You can absolutely get to 85%ile just with school curriculum and no supplementation.

But it's so sad to not give a kid a chance to approach their potential.

If you "HAVE" to to prepare the child; iXL might be a good resource; gives exposure to upper grade classes as the child makes progress.

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?

Answer a question or show them how to do something because it comes up naturally or in some game, sure. Go out of the way to teach them math concepts they haven’t asked about them or asked for more advance material, No. Like a PP said, some kids brains are just able to figure out the next step or creative ways to do problems. If that’s not your kid it’s fine. There is no need to rush math. Better to get a solid foundation. There’s way too many kids struggling in or immediately after compacted math or having to be tutored.

It's a mix OP. There are some kids whose parents supplement which is great. I wish I had a kid who would do that. There are others who use creative logic as one PP put it to solve problems.

I hate the people on here who judge and look down on parents who supplement. They get Johnny private baseball coaches but somehow that immigrant parent who t akes their kid to a math class on the weekend is somehow a striver. Give me a break.

First, MAP is a dynamic test, so it favors kids who push and use creative logic to answer questions they aren’t familiar with. If you skip or answer new questions incorrectly, your score will not advance.

Both of my kids score in the 99th percentile on the MAP M, so they are regularly getting questions on math concepts way ahead of their classmates within the first few questions each time.

One kid is energized by this and went out of her way to learn advanced math on her own using workbooks and games supplied by her teachers. She wanted to push herself and she did. This kid is motivated and a very hard worker.

The other kid is just really, really intelligent in ways I don’t fully comprehend. Does not get extra work or enrichment outside of school, but her brain just sees math and logic in a different way, so she’s able to work through questions on concepts she is unfamiliar with. This kid is just gifted.

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?

A parental discussion about multi-digit division is probably bottom of my list for things to do with the kid.

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?

No, some are saying no exposure, some are saying yes. We did workbooks, apps, etc. No formal tutoring till MS.

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?

How would you know this OP? No one collects data on this--it's all anecdotal. Do what is best for your kid.

Anonymous wrote:My kid has above 240 at MAP math as a 3rd grader, and we don't do any enrichment/supplement. He is probably gifted in math on some levels (not genius) and he figures out many math logic by himself. I don't expose him to higher level of math because he is already super bored at school. All he does is playing and watching screentime every single day and he also gets into CES. He is a fast learner, and he is easy picking up math concepts. For comparison, my younger kindergartener is still doing finger counting on 2+2 addition, and that kid knew multiplication and fraction before he joined kindergarten. He picked up that somewhere from daycare or screentime.

My child is similar, no enrichment (lots of sport/active commitments). The only kids I know who do formal tutoring or anything like that are trying to catch up. I think there is one girl whose mom tries to teach her extra to get ahead. My child says there are kids who are struggling to keep up in compacted math and seem frustrated, it’s possible their parents did enrichment or something to get them in but it’s not really a good fit. TBH it’s not that much faster than last year.

Current 5th grader is in compacted math. I’d guess about 40% of the grade is in compacted math. Maybe 5-10% attend outside math enrichment. This is anecdotal, and not actual data. I don’t personally know anyone at our school who does. But my kid knows a few kids from math class who do.

There's one kid whose parents say is super-gifted (always complaining about how the curriculum is boring their child), but at the same they take the kid to math and writing enrichment programs after school and on weekends. So whether the kid is truly brilliant or if the enrichment is advancing them so that they're bored at grade level them bored-who knows.

It depends on the kid. We did workbooks at home and math tables not for map but because the curriculum was bad.

My kid has above 240 at MAP math as a 3rd grader, and we don't do any enrichment/supplement. He is probably gifted in math on some levels (not genius) and he figures out many math logic by himself. I don't expose him to higher level of math because he is already super bored at school. All he does is playing and watching screentime every single day and he also gets into CES. He is a fast learner, and he is easy picking up math concepts. For comparison, my younger kindergartener is still doing finger counting on 2+2 addition, and that kid knew multiplication and fraction before he joined kindergarten. He picked up that somewhere from daycare or screentime.

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.)