratic roots, parabolas etc. The NWEA threshold for Algebra readiness is 235, and the one for Geometry is 245.

The way to know what was actually tested is to look at the Learning Continuum report, that will tell you what concepts the student knows at accuracy levels of 75, 50 and 25%.

I find it hilarious when parents show off their kids MAP scores as proof of genius level ability when they have no idea how that testing works. 288 administered to 12th graders is 99 percentile. I’m sure that 6th grader is smart, but chances are he’s not on par with the top students in 12th grade.

Mocking parents for not knowing information that teachers and admins refuse to share, isn't the flex you may think it is.

On math specifically, I do believe there a student who shows mastery of Algebra 1 and Geometry is very high percentile among high school seniors.

The MAP-M median for 12th grade is 233, which is below that "Algebra Readiness" level of 235.

I’m not mocking them, I just found it entertaining. It shows just how some parents are so enamored with their child being an outlier that they’ll hold on to even the slightest piece of information that shows so, even when it goes against common sense.

Not sure why that hit a sore spot with you, perhaps you are the poster that rushed to display the picture with the 288 MAP score. Congratulations to that student, he sounds like a smart kid, but it was a little annoying to see how the other poster expressing doubt was lectured on what it takes to raise smart kids.

We're talking about math curriculum level, not "smart".

In MCPS ,"common sense" is that most students are in fact not making rapid progress through the curriculum. This district flat out dropped material during 2020-2021, because students and teachers were unable to make virtual learning effective. MCPS waiving testing requirements because almost no one passed the tests the county/state administered.

Common sense says that students and parents who picked up the slack at home advanced farther.

If published MAP norms and percentiles aren't real, how should a parent identify the appropriate curriculum level for their child, since apparently exceeding the MAP Readiness scores is not sufficient?

And why does Google search show documents from districts all over the country laying out the qualifications for courses, but MCPS does not provide similar info to students and guardians?

If you are asking for outside of school curriculum, most of them have a placement or diagnostic test so that should be a good guide.

The MAP scores are real, but who knows how the district uses the testing features, there’s not enough detail in the report to know.

Let’s be real here, if your 6th grade kid got a 288 on MAP, you can’t possibly imagine he’s on the same level with the top 1% of the 12th graders, who btw usually take AP Calculus BC and pass the AP exam with a 5. If you actually believe that, I suggest you enroll him in Calculus.

12th graders take a different test than middle schoolers. The high-school test covers more material. Comparing similar scores on different tests isn't meaningful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid's score growth has been smooth from ES to MS. Looking at the score history there's no clue where the switch from 2-5 to 6+ was.

Im guessing you didn’t have an outlier kid? Kids scoring in the 270s in the 3-5 version usually see a big drop. Kids scoring in the 240s or below may not.

Mine didn't drop, but does study next-level math over the summer, so maybe that covered the gap.

You had a kid scoring in the 270s in 5th who increased from that in 6th because of studying over the summer?

I can't prove it's "because", but besides that, yes. We've done Beast Academy / AoPS material at home since 2nd grade, including summers.

Spring scores were 240s in 2nd, with ~10pts/yr growth every year 2nd-6th. (Interpolating to estimate the covid-missing Spring 2020 score)

There is some jitter with the Fall and Winter scores, probably because my kid likes testing, and so puzzled and educated-guessed on material not studied yet, and there are multiple choice questions, and the rest is short.

So what were the actual scores end of 5th and beginning of 6?

276 and 282

282 in the 6+ MAP suggests strong knowledge of both algebra 1 and geometry. I don’t buy it.

On MAP 6+ you can restrict the material being tested so it doesn’t cover algebra 1 and geometry. So it’s possible the scores are still for on grade material. For unrestricted MAP 6+ you’ll start hitting algebra 1 questions like slope and intercepts around 220. Around 240 they’ll get questions on quadratic roots, parabolas etc. The NWEA threshold for Algebra readiness is 235, and the one for Geometry is 245.

The way to know what was actually tested is to look at the Learning Continuum report, that will tell you what concepts the student knows at accuracy levels of 75, 50 and 25%.

I find it hilarious when parents show off their kids MAP scores as proof of genius level ability when they have no idea how that testing works. 288 administered to 12th graders is 99 percentile. I’m sure that 6th grader is smart, but chances are he’s not on par with the top students in 12th grade.

Mocking parents for not knowing information that teachers and admins refuse to share, isn't the flex you may think it is.

On math specifically, I do believe there a student who shows mastery of Algebra 1 and Geometry is very high percentile among high school seniors.

The MAP-M median for 12th grade is 233, which is below that "Algebra Readiness" level of 235.

I’m not mocking them, I just found it entertaining. It shows just how some parents are so enamored with their child being an outlier that they’ll hold on to even the slightest piece of information that shows so, even when it goes against common sense.

Not sure why that hit a sore spot with you, perhaps you are the poster that rushed to display the picture with the 288 MAP score. Congratulations to that student, he sounds like a smart kid, but it was a little annoying to see how the other poster expressing doubt was lectured on what it takes to raise smart kids.

We're talking about math curriculum level, not "smart".

In MCPS ,"common sense" is that most students are in fact not making rapid progress through the curriculum. This district flat out dropped material during 2020-2021, because students and teachers were unable to make virtual learning effective. MCPS waiving testing requirements because almost no one passed the tests the county/state administered.

Common sense says that students and parents who picked up the slack at home advanced farther.

If published MAP norms and percentiles aren't real, how should a parent identify the appropriate curriculum level for their child, since apparently exceeding the MAP Readiness scores is not sufficient?

And why does Google search show documents from districts all over the country laying out the qualifications for courses, but MCPS does not provide similar info to students and guardians?

If you are asking for outside of school curriculum, most of them have a placement or diagnostic test so that should be a good guide.

The MAP scores are real, but who knows how the district uses the testing features, there’s not enough detail in the report to know.

Let’s be real here, if your 6th grade kid got a 288 on MAP, you can’t possibly imagine he’s on the same level with the top 1% of the 12th graders, who btw usually take AP Calculus BC and pass the AP exam with a 5. If you actually believe that, I suggest you enroll him in Calculus.

12th graders take a different test than middle schoolers. The high-school test covers more material. Comparing similar scores on different tests isn't meaningful.

MAP 6+ is administered 6 through 12.

[Anonymous]

This is similar to testing at my kid’s school, not MCPS. My 4th grader got testing results back and they list what is called grade equivalent, which was 12.9, equivalent to 99% for 12th grade. I asked if he got exponents, trigonometry, logarithms etc and he was only tested on fractions. Instead of taking this as a sure sign that my child is a genius, I was curious enough to email the testing company for the test manual to read up on conversion scales and testing methodology. I know, I’m not proud of it, but I did it anyways, lol. I’ll always be a nerd.

It turns out the answers to the questions the 4th grader received is compared to what a 12 grader would answer to the same questions, which is how they get equivalent scores. The test is the same by name for both, but you’d have to dig deep to realize it’s not exactly the same test.

MAP6+ can test out of grade, but it really depends how it is set up in the version administered by MCPS. That’s why the parents super proud of their 99.999 percentile child should take that score with a grain of salt, unless they know exactly what testing their child did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid's score growth has been smooth from ES to MS. Looking at the score history there's no clue where the switch from 2-5 to 6+ was.

Im guessing you didn’t have an outlier kid? Kids scoring in the 270s in the 3-5 version usually see a big drop. Kids scoring in the 240s or below may not.

Mine didn't drop, but does study next-level math over the summer, so maybe that covered the gap.

You had a kid scoring in the 270s in 5th who increased from that in 6th because of studying over the summer?

I can't prove it's "because", but besides that, yes. We've done Beast Academy / AoPS material at home since 2nd grade, including summers.

Spring scores were 240s in 2nd, with ~10pts/yr growth every year 2nd-6th. (Interpolating to estimate the covid-missing Spring 2020 score)

There is some jitter with the Fall and Winter scores, probably because my kid likes testing, and so puzzled and educated-guessed on material not studied yet, and there are multiple choice questions, and the rest is short.

So what were the actual scores end of 5th and beginning of 6?

276 and 282

282 in the 6+ MAP suggests strong knowledge of both algebra 1 and geometry. I don’t buy it.

On MAP 6+ you can restrict the material being tested so it doesn’t cover algebra 1 and geometry. So it’s possible the scores are still for on grade material. For unrestricted MAP 6+ you’ll start hitting algebra 1 questions like slope and intercepts around 220. Around 240 they’ll get questions on quadratic roots, parabolas etc. The NWEA threshold for Algebra readiness is 235, and the one for Geometry is 245.

The way to know what was actually tested is to look at the Learning Continuum report, that will tell you what concepts the student knows at accuracy levels of 75, 50 and 25%.

I find it hilarious when parents show off their kids MAP scores as proof of genius level ability when they have no idea how that testing works. 288 administered to 12th graders is 99 percentile. I’m sure that 6th grader is smart, but chances are he’s not on par with the top students in 12th grade.

Mocking parents for not knowing information that teachers and admins refuse to share, isn't the flex you may think it is.

On math specifically, I do believe there a student who shows mastery of Algebra 1 and Geometry is very high percentile among high school seniors.

The MAP-M median for 12th grade is 233, which is below that "Algebra Readiness" level of 235.

I’m not mocking them, I just found it entertaining. It shows just how some parents are so enamored with their child being an outlier that they’ll hold on to even the slightest piece of information that shows so, even when it goes against common sense.

Not sure why that hit a sore spot with you, perhaps you are the poster that rushed to display the picture with the 288 MAP score. Congratulations to that student, he sounds like a smart kid, but it was a little annoying to see how the other poster expressing doubt was lectured on what it takes to raise smart kids.

We're talking about math curriculum level, not "smart".

In MCPS ,"common sense" is that most students are in fact not making rapid progress through the curriculum. This district flat out dropped material during 2020-2021, because students and teachers were unable to make virtual learning effective. MCPS waiving testing requirements because almost no one passed the tests the county/state administered.

Common sense says that students and parents who picked up the slack at home advanced farther.

If published MAP norms and percentiles aren't real, how should a parent identify the appropriate curriculum level for their child, since apparently exceeding the MAP Readiness scores is not sufficient?

And why does Google search show documents from districts all over the country laying out the qualifications for courses, but MCPS does not provide similar info to students and guardians?

If you are asking for outside of school curriculum, most of them have a placement or diagnostic test so that should be a good guide.

The MAP scores are real, but who knows how the district uses the testing features, there’s not enough detail in the report to know.

Let’s be real here, if your 6th grade kid got a 288 on MAP, you can’t possibly imagine he’s on the same level with the top 1% of the 12th graders, who btw usually take AP Calculus BC and pass the AP exam with a 5. If you actually believe that, I suggest you enroll him in Calculus.

12th graders take a different test than middle schoolers. The high-school test covers more material. Comparing similar scores on different tests isn't meaningful.

MAP 6+ is administered 6 through 12.

It's an adaptive test that is set for the child's grade and math level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is run by ineffective and unsupportive leaders who don’t actual care about the schools or kids. Our school fought back when the memo arrived and yet no one at the top cared or listened. We are told to follow orders even though the decision is not good for kids. It’s awful and parents should be reaching out to the math dept and directors. They don’t listen to teachers.

Why would the people at the top even think this was helpful? Could this provide a better indication of who is ready for Algebra in 6th than the current methods which seem to be up to each school are inconsistent?

You didn't hear this from me but all the noise about the WPS offering Algebra in 6th to students has raised equity concerns among the top brass. Apparently, the first step in addressing it is to collect accurate metrics by using the 6th-grade MAP-M at the end of 5th.

It all makes sense now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is run by ineffective and unsupportive leaders who don’t actual care about the schools or kids. Our school fought back when the memo arrived and yet no one at the top cared or listened. We are told to follow orders even though the decision is not good for kids. It’s awful and parents should be reaching out to the math dept and directors. They don’t listen to teachers.

Why would the people at the top even think this was helpful? Could this provide a better indication of who is ready for Algebra in 6th than the current methods which seem to be up to each school are inconsistent?

You didn't hear this from me but all the noise about the WPS offering Algebra in 6th to students has raised equity concerns among the top brass. Apparently, the first step in addressing it is to collect accurate metrics by using the 6th-grade MAP-M at the end of 5th.

It all makes sense now.

Except that the test, or nearly any single-point litmus, presents high statistical variability versus a student's achievement/capability, and the associated metrics collected are unsuitable for MCPS's use for individual placement. At least unsuitable in the way MCPS employs them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is run by ineffective and unsupportive leaders who don’t actual care about the schools or kids. Our school fought back when the memo arrived and yet no one at the top cared or listened. We are told to follow orders even though the decision is not good for kids. It’s awful and parents should be reaching out to the math dept and directors. They don’t listen to teachers.

Why would the people at the top even think this was helpful? Could this provide a better indication of who is ready for Algebra in 6th than the current methods which seem to be up to each school are inconsistent?

You didn't hear this from me but all the noise about the WPS offering Algebra in 6th to students has raised equity concerns among the top brass. Apparently, the first step in addressing it is to collect accurate metrics by using the 6th-grade MAP-M at the end of 5th.

It all makes sense now.

Except that the test, or nearly any single-point litmus, presents high statistical variability versus a student's achievement/capability, and the associated metrics collected are unsuitable for MCPS's use for individual placement. At least unsuitable in the way MCPS employs them.

In what unsuitable way does MCPS use them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is run by ineffective and unsupportive leaders who don’t actual care about the schools or kids. Our school fought back when the memo arrived and yet no one at the top cared or listened. We are told to follow orders even though the decision is not good for kids. It’s awful and parents should be reaching out to the math dept and directors. They don’t listen to teachers.

Why would the people at the top even think this was helpful? Could this provide a better indication of who is ready for Algebra in 6th than the current methods which seem to be up to each school are inconsistent?

You didn't hear this from me but all the noise about the WPS offering Algebra in 6th to students has raised equity concerns among the top brass. Apparently, the first step in addressing it is to collect accurate metrics by using the 6th-grade MAP-M at the end of 5th.

It all makes sense now.

Except that the test, or nearly any single-point litmus, presents high statistical variability versus a student's achievement/capability, and the associated metrics collected are unsuitable for MCPS's use for individual placement. At least unsuitable in the way MCPS employs them.

In what unsuitable way does MCPS use them?

It isn't. They're just spouting gibberish. The MAP-M results are on point for placement but are one of several factors to consider.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is run by ineffective and unsupportive leaders who don’t actual care about the schools or kids. Our school fought back when the memo arrived and yet no one at the top cared or listened. We are told to follow orders even though the decision is not good for kids. It’s awful and parents should be reaching out to the math dept and directors. They don’t listen to teachers.

Why would the people at the top even think this was helpful? Could this provide a better indication of who is ready for Algebra in 6th than the current methods which seem to be up to each school are inconsistent?

You didn't hear this from me but all the noise about the WPS offering Algebra in 6th to students has raised equity concerns among the top brass. Apparently, the first step in addressing it is to collect accurate metrics by using the 6th-grade MAP-M at the end of 5th.

It all makes sense now.

Except that the test, or nearly any single-point litmus, presents high statistical variability versus a student's achievement/capability, and the associated metrics collected are unsuitable for MCPS's use for individual placement. At least unsuitable in the way MCPS employs them.

In what unsuitable way does MCPS use them?

It isn't. They're just spouting gibberish. The MAP-M results are on point for placement but are one of several factors to consider.

Check your logic. There is a litmus associated with the single score. Score lower (locally normed) on that one test and you are out. There are other factors that also could exclude you, but none of those would put you back in if, say, you missed the MAP-M litmus by a hair on a bad day, but had all the other qualifications with flying colors. There's no sliding scale/heuristic. Not to mention the lack of ability-related testing (e.g., CogAT or the like) to evidence those who would be great for advanced programs but just not already exposed to material (i.e., without a home school cohort that would facilitate such teaching, and without at-home or private tutoring).

To the prior poster, a single test score of this type icarries far too much statistical uncertainty to be relied upon as a single excluding litmus. It's not what the test was designed for -- check back a few pages if you need a fuller explanation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is run by ineffective and unsupportive leaders who don’t actual care about the schools or kids. Our school fought back when the memo arrived and yet no one at the top cared or listened. We are told to follow orders even though the decision is not good for kids. It’s awful and parents should be reaching out to the math dept and directors. They don’t listen to teachers.

Why would the people at the top even think this was helpful? Could this provide a better indication of who is ready for Algebra in 6th than the current methods which seem to be up to each school are inconsistent?

You didn't hear this from me but all the noise about the WPS offering Algebra in 6th to students has raised equity concerns among the top brass. Apparently, the first step in addressing it is to collect accurate metrics by using the 6th-grade MAP-M at the end of 5th.

It all makes sense now.

Except that the test, or nearly any single-point litmus, presents high statistical variability versus a student's achievement/capability, and the associated metrics collected are unsuitable for MCPS's use for individual placement. At least unsuitable in the way MCPS employs them.

In what unsuitable way does MCPS use them?

It isn't. They're just spouting gibberish. The MAP-M results are on point for placement but are one of several factors to consider.

Yep it's nonsense. They just want to support a false narrative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is run by ineffective and unsupportive leaders who don’t actual care about the schools or kids. Our school fought back when the memo arrived and yet no one at the top cared or listened. We are told to follow orders even though the decision is not good for kids. It’s awful and parents should be reaching out to the math dept and directors. They don’t listen to teachers.

Why would the people at the top even think this was helpful? Could this provide a better indication of who is ready for Algebra in 6th than the current methods which seem to be up to each school are inconsistent?

You didn't hear this from me but all the noise about the WPS offering Algebra in 6th to students has raised equity concerns among the top brass. Apparently, the first step in addressing it is to collect accurate metrics by using the 6th-grade MAP-M at the end of 5th.

It all makes sense now.

Except that the test, or nearly any single-point litmus, presents high statistical variability versus a student's achievement/capability, and the associated metrics collected are unsuitable for MCPS's use for individual placement. At least unsuitable in the way MCPS employs them.

In what unsuitable way does MCPS use them?

It isn't. They're just spouting gibberish. The MAP-M results are on point for placement but are one of several factors to consider.

Yep it's nonsense. They just want to support a false narrative.

Yes, it's not surprising that misuse/ misunderstanding of data and nonsensical non-responses go hand in hand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid's score growth has been smooth from ES to MS. Looking at the score history there's no clue where the switch from 2-5 to 6+ was.

Im guessing you didn’t have an outlier kid? Kids scoring in the 270s in the 3-5 version usually see a big drop. Kids scoring in the 240s or below may not.

Mine didn't drop, but does study next-level math over the summer, so maybe that covered the gap.

You had a kid scoring in the 270s in 5th who increased from that in 6th because of studying over the summer?

I can't prove it's "because", but besides that, yes. We've done Beast Academy / AoPS material at home since 2nd grade, including summers.

Spring scores were 240s in 2nd, with ~10pts/yr growth every year 2nd-6th. (Interpolating to estimate the covid-missing Spring 2020 score)

There is some jitter with the Fall and Winter scores, probably because my kid likes testing, and so puzzled and educated-guessed on material not studied yet, and there are multiple choice questions, and the rest is short.

So what were the actual scores end of 5th and beginning of 6?

276 and 282

282 in the 6+ MAP suggests strong knowledge of both algebra 1 and geometry. I don’t buy it.

On MAP 6+ you can restrict the material being tested so it doesn’t cover algebra 1 and geometry. So it’s possible the scores are still for on grade material. For unrestricted MAP 6+ you’ll start hitting algebra 1 questions like slope and intercepts around 220. Around 240 they’ll get questions on quadratic roots, parabolas etc. The NWEA threshold for Algebra readiness is 235, and the one for Geometry is 245.

The way to know what was actually tested is to look at the Learning Continuum report, that will tell you what concepts the student knows at accuracy levels of 75, 50 and 25%.

I find it hilarious when parents show off their kids MAP scores as proof of genius level ability when they have no idea how that testing works. 288 administered to 12th graders is 99 percentile. I’m sure that 6th grader is smart, but chances are he’s not on par with the top students in 12th grade.

Mocking parents for not knowing information that teachers and admins refuse to share, isn't the flex you may think it is.

On math specifically, I do believe there a student who shows mastery of Algebra 1 and Geometry is very high percentile among high school seniors.

The MAP-M median for 12th grade is 233, which is below that "Algebra Readiness" level of 235.

I’m not mocking them, I just found it entertaining. It shows just how some parents are so enamored with their child being an outlier that they’ll hold on to even the slightest piece of information that shows so, even when it goes against common sense.

Not sure why that hit a sore spot with you, perhaps you are the poster that rushed to display the picture with the 288 MAP score. Congratulations to that student, he sounds like a smart kid, but it was a little annoying to see how the other poster expressing doubt was lectured on what it takes to raise smart kids.

We're talking about math curriculum level, not "smart".

In MCPS ,"common sense" is that most students are in fact not making rapid progress through the curriculum. This district flat out dropped material during 2020-2021, because students and teachers were unable to make virtual learning effective. MCPS waiving testing requirements because almost no one passed the tests the county/state administered.

Common sense says that students and parents who picked up the slack at home advanced farther.

If published MAP norms and percentiles aren't real, how should a parent identify the appropriate curriculum level for their child, since apparently exceeding the MAP Readiness scores is not sufficient?

And why does Google search show documents from districts all over the country laying out the qualifications for courses, but MCPS does not provide similar info to students and guardians?

If you are asking for outside of school curriculum, most of them have a placement or diagnostic test so that should be a good guide.

The MAP scores are real, but who knows how the district uses the testing features, there’s not enough detail in the report to know.

Let’s be real here, if your 6th grade kid got a 288 on MAP, you can’t possibly imagine he’s on the same level with the top 1% of the 12th graders, who btw usually take AP Calculus BC and pass the AP exam with a 5. If you actually believe that, I suggest you enroll him in Calculus.

12th graders take a different test than middle schoolers. The high-school test covers more material. Comparing similar scores on different tests isn't meaningful.

MAP 6+ is administered 6 through 12.

It's an adaptive test that is set for the child's grade and math level.

Adaptive doesn't mean that that different grades/levels get the same score for different absolute performance, like getting B's every year or A's every year. MAP expects students to grow their score every year, not maintain a score that is meant relative to trade.

245 is labelled "Geometry readiness", regardless of student's grade level. That's 67%ile for 12th grade. Are those 67% of seniors geometry ready or not? What were their scores in the year they started geometry?

If a student Larlo is in Calculus but has flaky performance on all the material, and another student Larla has strong performance but only in Geometry class, they might have similar MAP score. What class does each student a good fit for? Should Larlo repeat the precious courses? Should Larla advance to a higher course?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid's score growth has been smooth from ES to MS. Looking at the score history there's no clue where the switch from 2-5 to 6+ was.

Im guessing you didn’t have an outlier kid? Kids scoring in the 270s in the 3-5 version usually see a big drop. Kids scoring in the 240s or below may not.

Mine didn't drop, but does study next-level math over the summer, so maybe that covered the gap.

You had a kid scoring in the 270s in 5th who increased from that in 6th because of studying over the summer?

I can't prove it's "because", but besides that, yes. We've done Beast Academy / AoPS material at home since 2nd grade, including summers.

Spring scores were 240s in 2nd, with ~10pts/yr growth every year 2nd-6th. (Interpolating to estimate the covid-missing Spring 2020 score)

There is some jitter with the Fall and Winter scores, probably because my kid likes testing, and so puzzled and educated-guessed on material not studied yet, and there are multiple choice questions, and the rest is short.

So what were the actual scores end of 5th and beginning of 6?

276 and 282

282 in the 6+ MAP suggests strong knowledge of both algebra 1 and geometry. I don’t buy it.

On MAP 6+ you can restrict the material being tested so it doesn’t cover algebra 1 and geometry. So it’s possible the scores are still for on grade material. For unrestricted MAP 6+ you’ll start hitting algebra 1 questions like slope and intercepts around 220. Around 240 they’ll get questions on quadratic roots, parabolas etc. The NWEA threshold for Algebra readiness is 235, and the one for Geometry is 245.

The way to know what was actually tested is to look at the Learning Continuum report, that will tell you what concepts the student knows at accuracy levels of 75, 50 and 25%.

I find it hilarious when parents show off their kids MAP scores as proof of genius level ability when they have no idea how that testing works. 288 administered to 12th graders is 99 percentile. I’m sure that 6th grader is smart, but chances are he’s not on par with the top students in 12th grade.

Mocking parents for not knowing information that teachers and admins refuse to share, isn't the flex you may think it is.

On math specifically, I do believe there a student who shows mastery of Algebra 1 and Geometry is very high percentile among high school seniors.

The MAP-M median for 12th grade is 233, which is below that "Algebra Readiness" level of 235.

I’m not mocking them, I just found it entertaining. It shows just how some parents are so enamored with their child being an outlier that they’ll hold on to even the slightest piece of information that shows so, even when it goes against common sense.

Not sure why that hit a sore spot with you, perhaps you are the poster that rushed to display the picture with the 288 MAP score. Congratulations to that student, he sounds like a smart kid, but it was a little annoying to see how the other poster expressing doubt was lectured on what it takes to raise smart kids.

We're talking about math curriculum level, not "smart".

In MCPS ,"common sense" is that most students are in fact not making rapid progress through the curriculum. This district flat out dropped material during 2020-2021, because students and teachers were unable to make virtual learning effective. MCPS waiving testing requirements because almost no one passed the tests the county/state administered.

Common sense says that students and parents who picked up the slack at home advanced farther.

If published MAP norms and percentiles aren't real, how should a parent identify the appropriate curriculum level for their child, since apparently exceeding the MAP Readiness scores is not sufficient?

And why does Google search show documents from districts all over the country laying out the qualifications for courses, but MCPS does not provide similar info to students and guardians?

If you are asking for outside of school curriculum, most of them have a placement or diagnostic test so that should be a good guide.

The MAP scores are real, but who knows how the district uses the testing features, there’s not enough detail in the report to know.

Let’s be real here, if your 6th grade kid got a 288 on MAP, you can’t possibly imagine he’s on the same level with the top 1% of the 12th graders, who btw usually take AP Calculus BC and pass the AP exam with a 5. If you actually believe that, I suggest you enroll him in Calculus.

12th graders take a different test than middle schoolers. The high-school test covers more material. Comparing similar scores on different tests isn't meaningful.

MAP 6+ is administered 6 through 12.

It's an adaptive test that is set for the child's grade and math level.

Adaptive doesn't mean that that different grades/levels get the same score for different absolute performance, like getting B's every year or A's every year. MAP expects students to grow their score every year, not maintain a score that is meant relative to trade.

245 is labelled "Geometry readiness", regardless of student's grade level. That's 67%ile for 12th grade. Are those 67% of seniors geometry ready or not? What were their scores in the year they started geometry?

If a student Larlo is in Calculus but has flaky performance on all the material, and another student Larla has strong performance but only in Geometry class, they might have similar MAP score. What class does each student a good fit for? Should Larlo repeat the precious courses? Should Larla advance to a higher course?

Sure