Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+1
When kids are quick to learn math concepts and enjoy them, they easily get ahead of peers in K-2, especially if they had a lot of early exposure to number concepts through early play (blocks, legos, cooking, counting, etc.)

What hasn’t been mentioned yet is that the MAP-M itself exposes advanced kids to even more advanced concepts. Motivated kids have enough access to technology (math games, khan Academy, etc) that they can figure out the “new” thing on their own or they ask about it. I remember when my 3rd grader asked me about the question with a little number 2 in the upper right and I explained that it meant the number times itself. That was all it took to learn exponents.

Now isn't that just precious with its virtue signaling.

All you need is to be smart and you'll figure it out! Everyone has the same resources! Keep the myth alive!

+1 Combined with the true belief that their child is special at math. (P.S. Most kids will understand concepts like exponents if explained to them--that's the point of why extra exposure at home or in enrichment classes makes it much easier to score higher).

The point, and it's quite suggestive that you can't see the point, is that you don't need this. 85%ile or qualifying for Compacted Math isn't about "exposure" to some arcane concept or language. If you (the kid) go to school and do your homework and ace your on-level tests, you are well able 85% ile / Compacted Math qualification. We are talking about a program for onboarding to slight acceleration, not skipping 2-3 years ahead.

Different poster, but are you sure that's true? Is this info on topics by score level inaccurate? Because what they have for the 191-200 and 201-210 bands includes a lot of stuff that isn't taught in Eureka Math until late 3rd grade or beyond-- fractions (including multiplying fractions), decimals, multi-digit multiplication and division (including remainders), area, perimeter, angles, variables, prime numbers, etc.

+1 It's additional exposure, not genius. With my older kid I did much more supplementation at home, and their math scores showed it. With my younger one, I haven't had the time, and their math scores show it. It's too bad that people conflate MAP scores with being gifted in math and that MCPS makes placement decisions based upon it. This is not what MAP was designed to do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+1
When kids are quick to learn math concepts and enjoy them, they easily get ahead of peers in K-2, especially if they had a lot of early exposure to number concepts through early play (blocks, legos, cooking, counting, etc.)

What hasn’t been mentioned yet is that the MAP-M itself exposes advanced kids to even more advanced concepts. Motivated kids have enough access to technology (math games, khan Academy, etc) that they can figure out the “new” thing on their own or they ask about it. I remember when my 3rd grader asked me about the question with a little number 2 in the upper right and I explained that it meant the number times itself. That was all it took to learn exponents.

Now isn't that just precious with its virtue signaling.

All you need is to be smart and you'll figure it out! Everyone has the same resources! Keep the myth alive!

+1 Combined with the true belief that their child is special at math. (P.S. Most kids will understand concepts like exponents if explained to them--that's the point of why extra exposure at home or in enrichment classes makes it much easier to score higher).

The point, and it's quite suggestive that you can't see the point, is that you don't need this. 85%ile or qualifying for Compacted Math isn't about "exposure" to some arcane concept or language. If you (the kid) go to school and do your homework and ace your on-level tests, you are well able 85% ile / Compacted Math qualification. We are talking about a program for onboarding to slight acceleration, not skipping 2-3 years ahead.

Different poster, but are you sure that's true? Is this info on topics by score level inaccurate? Because what they have for the 191-200 and 201-210 bands includes a lot of stuff that isn't taught in Eureka Math until late 3rd grade or beyond-- fractions (including multiplying fractions), decimals, multi-digit multiplication and division (including remainders), area, perimeter, angles, variables, prime numbers, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+1
When kids are quick to learn math concepts and enjoy them, they easily get ahead of peers in K-2, especially if they had a lot of early exposure to number concepts through early play (blocks, legos, cooking, counting, etc.)

What hasn’t been mentioned yet is that the MAP-M itself exposes advanced kids to even more advanced concepts. Motivated kids have enough access to technology (math games, khan Academy, etc) that they can figure out the “new” thing on their own or they ask about it. I remember when my 3rd grader asked me about the question with a little number 2 in the upper right and I explained that it meant the number times itself. That was all it took to learn exponents.

Now isn't that just precious with its virtue signaling.

All you need is to be smart and you'll figure it out! Everyone has the same resources! Keep the myth alive!

+1 Combined with the true belief that their child is special at math. (P.S. Most kids will understand concepts like exponents if explained to them--that's the point of why extra exposure at home or in enrichment classes makes it much easier to score higher).

The point, and it's quite suggestive that you can't see the point, is that you don't need this. 85%ile or qualifying for Compacted Math isn't about "exposure" to some arcane concept or language. If you (the kid) go to school and do your homework and ace your on-level tests, you are well able 85% ile / Compacted Math qualification. We are talking about a program for onboarding to slight acceleration, not skipping 2-3 years ahead.

Different poster, but are you sure that's true? Is this info on topics by score level inaccurate? Because what they have for the 191-200 and 201-210 bands includes a lot of stuff that isn't taught in Eureka Math until late 3rd grade or beyond-- fractions (including multiplying fractions), decimals, multi-digit multiplication and division (including remainders), area, perimeter, angles, variables, prime numbers, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+1
When kids are quick to learn math concepts and enjoy them, they easily get ahead of peers in K-2, especially if they had a lot of early exposure to number concepts through early play (blocks, legos, cooking, counting, etc.)

What hasn’t been mentioned yet is that the MAP-M itself exposes advanced kids to even more advanced concepts. Motivated kids have enough access to technology (math games, khan Academy, etc) that they can figure out the “new” thing on their own or they ask about it. I remember when my 3rd grader asked me about the question with a little number 2 in the upper right and I explained that it meant the number times itself. That was all it took to learn exponents.

Now isn't that just precious with its virtue signaling.

All you need is to be smart and you'll figure it out! Everyone has the same resources! Keep the myth alive!

+1 Combined with the true belief that their child is special at math. (P.S. Most kids will understand concepts like exponents if explained to them--that's the point of why extra exposure at home or in enrichment classes makes it much easier to score higher).

The point, and it's quite suggestive that you can't see the point, is that you don't need this. 85%ile or qualifying for Compacted Math isn't about "exposure" to some arcane concept or language. If you (the kid) go to school and do your homework and ace your on-level tests, you are well able 85% ile / Compacted Math qualification. We are talking about a program for onboarding to slight acceleration, not skipping 2-3 years ahead.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+1
When kids are quick to learn math concepts and enjoy them, they easily get ahead of peers in K-2, especially if they had a lot of early exposure to number concepts through early play (blocks, legos, cooking, counting, etc.)

What hasn’t been mentioned yet is that the MAP-M itself exposes advanced kids to even more advanced concepts. Motivated kids have enough access to technology (math games, khan Academy, etc) that they can figure out the “new” thing on their own or they ask about it. I remember when my 3rd grader asked me about the question with a little number 2 in the upper right and I explained that it meant the number times itself. That was all it took to learn exponents.

Now isn't that just precious with its virtue signaling.

All you need is to be smart and you'll figure it out! Everyone has the same resources! Keep the myth alive!

I have 2 kids, with the same wealthy privilege and special opportunities and classes that proletariat like you will never get. Guess what? One of them is 2 years more advanced than the other (age-adjusted), due to indifferences in ability and interest and effort in the subject.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+1
When kids are quick to learn math concepts and enjoy them, they easily get ahead of peers in K-2, especially if they had a lot of early exposure to number concepts through early play (blocks, legos, cooking, counting, etc.)

What hasn’t been mentioned yet is that the MAP-M itself exposes advanced kids to even more advanced concepts. Motivated kids have enough access to technology (math games, khan Academy, etc) that they can figure out the “new” thing on their own or they ask about it. I remember when my 3rd grader asked me about the question with a little number 2 in the upper right and I explained that it meant the number times itself. That was all it took to learn exponents.

Now isn't that just precious with its virtue signaling.

All you need is to be smart and you'll figure it out! Everyone has the same resources! Keep the myth alive!

+1 Combined with the true belief that their child is special at math. (P.S. Most kids will understand concepts like exponents if explained to them--that's the point of why extra exposure at home or in enrichment classes makes it much easier to score higher).

The point, and it's quite suggestive that you can't see the point, is that you don't need this. 85%ile or qualifying for Compacted Math isn't about "exposure" to some arcane concept or language. If you (the kid) go to school and do your homework and ace your on-level tests, you are well able 85% ile / Compacted Math qualification. We are talking about a program for onboarding to slight acceleration, not skipping 2-3 years ahead.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+1
When kids are quick to learn math concepts and enjoy them, they easily get ahead of peers in K-2, especially if they had a lot of early exposure to number concepts through early play (blocks, legos, cooking, counting, etc.)

What hasn’t been mentioned yet is that the MAP-M itself exposes advanced kids to even more advanced concepts. Motivated kids have enough access to technology (math games, khan Academy, etc) that they can figure out the “new” thing on their own or they ask about it. I remember when my 3rd grader asked me about the question with a little number 2 in the upper right and I explained that it meant the number times itself. That was all it took to learn exponents.

Now isn't that just precious with its virtue signaling.

All you need is to be smart and you'll figure it out! Everyone has the same resources! Keep the myth alive!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+1
When kids are quick to learn math concepts and enjoy them, they easily get ahead of peers in K-2, especially if they had a lot of early exposure to number concepts through early play (blocks, legos, cooking, counting, etc.)

What hasn’t been mentioned yet is that the MAP-M itself exposes advanced kids to even more advanced concepts. Motivated kids have enough access to technology (math games, khan Academy, etc) that they can figure out the “new” thing on their own or they ask about it. I remember when my 3rd grader asked me about the question with a little number 2 in the upper right and I explained that it meant the number times itself. That was all it took to learn exponents.

Now isn't that just precious with its virtue signaling.

All you need is to be smart and you'll figure it out! Everyone has the same resources! Keep the myth alive!

+1 Combined with the true belief that their child is special at math. (P.S. Most kids will understand concepts like exponents if explained to them--that's the point of why extra exposure at home or in enrichment classes makes it much easier to score higher).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+1
When kids are quick to learn math concepts and enjoy them, they easily get ahead of peers in K-2, especially if they had a lot of early exposure to number concepts through early play (blocks, legos, cooking, counting, etc.)

What hasn’t been mentioned yet is that the MAP-M itself exposes advanced kids to even more advanced concepts. Motivated kids have enough access to technology (math games, khan Academy, etc) that they can figure out the “new” thing on their own or they ask about it. I remember when my 3rd grader asked me about the question with a little number 2 in the upper right and I explained that it meant the number times itself. That was all it took to learn exponents.

Now isn't that just precious with its virtue signaling.

All you need is to be smart and you'll figure it out! Everyone has the same resources! Keep the myth alive!

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+1
When kids are quick to learn math concepts and enjoy them, they easily get ahead of peers in K-2, especially if they had a lot of early exposure to number concepts through early play (blocks, legos, cooking, counting, etc.)

What hasn’t been mentioned yet is that the MAP-M itself exposes advanced kids to even more advanced concepts. Motivated kids have enough access to technology (math games, khan Academy, etc) that they can figure out the “new” thing on their own or they ask about it. I remember when my 3rd grader asked me about the question with a little number 2 in the upper right and I explained that it meant the number times itself. That was all it took to learn exponents.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

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?

My kid didn't get any extra enrichment in math and was always scoring 95th-99th percentile in math and was placed in compacted. Our school did use reflect in 3rd grade to gets kids to learn their math facts, but that was it. I think it depends on the kid. Mine just seems to "get" math -- I have no idea where it comes from because I took logic in college for my quantitative requirement instead of taking math!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP. You sound kind of dumb to assume this SAHM’s kids aren’t the smartest or are borderline. And that borderline is a bad thing. Hope your kids are smarter than you.

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?

Anonymous wrote:

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.