Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Learning Environments Which math class?

Hi there, I'm new so I'm hoping that I'm posting in the right area My 10 year old (5th grade) will be going into middle school next year and I am trying to find the right placement for him in math. The GT program here is pretty unhelpful, but after months of asking, I finally got the GT teacher to proctor a 6th grade NWEA math assessment to see if it helps us to figure out where he should start in math in middle school. He scored a 247. I've looked the score up and it is very high for a 5th grader and is also in the 95th percentile for end-of-the-year 6th graders. I have been "homeschooling" him in math for this last year since he had progressed past what his elementary school could provide - he is doing Thinkwell 7th-8th grade math online and working his way through a Pre-Algebra Art of Problem Solving textbook. He is also part of CTY and has done math classes through them in the past. What I would like to know is whether a 7th grade pre-algebra class will be an advanced enough placement for him next year, of if I should try to fight to get him into the 8th grade Algebra class. The school is resistant to acceleration so my guess is that getting a 7th grade placement for him as a 6th grader will be the best I can do. I don't know enough about how the NWEA math scores are interpreted to tell if he is performing around the level of an entering 7th grader or entering 8th grader as far as math goes.

Thanks!!
Melisa

According to NWEA's comparative data placement guide, his 247 would be a recommended placement for Geometry (though just barely.) His score in 5th grade would put him at the top of the high achieving group for 6th grade.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nwea.org%2Fsites%2Fwww.nwea.org%2Ffiles%2Fresources%2FComparative%2520Data.pdf

Thanks so much for the link, that will be very useful. We are in a rural area and I feel like the math classes are a bit "behind" national standards as it is. The 7th grade math class would be pre-algebra, 8th grade is Algebra 1 and they offer Geometry in 9th grade here. As an entering 6th grader, I am thinking that the 8th grade Algebra 1 class would probably be the best fit - and according to this document, it seems that a score of 235 would indicate readiness for this, correct? So his score of 247 should put him well in the range of being considered ready for Algebra 1. I just want to make sure I am understanding this fully before I bring it up at a meeting

Thank you SO much!
Melisa

Definitely the 247 should qualify him for Algebra 1. If they are hesitant to go ahead, ask if he can take the end of the year Pre-Algebra test and that if he gets 80% or better, he be moved immediately to Algebra 1. If he scores 60-80%, I would ask for compacting of the sections that he did not score well on over the summer, then Algebra 1 in the new year.

Thanks so much! That gives me a lot more confidence asking for Algebra 1 for him when we go in for a meeting. There is only one 8th grade Algebra class at the middle school here, and a high school math teacher comes over to teach it. That kind of gives you an idea of the population - a child like my son is highly unusual here and people just don't know what to do with him, so I've found acceleration to be the only solution. They don't like the scheduling headache that I am causing them, and a big excuse that I am hearing against acceleration is that "he will be overwhelmed with the transition to middle school enough without adding an advanced math class to it." My thought is that taking a math class that is the equivalent of what he studied 2 years previously would be much more of a problem to adjust to than one that is at the right level.

Thanks so much for all of your help!
Melisa

Hmmmm. Everyone could definitely be right, and perhaps I should be rethinking my placement for my daughter. She scored a 253 in the beginning of 5th grade this year on her NWEA MAP testing (I think that's the same test you are talking about....we usually call it, "MAP" test), which is very similar to your situation.

First thing, there are updated norms for the MAP tests, and they considerably lower the percentiles. See this link: http://www.nwea.org/sites/www.nwea.org/files/resources/NWEA_2011_RIT_Scale_Norms.pdf
A 247 in math in spring of 5th grade is 96% for 5th grade, and 91% for 6th graders, 82% for 7th graders and 76% for 8th graders. Remember that these are national norms, that include children from the lowest performing schools in the country, so if your school district is higher performing, your child would be at a much lower percentile if ranked just in your own community.

So I am not sure I would recommend skipping to the 8th grade algebra class. I'm not sure it's awful to be in the 90%+ of your classmates.

Another thing about NWEA MAP testing--somewhere I read that the accuracy drops off considerably when you get to the higher numbers. If someone gets a little lucky and answers one of the hard problems towards the end right, even if a guess, it can skew the numbers up significantly.

Yes, since you've chosen to go ahead and teach a lot of the math that is part of the curriculum, at home, he will end up doing some repetition. But it might be better for him to skip at most one grade of math, and use your time at home for other things than teaching what they will teach at school. Instead, you can focus on more interesting, non-curriculum math. Things like competition math problem solving, or special projects on cool things like Fibonacci numbers, explorations on infinity, the 4th dimension, etc, etc.

For me, with my daughter having the 253 in September of 5th grade (I assume it will be a little higher when they retest for spring numbers this month), she'll just be skipping 6th grade math, and will be doing Pre-Algebra with the 7th graders in the fall when she enters middle school as a 6th grader. As a middle schooler, there are so many new, challenging, exciting things that happen (woodshop! home ec, switching classes, puberty, new clusters, longer research papers, engineering projects, real lab science, crazy social situations, etc etc) I think it's okay to reinforce some math, and seek totally different math challenges as time permits.

Sorry, don't mean to be a downer.....by all means, no one knows your situation better than you. But I thought I'd just provide a counterpoint. No matter what you choose, I hope he enjoys it! Good luck!

I don't want him to skip 8th grade Algebra 1 at all, just pre-algebra since he is already doing that right now. I'd like for him to take 8th grade Algebra in the fall as a 6th grader. As far as the MAPS test goes - the one that he took yesterday was proctored by the GT teacher because it is at a higher level than his normal 5th grade assessment. It is called the 6+ Mathematics Survey with Goals. My son said that it was longer than his "regular" MAPS tests, so my guess is that it is a slightly different assessment done by the same company. But someone else here might know a lot more about it than I do!

I was just reading the form in the link that you posted, and I think that it is normed on Primary grades where perhaps the one my son took is normed on 6th grade and up?

Did the GT teacher who proctored the test for your ds have any advice re which math class to place him in?

I'm not familiar with MAP testing, but fwiw I would think with math it would be fairly straightforward to compare the curriculum he's already learned at home vs the curriculum taught at your middle school. I'd look at the course title more than what grade it's taught at - for instance, in our school district typical kids take a 7th grade math course in 7th, pre-algebra in 8th, algebra in 9th, geometry in 10th. Honors track kids take pre-algebra in 7th, algebra in 8th, etc. Gifted program kids who have subject-accelerated take the same curriculum but earlier. If you look at the curriculum for pre-algebra your ds has mastered this year in homeschool and compare it to the school district's pre-algebra curriculum, are they comparable or are their holes? If there are holes, can you focus on making up those areas during the rest of this school year? If there aren't large gaps and if you feel he's confident in what he's learned in pre-algebra, I'd advocate for putting him directly into algebra. I wouldn't put him in geometry (which I think one poster above suggested?) - he needs algebra first.

Back to the MAP scores, I find the percentiles a little tricky when it comes to math curriculum (but again, I'm not familiar with MAP testing so I may be just clueless!). The thing I think is tricky is they are fitting a score into a percentile of students in grade 7 or grade 8 or grade whatever... but typically once kids get into middle school not everyone takes the same level of math course in each grade... so I'm not sure how you can relate the percentiles to actual course placement.

polarbear

ps - I just remembered that there is a test called an "Algebra Readiness Test" that is offered in our school district, as well as (I think) many other school districts in the US - I'm sorry I can't remember the name of it at the moment! It is used in our district to screen which kids go into algebra in 8th vs waiting until 9th, and also used to screen kids going into pre-algebra in 6th which here is considered to be 2 years ahead of grade level. I'll try to find out the name of it - it might not be something available where you're at, but if it is, it might be useful since you are specifically looking at pre-algebra vs algebra.

The RIT scores are continuous, so if he took the 6+ test, the RIT score you have is still the same on the percentiles chart.

As for whether or not it's better to be in the top 10% of your class and repeat, it depends on what you want for your child. I am a huge fan of Richard Rusczyk. He discusses the tyranny of the 100% and that if you are consistently the smartest person in the room, you may be in the wrong room. Solid math is built by problem solving and working on a challenge, not by doing work from two years ago just to adjust easily.

http://mathprize.atfoundation.org/archive/2009/rusczyk


ETA: PolarBear- I wasn't suggesting he should go to Geometry. That is the NWEA recommended placement for a student with his RIT score. I don't think skipping Algebra would be in his best interest. Even if he can guess through the NWEA problems by solving the problems, his score isn't staggeringly into Geometry and it would probably be a struggle.

All that the GT teacher told me was that his score was "very good". I am planning on having a meeting with the district math coach and others in the next few weeks - but I always feel better going into a meeting having an idea of what scores mean and what I should ask for ahead of time. Otherwise, I sometimes feel that my suggestions and observations are dismissed. Having print outs (like the one the second poster above listed) is even better. The math coach mentioned something about an Algebra readiness test several months ago, I'll be sure to bring that up again.

This is really good information, and I love what you wrote about if you are always the smartest person in the room, maybe you are in the wrong room. DS10 absolutely it the type of person who needs to be challenged - or he goofs off and finds his own entertainment. Thanks!

CAMom - I watched the entire Richard Rusczyk lecture that you posted and am in complete agreement. I would rather DS10 be placed in a math class where he is challenged and maybe gets a B, but makes growth than a class where he gets an A but repeats things he already knows. After watching that lecture, I am also thinking of signing him up for the AoPS AMC-8/Mathcounts class that starts at the end of May. There is also a CTY course called "Honors Problem Solving in Pre-Algebra" and I thought that this might be good for him to do now, even though he is technically beyond Pre-algebra. The problem solving approach of both of these would seem like good preparation for Algebra 1 in the fall. Plus if he received a good grade in a CTY Honors Pre-Algebra course, I'm not sure that anyone could argue with the placement. We typically do some type of CTY course in the summer anyway - DS10 needs the stimulation. There are no competitive math teams in our area, but I really feel like MathCounts would be an excellent opportunity for him (and others, I'm sure) if we can find someone to run it. Thanks for all of the direction - I'm going to have to see if I can find some more Richard Rusczyk info/lectures, it was really good info.

Hi Melisa,

That's great! I actually 100% agree that you don't want to be the smartest in the room, etc. I just think so much has to do with your district percentiles, and it's better to use those as a gauge than the national numbers. You can better know what to expect from his classmates when you consider your district numbers. These are available on the NWEA reporting sheets, but usually just for the grade your child is in.

I have an older child, so I'm able to look at the MAP NWEA percentiles for different grades, using that history. So you can see that a 247 in math in spring of 5th grade puts your child in the 96th percentile nationally vs. other 5th graders, and it puts him in 91% vs. 6th, and the 82nd percentile vs. 7th graders. You are talking about skipping him up 2 grades in math, so you'd be placing him where he is currently above 82% of the kids doing that math. But if your district is strong, he could be much, much lower than that. For example, in my district, a 248 is only the district AVERAGE (ie 50th percentile) for 7th graders. So here, someone moving into that class with those peers would not be a particularly strong student. I think acceleration at that level is often reserved for kids who will still be above average in the situation they are moving into. If you are in a smaller district with lower-performing students, it may make sense to even move him up 3 grades!! So much of what is relevant will have to do with your local conditions, plus the abilities of the teachers to fill gaps and/or compact parts of curriculum your child may already have been taught.

Good luck with your decision, and I guess my only advice is to pay attention to your local numbers/situation. If your schools are flooded with brilliant kids, you probably don't need to accelerate as much to get a rigorous math class, but if not, it can make a lot of sense.

I'm glad you liked it Melisa!

Rusczyk has several articles posted on the AoPS website. You can also get videos for the Pre-Algebra class on the website for review and a feel of the AoPS style. I would hazard a guess that it is far harder than the kind of math your son may be used to doing! We also use Alcumus (the online program with AoPS) extensively and it may be worth having a run through the problems over the summer.

I hope you have success with your meeting and you're able to advocate for Algebra placement for your DS!

C squared - you are totally right about matching the district numbers. Our district is very low-performing. Our high school is 14th from the bottom in Colorado out of something like 180 schools. It's terrible. I think it would be a good idea to ask at the meeting for the mean NWEA score of the kids entering the 8th grade Algebra 1 class. My guess is that DS10's score of 247 is at least within that range, if not above. Does anyone see an advantage of having DS10 take the AoPS Algebra 1 course online AND the 8th grade Algebra 1 class, or is that too repetitive? My guess is that the course at school will move a bit slow for him and maybe the AoPS one would be good as a supplement to compact some of the ideas - but I don't want to overkill

I'd look at the curriculum and even talk to some teachers/kids/parents that are at the middle school about the curriculum. Depending on what they teach it could go either way. My DD is in 5th grade taking a 6th grade class at the middle school this year and it is great. While not super challenging, I have seen her mature in process/thinking wrt multi-step problems. Things she could do before she is learning to do more efficiently, etc. While I could potentially test her to skip the 7th grade course and take algebra, I decided that actual 7th grade was soon enough. Mainly based based on the fact that even though she gets it easily, she didn't test out of the comprehensive unit pre-tests. Since everything builds and I saw her maturing, I decided to leave it alone. Also, anything after geometry isn't offered at the MS so we'd be back to switching buildings and bad schedules. Also, in our district once you hit algebra you take high pressure end of course tests to get high schools credit. I figured there were enough other transition things for MS. We're adding band which should be a good challenge.

Just saying my eyes have really opened to how much different (and likely better for us) to be out of the elementary grades.

Good Luck

PS (Mine's still getting 100 in the class but is doing different interesting things each day. Not the same thing for 2 weeks-pace is better).

Just realized that maybe it sounded like I meant to not accelerate. I just meant depending on the curriculum you might not want to go all the way to Algebra. My kid is one that could likely muddle her way through a lot of problems and get answers right but not be efficient at a solution causing difficulty later on since everything builds in math.

Melisa, does your middle school have some kind of math placement test? To make allowances for differences in school populations and grading, around here everyone is required to take a middle school math placement test. If not, it may be worthwhile asking how they make placement decisions and tailoring your response to their established system.

I know that you are in an area of the state where options may be limited. If you can't get what you need through your local district, you may want to look at online options. There is an online CO state charter school (Provost Academy) and several Front Range districts are offering online options. I don't know exactly how the funding works but you shouldn't have to pay for it.

Your post reminds me that when my DS was in 2nd grade, he used to be bored to death in math class. He got into many troubles in the classroom with the teacher every week. School had mandatory MAP tests 3 times a year, DS scored in 250s at that time, but his teacher was dismissive regarding DS' ability and only addressed discipline issue. Things changed dramatically in DS' 3rd grade. New principal came in and they started new GT program. GT teacher pulled DS from 3rd grade math to 5th grade GT math. A few weeks later, his teacher told me that they have to move DS again because his comprehension and retension was far better than the best 5th graders in her class. And DS' MAP score (268 in mid term 3rd grade) proved that too. The schedule mismatch made the next move quite tedious. We are very lucky to have the new principal to work it out. GT teacher even sit in DS' first math class with 6th graders just to make sure he felt comfortable. And he did. DS9 is now working with 7th graders in pre-algebra. Still not much challenge for DS as he was still best in the class. But the real deal is having opportunies to take the AMC8/mathcounts with the peers matching his math ability. That made DS very excited.

The NWEA 6+ Survey with Goals was the "math placement" test that the district math coach recommended after I repeatedly asked for someone to administer a math placement test this whole semester. Honestly, I don't think it is an issue that comes up often here since all of the schools are considered "failing" by state and federal standards. There are actually only 3 more years on a 5 year timeline that the district has to get their act together before the state takes over the schools, which is frightening. With that in mind, you would think that they would be bending over backward to keep a kid like mine in the district - he is not as advanced as many kids in this forum, but in comparison to the kids here he is light-years ahead. I am unsure whether the school board knows what it is like to have to jump through all of these hoops and be so pushy to try to get DS what he needs. I am thinking of letting them know, but I want to make sure we get a placement for him for next year that will work for him before I make too many waves

Melisa,

It sounds like you are on the right track, and I'd agree that given the situation with the schools, more radical acceleration might make a lot of sense.

Also, I agree that the contest math is the best way to provide challenge that is much deeper than typical curriculum math.

Good luck with working out your child's program!

By the way....it is hard to find perfect schools. I'm currently frustrated that they are about to eliminate ability grouping for our middle school math classes. Math is the only subject that our MS currently separates out based on ability (A/B/C/D periods). Starting next year they are mixing all the math classes up completely heterogenously. They say the research shows no negatives of this. Ha! Means extra teaching at home, but I can do that--I love math. I feel sorry for the kids where that isn't as viable.

I'm currently frustrated that they are about to eliminate ability grouping for our middle school math classes. Math is the only subject that our MS currently separates out based on ability (A/B/C/D periods).

How in the world does this work? Is the goal to try to elevate everyone's standards? It seems like there's just such a wide range of abilities to make this work - even more than in science, English or reading. Do they all use the same book? Does everyone end up in Algebra I at the same time? I'm just curious, because I've never heard of a middle school NOT having some differentiation for math.

According to DS, for 150 7th graders, math class is differentiated into 3 groups, one with "regular math", one with "pre-algebra at 8th grade level" and one with "algebra I at 9th grade level". They use different textbooks. There are a couple of placement tests before unit study during the school year and kids will be promoted or demoted accordingly.

Bumping this topic as it answered most, but not all, of my questions. DS recently scored at 254 on MAP in 5th (2-5 test) and will be taking the Iowa algebraic assessment. I'm curious what one might suggest if he does actually score enough for pre-algebra, or even algebra, and the school resists further acceleration.

Would you advise against skipping math 6 and taking pre-algebra? I've seen posts suggesting double acceleration is better if there's a year in between -- is less than a year enough transition?

He has commented that this year of grade 5 math was easy, he far preferred the extension math pull-out, and he actually wants to learn geometry. Is there anything you can recommend for geometry extension that's pre- high school Geometry?

I'd love to see him develop his problem solving skills, and I am half tempted to suggest homeschooling math and doing AoPS pre-algebra, though the budget is tight. I wish there were a math 6/7 course. As it is, I've heard some of the middle school math teachers are great, while others have led to kids going home and learning through YouTube because they don't get it.


Also, I recall sometime in the past year a rather interesting discussion about math acceleration that went into ways to extend math rather than go quickly through it, if you want to make sure there's a solid foundation for problem solving as well as not lead to burnout. Could someone help me find that? The archives are thick with my search terms.

Every kid is different, of course, but in our case, our DC successfully skipped from 3rd to 5th (whole-grade), to 7th in math only (not a pre-algebra course) the following year, and to algebra I the year after that. So in math, that was a skip every year for three years running, depending on whether you count 7th grade math as equivalent to pre-algebra, or as a separate course.

Depending on that distinction, we may or may not have skipped pre-algebra, but definitely skipped 6th. The teacher explained her comfort with the acceleration to 7th (which occurred after the first quarter of 6th) by saying that the topics in 6th and 7th were essentially equivalent. Progressing to algebra I at the end of that year was on the basis of performance on an end-of-course exam in pre-algebra.

And wait a minute, and I expect indigo will come up with some useful threads.

Thanks aeh! One of the big concerns locally is the CCSS transition's "increased rigor", which eliminated a 6/7 math option, created a new math 6, and moved pre-Algebra to 7th in standard sequence -- but I'm not sure of the scope, and am not especially experienced in math any more.

You can also take a look at the Standards, and compare them to what you know of your child's skills and instruction:

http://www.corestandards.org/Math/

Math hasn't changed so much that you won't recognize the topics.

What I'm not sure of is how the standards have shifted, if might cause an acceleration of too many years too quickly in a changing curriculum. Like, is the shift more in name, with a few things juggled around? There are kids right now in two different classes of the same name -- old and new curriculum track, different text books and scope; the shift still very fresh and kinks are being worked out.

Here's one story that got me concerned: Early Algebra and the Common Core State Standards

In terms of the CCSS math changes, we have seen our local schools remove acceleration, only to find they needed to add it back in as the CCSS were not so horribly rigorous for the top students. The schools now offer a compacted 6th/7th class.

Don't most of the CCSS math classes now incorporate some pre-H.S. geometry into each year?

With that math RIT on the 2-5, he is well into the range where we have to wonder how well that version of the test is actually measuring him (and our schools do the same, btw). NWEA would appear to recommend that students in that range take the 6 grade and above test. Still, some of the students in that RIT range in our schools go into 6th grade math that will begin to accelerate in 7th, while others with additional high test scores will go into the accelerated/compacted 6th/7th class.

If you decide to do AoPS, I would not skip the pre-algebra class without giving it a close look. It is fairly challenging, perhaps, in some cases, even more so than a standard algebra class. DD did learn to solve challenging problems while doing AoPS!

This wouldn't surprise me at all -- we're in bad timing while they are in training/transition. Maybe it'll be back in a couple years.


I agree about the MAP test version. His fall score was his first, and it was a 240, so maybe they didn't think he would have as much growth? He said he had way more questions than anyone else did (over 70), but no indication he took the 6+ test. It does show me that exposure to higher level math is what he needs, as he grasps and remembers very well. Up til this year, he was frustrated -- they didn't offer much differentiation, and we don't after-school. Incidentally, this winter, his state grade-level tests (a year accelerated, but only 2 months in new grade) said he showed 2-3 years growth across the board, which just made me laugh -- it's just that the old test didn't go high enough. Does an EXPLORE math score of 16 suggest anything in particular? It was his lowest score, and, again, showed me how instruction exposure plays a part (that was only a few weeks into the skip). The IAAT will help; they don't go solely by MAP.


I have heard great things about that pre-Algebra class, and I enjoyed the Rusczyk speech linked earlier in this thread, especially how to apply problem solving tools rather than become a computer/do the work of a computer.

I was thinking that if the school pushed for math 6 (because, resistance!) with no acceleration, despite accumulated scores, maybe we should home school math 6 and AoPS pre-Algebra, then have him take the placement test next year for Algebra I and go into that in 7th -- depending on how it all plays out. Not sure how that would all work out. Could even do math 6 in school (but I think the pace and repetition might be tedious) and do AoPS outside of school. Just not sure how to rate the value of math 6. I've gathered from the comments that scoring straight into Algebra is possible, but perhaps not wise regardless, not without a summer pre-Algebra class, and we're not in a hurry for that -- I just want him appropriately challenged and engaged.

Oh, and FWIW, the DC described above went from a traditional (one might say, the anti-CC) curriculum (Saxon 6/5 & Saxon 8/7) into Pearson CC Algebra I.

On the MAP, the survey with goals test should have around 52 items. There is also a briefer survey test that only has about 20 items. If he had way more items, then possibly the others didn't take the long version, and possibly he took both versions.

longcut - maybe this is one you are looking for?

http://giftedissues.davidsongifted....7632/Preparing_for_the_new_math_SAT.html

http://giftedissues.davidsongifted.org/BB/ubbthreads.php/topics/227906/More_algebra_talk.html

FWIW, would recommend that your child does the AoPS preAlg before anything else.

We also live in a rural area (within low shot as well as bow shot of real live cattle) so we too have felt the pain of having a child that would be an outlier in city populations let alone where we live.

We managed to get our child's 4th grade teacher to allow her to do the AoPS preAlg chapter work (we would print it out so as not to make her too conspicuous) during class time and then do the class one evening a week. After doing this class she ceilinged on the Maths section of the Explore.

In 5th the wheels came off a bit as the Maths teacher was very anti-gifted so our child had to do the AoPS Alg I after school which sucked a bit but she stayed interested and challenged (just not in school).

Middle school starts in 6th here in our SD and after a placement test that the teacher did her best to sabotage DD still was placed into the CC 'advanced' Alg I class (8th grade). We went along to try to get her in a class with more 'peer like' kids. Now almost at the end of the year DD reports that AoPS preAlg was harder so the link up thread about Alg I being diluted may have some merit.

Next year DD will be bused to the HS honours Geometry program which will be on trial as far as we are concerned. Maths is first period so if DD is not comfortable in the HS (she is 11) then we will just have her do the AoPS Geometry from home and then take her to the MS for second period on. If the HS works out then DD will circle back through the AoPS curriculum once done with PS Maths.

We are in no hurry for her to go to college - she has been whole grade accelerated already and while she complains about the slow pace of everything we are not willing to put her through any more skips. This seems to be the best plan given what we know so far but we have already learned to write plans using pencil not ink LOL

One thing that I have to say that I am deeply grateful for is the MS principal and her current Maths teacher have been massively supportive of our DD. I read posts everyday here about the willful ignorance and pigheadedness of some SDs - my DD is online friends with a fellow DYS girl whose mother is a frequent poster here, her friend has an even higher LOG than her but a much stupider SD administration so she is still stuck in regular 5th grade Maths A lot just comes down to luck...

Yes! Thank you! Much to think about.

And thank you madeinuk, as well. I asked DS about taking an advanced class independently and he's intrigued. I might have him do the AoPS pre-Algebra regardless, and keep it in mind for DD here in a year or two.

Being stuck in a class when you are in the 99% is he'll on earth. I don't reccamend it.

I am interested in your thoughts on this -- what makes a class or way of learning work for you?

I find it very interesting that people on this forum seem to have experiences that indicate that the version on the RIT/MAP test changes the question bank and therefore greatly impacts how to interpret the scores. My DS6 in first grade, scored a 147 on his winter MAP-P, and was then switched into a 3rd grade math class. I questioned the district's acceleration/enrichment specialist on the version of the test and whether or not he could take the 2-5 version with his math class instead of his homeroom. They were very clear that the test would automatically move into the next set of questions and there was no difference. I doubted this information, based on what I've learned here and read on the NWEA website. My son just took the end of year test (I don't know how he scored), but his "scrap" paper that he used had some pretty impressive problems on it. He was trying to figure out 14 divided by 4, as he said he need it to solve a larger problem. He said the test was hard. He has strong mathematical reasoning skills, which I think helps him to make correct guesses when given multiple choice questions, even in topics he has little experience with.

Personally, I'm not putting too much weight on his score. I think his needs are being met, as he will be in a compacted 4th/5th grade math program next year as a second grader. Just wanted to add what our school district is saying about the test. (BTW, our school district is the largest in our state). Either NWEA is not communicating clearly with our school district, or perhaps it's true that the tests can access other question banks?

According to this NWEA info, there are criteria for switching test level at least for the 6+, but I recall seeing a mention of when to switch to the 2-5 test somewhere else, will see if I can find it. If I'd know it was 231, I'd have requested it this spring - how frustrating the schools don't know this. Common Core MAP Mathematics: NWEA Recommendations for Transitioning Students from 2 – 5 to 6+

"Although the items contained within the 2 – 5 and 6+ versions of the test are all calibrated to the same RIT scale, the differences in content between the two versions of the test can mean that a new sixth grade student, particularly a high-performing one, may see items within the 6+ test that measure content areas to which s/he has never been exposed. This can result in a perceived drop in performance when transitioning between the 2 – 5 test in the spring of fifth grade to the 6+ test in the fall of sixth grade. This may partially explain why the drop in score is higher for high-achieving students than for lower-achieving ones.

Based on these observations, our recommendation is that students who score at the 90th percentile (231) or higher on the 2 – 5 mathematics test in the fall of fifth grade be transitioned into more advanced sixth grade (or higher) instruction, if their teachers and parents agree that they are ready, and if other indicators such as grades are consistent with their high MAP test scores. Going forward, they should be transitioned into the 6+ MAP test during any subsequent testing seasons, after they have begun to receive instruction in the more advanced content."

HiMom2R&R - I know that we've chatted before on this issue: http://giftedissues.davidsongifted....st_time_here_RIT_math_sc.html#Post218414, but I'll just share that my DYS DS7 has now had an identical score on the MAP-P and the MAP 2-5 and the types of problems that he needed to solve on the 2-5 to get the same score are not even comparable. So, oddly, although his score does not reflect it, I feel strongly that he has made growth. I believe this both based on the questions he said that he needed to answer on both versions, as well, as yes...I saw his scratch paper.

Since we are talking about RIT/MAP test a bit here, I have a question regarding the test.

DS9 in third grade scored 224 on his spring math MAP test. He is in challenged math class which is about half year accelerated in math. A girl in his homeroom class who is in the advanced math class (one full year acceleration) scored 250 something. Does the exposure to the material have an effect on the score if the same test is given?

I am wondering about this because I have been advocating for my DYS DS7 to get into third grade challenged math class (instead of differentiation in class) when he's in 2nd grade. However, the school will not consider this option until he takes the MAP test and CogAT in the fall. I currently use Beast Academy as supplement for him on the weekends and will move in a faster pace during the summer. I am wondering if this will help with his MAP test score in the fall.

TIA

IMO, yes. Exposure matters. I will also say, however, that our school ignores NWEA's score guidelines and keeps giving the test, regardless of the score, based on grade level. It would seem that the 2-5 test indeed has some sort of ceiling as mentioned by longcut here, and that the other student's precise score is questionable - she needs to be transitioned to the 6+ test to more accurately show growth (or growth will stall due to the ceiling effects). Stalled growth can be very frustrating for the student and concerning for the parent. Your DS, though, should still have some headroom in this version of the test.

Also, FWIW, in class differentiation has rarely worked for us. After 2 years of attempting in class differentiation, during which DS said he was learning nothing, right now it looks like DYS DS7 will be SSA in math next year. In his case, I honestly think that it has taken 2 years for the school to realize what level of math he is at...they kept trying to "enrich him," not fully grasping that he wasn't slightly ahead, but years ahead. To be fair to the school, I don't think they see it very often. Keep advocating!

Loy58,

Thank you for your answer to my question. The in-class differentiation that DS7 is currently doing is not working for him. He needs to be in a pull out accelerated class. He's not motivated to learn and work on questions on his own. There is not much push and challenge from the teacher. In a group setting, I think it will work much better for him. I will keep advocating!

Loy58- Thank you. I believe you completely, which is why I find it so frustrating that the school system continues to tell me there is no difference in the test. Oh well, as long as his scores and how they are interpreted are not negatively impacting his math instruction at school, I'm trying not to worry about it. It just makes me hesitant of giving the scores much weight in my mind.

I found the transition document for MAP MPG to MAP 2-5
NWEA Recommendations for Transitioning Students from MPG to MAP 2 – 5

"NWEA recommends the following for consideration when making the decision to transition students from MPG to MAP 2 – 5.
•
Can the student read with enough fluency to receive an accurate and valid score on the MAP 2 – 5 Reading assessment?
•
Has the student been exposed to the content that will be tested in MAP 2 – 5?
•
Is the student scoring ≥ 190 on the MPG Reading test or ≥ 200 on the MPG Mathematics test?"

Thank you longcut- that is helpful. It's interesting though, that on the very last page it has a chart that states that a first grader should still take MPG, not MAP 2-5, even if their scores is over 200. It states a few pages earlier, "We recommend that all first graders take MPG Mathematics, because they are not likely to have been introduced to a large portion of the content in the grades 2 – 5 Mathematics assessment." Since my son is now in a 3rd grade math class, he really should have taken the 2-5 test. Oh well, regardless I wouldn't change his math placement for next year, so I probably won't make a big deal over it. But I will save this to advocate for him next year. Thanks!

The interface for the MAP P is very different from that of the MAP 2-5. The MAP P reads the child the question and has a lot of graphics. The higher versions require the child to read the questions him or herself and there are fewer problems that are "game-like" and require things like dragging and dropping.

From what we've been told many schools are don't like to move children who are very young up to a higher MAP test because they are concerned the child's reading skills may influence their performance and give them a lower result than their actual knowledge.

DS7 got 213 on math and 207 on reading when he took the k-2 MAP test last fall. The school gave him the 2-5 math test in the winter after I asked for acceleration. He got 199, which they determined he was at middle of 3rd grade level. So sounds like they were following these guidelines....