Generated 2026-09-15 · State: KS · Standards scope: Grades 6–8 mathematics + Grade 6 English Language Arts · Rebuilt from the audited crosswalk data on each revision.
Grades 6–8 went live in AcornSmarts on 15 September 2026. The K–5 report for Kansas is published separately at acornsmarts.com/standards/kansas/.
| Code | Verdict | Evidence (generator · forms) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6.RP.1 | PARTIAL | ratiosSaplingQ L5 kind 0 MC: 'In a group of N, there are a X and b Y. What is the ratio of X to Y?' Answer a:b; distractors a:total (part-to-whole) and b:a (order flip); why names part-to-part vs part-to-whole explicitly. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Distinguishing part-to-part from part-to-whole is genuinely exercised (the a:total distractor forces it). But the child selects notation; no item has them produce or select ratio LANGUAGE ('for every 2 wings there was 1 beak'-style sentences). Describe is a production verb under the house standard, so PARTIAL. Blocking clause: Use ratio language to describe a relationship between two quantities |
| 6.RP.2 | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE |
ratiosSaplingQ L6 kinds 0-2 MC: price per notebook ('per' = divide, halves allowed, $1.50-style); train unit rate answered in 'miles per hour' language; better-buy with per-ounce comparison ('B, because you get more' distractor). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Unit-rate concept assessed by find/compare, which the verb allows; answer options themselves carry unit-rate language ('45 miles per hour', '$0.30 per oz') and whys teach 'per means division'. Weakness an adversary will name: the child recognizes unit-rate language rather than using it, and a/b fraction NOTATION (3/4 cup per cup) never appears — only whole and half-dollar rates. |
| 6.RP.3 | FULL | ratiosSaplingQ L5-L7 Solving real problems by table reasoning (L5 kind 1 missing-value table), calculation (L5 kind 2 equivalent ratios, L7 kind 2 recipe scaling), and unit-rate calculation (L6 all kinds). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The verb is 'solve' and solving happens across three levels. The listed representations are an 'e.g.' list; of them only tables and calculations appear — tape diagrams and double number lines never do. Not blocking (illustrative list), but stated for honesty. |
| 6.RP.3a | PARTIAL | ratiosSaplingQ L5 kind 1; L6 kinds 0-2 Find missing value in a stated equivalent-ratio table (lemons→oz); unit-pricing problems; constant-speed unit rate; better-buy comparison of unit rates. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Find-the-missing-value, unit pricing, and constant speed are all solidly present. But the child never MAKES a table (production), never PLOTS pairs on the coordinate plane (display), and 'use tables to compare ratios' is only approximated by the better-buy item, which compares unit rates, not tables. Blocking clause: Make tables of equivalent ratios ... and plot the pairs of values on the coordinate plane |
| 6.RP.3b | FULL | percentsSaplingQ L5-L6 L5: p% of n with p a multiple of 5 (incl. 5,15,...,95) and n a multiple of 20, one-place-shift distractor. L6 branch 1: 'X is p% of a number, what is the number?' (find the whole given part+percent). L6 branch 2: percent from part/whole. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Both named demands — rate per 100 and find-the-whole — are directly computed, with the undo-vs-apply misconception targeted. Number space is deliberately clean (bases multiples of 20, whole answers); an adversary can call it narrow but the standard sets no messiness requirement. |
| 6.RP.3c | FULL | ratiosSaplingQ L7 kinds 0-1 Convert inches→feet (÷12, incl. half-feet like 90 in) and hours→minutes (×60, incl. the .5h→50min trap); recipe-scaling kind 2 is ratio reasoning with quantities. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Both directions of unit transformation (multiply and divide) appear, with the small-to-big-divides sanity check taught. Self-caught weakness: only two conversion pairs exist (length in/ft, time hr/min) — no metric, no capacity, no weight, and no multi-step or compound-unit manipulation. An adversary will attack the breadth of 'convert measurement units'. |
| 6.NS.1 | PARTIAL | fractionsSaplingQ L6-L7 L6: whole ÷ unit fraction (servings), unit fraction ÷ whole (share brownies), same-denominator counting a/d ÷ 1/d. L7: 1/b ÷ 1/(bk) with whole answer; a/b cut into 1/d-lb pieces word problem; structure check 'which expression equals a/b ÷ c/d' (invert-and-multiply). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Real and well-built content, but every COMPUTED division has a unit-fraction divisor and a whole-number quotient by construction. General fraction ÷ fraction (a/b ÷ c/d) appears only as recognition of the reciprocal structure — it is never computed, and no quotient is ever itself a fraction. 'Requiring multiple exposures connecting various concrete and abstract models' is also out of reach in text-only MC. The easy corner of the standard, graded accordingly. Blocking clause: Interpret and compute quotients of fractions |
| 6.NS.2 | FULL | divisionSaplingQ L6-L7 L6: bare multi-digit division nd ÷ dv with 2-digit divisors (12-29), dividends to ~4 digits, off-by-one distractors, inverse-multiplication check taught. L7: packing word problem, dividends to ~3500, estimation strategy taught. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The verb (divide) is exercised on multi-digit numbers with clean quotients. Adversary angle: MC with off-by-one distractors verifies the answer, not that an efficient algorithm was used, and every division is exact (no remainders) — fluency is inferred, not observed. |
| 6.NS.3 | PARTIAL | decimalsSaplingQ L6-L7 L6: add and subtract money-like decimals (1.05-8.50, hundredths), place-alignment distractors. L7: multiply 0.x × 0.y (single tenths digits, place-count why); divide x.y ÷ 0.d (single-digit, multiply-both-by-10 why). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Addition/subtraction genuinely use multi-digit decimals. Multiplication is only ever tenth × tenth with one significant digit each, and division only a one-place dividend by a single-digit tenth — neither operand is multi-digit. Two of the four required operations sit well below the standard's stated size, so the fluency claim cannot be FULL. Blocking clause: multiply, and divide multi-digit decimals |
| 6.NS.4 | FULL | factorsSaplingQ L5-L6 L5: GCF of two numbers, coprime-multiple construction, pool filtered to keep both ≤100. L6 branch 1: LCM of pairs all ≤12, with a·b-is-not-always-least distractor. L6 branch 2: rewrite a+b as g(m1+m2), distractors g(a+b) and a wrong-factor form. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
All three demands present within the standard's stated bounds (GCF ≤100 enforced by the pool filter; LCM operands ≤12; distributive rewrite with coprime remainder exactly per the 18+48=6(3+8) example). Weakness to expect from an adversary: 'express ... as a multiple of a sum' is met by selecting the rewrite in MC rather than producing it. |
| 6.NS.5 | FULL | integersQ L1 + L4 Below-zero temperature → −n; number-line side of −n; drone above / diver below sea level with 0 as reference; earned/spent as +/−. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
'Understand ... quantities having opposite directions or values' assessed by recognition across temperature, elevation, and money — three of the standard's four example contexts (electric charge absent, but the list is an e.g.). |
| 6.NS.5a | FULL | integersQ L1 form 1; L4 form 0 Select the number representing 'n degrees BELOW zero' (−n vs n vs −(n+10)) and the number representing a diver 'down' m below sea level (−down vs down vs −up, the drone/diver mixup distractor). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Representing real-world quantities with signed numbers is exactly what the items do; selection is compatible with 'use ... to represent' as assessed here. Contexts limited to temperature/elevation/money. |
| 6.NS.5b | PARTIAL | integersQ L4 form 1 'Writing earnings as +E and spending as −S, what does 0 represent here?' — answer 'neither earning nor spending — the starting point'; distractors 'running out of money' (balance-zero confusion) and the difference. The diver item's why also states 'Zero is sea level — the reference point'. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The zero-as-reference-point idea is directly and well targeted, including the balance-of-zero trap. But the verb is 'explaining', and the child selects a stated explanation rather than producing one — explanation verbs cap at PARTIAL under the house standard. Blocking clause: Explaining the meaning of 0 in each situation |
| 6.NS.6 | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE |
integersQ L1; coordinateSaplingQ L4 Locate −n as 'n units LEFT of zero' on the number line; identify the quadrant of (x, y) from the signs. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Number-as-point and pair-as-location both assessed by recognition. Self-caught weakness: every instance is an INTEGER — no fraction or decimal is ever placed on a line or plane, so 'a rational number' is only witnessed through its integer cases. Expect the adversary to press here (the full rational demand lives in 6.NS.6c, graded PARTIAL below). |
| 6.NS.6a | PARTIAL | integersQ L1 form 0 'What is the opposite of v?' where v may itself be negative — so opposite-of-−n = n is computed; the number-line item's why states 'Opposite signs mean opposite sides of zero'. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Opposite-sides-of-0 recognition is covered, and asking the opposite of a negative implicitly touches −(−n)=n. But the −(−3) NOTATION is never posed, the double-opposite is never asked as its own question, and '0 is its own opposite' appears nowhere in the generator (v is always nonzero: n ≥ 2). Blocking clause: recognize that the opposite of the opposite of a number is the number itself, (e.g. −(−3) = 3,) and that 0 is its own opposite |
| 6.NS.6b | FULL | coordinateSaplingQ L4 Quadrant of (x, y) from signs (all four quadrants reachable, nz() draws both signs); reflection of (x, y) across the x-axis with (−x, y) and (−x, −y) as the one-axis/both-axes distractors, why contrasts flipping x vs y vs both. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Both clauses — signs→quadrant and sign-differences→reflections — are the literal content of the two L4 forms. The reflection item's source point is always Quadrant I and always asks about the x-axis, but the distractor set plus the why cover the y-axis and both-axes cases as recognitions. |
| 6.NS.6c | PARTIAL | integersQ L1 form 2; coordinateSaplingQ L4 'On the number line, where is −n?' answered in words ('n units LEFT of zero'); quadrant identification for integer pairs. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Positioning is a display act and no number-line or plane diagram exists — locations are described verbally or classified by quadrant. And every value is an integer: 'other rational numbers' (fractions, decimals) are never placed anywhere. Two independent gaps; the verbal-location content keeps it above NOT COVERED. Blocking clause: Find and position integers and other rational numbers on a horizontal or vertical number line diagram |
| 6.NS.7 | FULL | integersQ L2 + L3 Order two negatives ('which is LESS', number-line why); debt comparison −$a vs −$b; |v| computation; the order-vs-magnitude combined statement item. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Ordering and absolute value both assessed by recognition, including their interaction (7d's trap). Same integers-only caveat as 6.NS.6: rational-but-not-integer values are never ordered. |
| 6.NS.7a | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE |
integersQ L2 form 0; L3 form 1 'Which is LESS: −a or −b?' with the why locating both on the number line ('−lo sits farther left'); 'Which statement is true about −a and −b?' where the correct option is itself an inequality chain −a < −b. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Interpretation-as-position is assessed by recognition: the comparison items are answered correctly only by the number-line reading, and L3 form 1 has the child endorse a written inequality statement. Adversary angle: no item hands the child a pre-written statement like −3 > −7 and asks what it says about position — the position reading lives partly in the whys. |
| 6.NS.7b | PARTIAL | integersQ L2 form 1 'Ana's account reads −$d and Beto's reads −$d2. Who has LESS money?' — real-world order interpretation with the owing-more-is-having-less why. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Interpreting order in a real-world context is done well. But 'write' and 'explain' are production verbs with no item behind them — the child never writes a statement like −3°C > −7°C nor produces the explanation. Blocking clause: Write, interpret, and explain statements of order for rational numbers in real-world contexts |
| 6.NS.7c | PARTIAL | integersQ L3 forms 0-1 |v| = ? computed with the distance-to-zero why; debt magnitude appears in the L3 form-1 why ('A $a debt is less money AND more debt than a $b one'). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Computing |v| and the real-world magnitude reading both exist, and the whys carry the exact distance/debt framing of the standard. The lead verb is 'explain', though, and the |−30|=30 write-to-describe-debt act is never asked of the child — explanation lives in the feedback, not the task. Explanation verbs cap at PARTIAL. Blocking clause: Explain the absolute value of a rational number as its distance from 0 on the number line |
| 6.NS.7d | FULL | integersQ L3 form 1 'Which statement is true about −a and −b?' — correct: '−a < −b, but |−a| > |−b|'; distractors assert the wrong order or the wrong magnitude; why: a $a debt is less money AND more debt. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
This is the standard's own example (account balance less than −30 = debt greater than 30) rebuilt as a distinguish-by-recognition item. Distinguish is a compatible verb. Clean FULL. |
| 6.NS.8 | PARTIAL | coordinateSaplingQ L5 Distance between (x, y1) and (x, y2) — same x, opposite-sign y's so the segment crosses the axis; why teaches |y1 − y2| as adding both distances to zero. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The distance demand is half-covered: same-first-coordinate only — the same-SECOND-coordinate (horizontal) case is never generated (x is fixed, y's differ, always). No graphing exists (display verb), and absolute value is implicit in the why rather than used by the child. Real content, two named gaps. Blocking clause: by graphing points in all four quadrants of the coordinate plane |
| 6.EE.1 | PARTIAL adversarial: NOTE-ONLY |
expressionsQ L2 branch 0 b^e evaluated (b 2-6, results kept small), with b×e and b+e as the counts-factors-not-addends distractors. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Evaluation of exponent expressions is solid. 'Write' is a production verb with nothing behind it — no item asks the child to write (or even select) an exponential expression for a repeated product. Blocking clause: Write and evaluate numerical expressions involving whole-number exponents |
| 6.EE.2 | PARTIAL | expressionsQ L2 branch 1; L3 Evaluate ax + b at x (with the digit-gluing '3(5)=35' distractor); select the expression for a verbal phrase and for a real-world cost. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Read and evaluate are covered by recognition and computation. 'Write' is production: expression-building is only ever selection among three given forms. Graded with its children — the umbrella can't exceed the write gap. Blocking clause: Write, read, and evaluate expressions in which letters stand for numbers |
| 6.EE.2a | PARTIAL | expressionsQ L3 'Which expression says "k less than twice a number"?' (2n − k vs k − 2n vs 2(n − k)); ticket-cost-plus-flat-shipping expression selection (per·b + k vs the shipping-per-ticket error). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The translation skill — including the subtraction-order trap the standard's own 5 − y example warns about — is exercised sharply, but by selection. 'Write' is a production verb, so PARTIAL by the house rule despite strong content. Blocking clause: Write expressions that record operations |
| 6.EE.2b | PARTIAL | expressionsQ L1 branch 1 'In the expression cx + k, what is the COEFFICIENT?' — c vs k vs c+k; why names the constant term. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Identify-parts content exists but only for 'coefficient' (with 'constant term' named in the why). Sum, term, product, factor, and quotient are never asked, and the view-(8+7)-as-one-entity demand is untouched. One vocabulary word out of six is real but thin coverage. Blocking clause: view one or more parts of an expression as a single entity |
| 6.EE.2c | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE |
expressionsQ L2 branch 1 + volumeSaplingQ L4-L5 Evaluate ax + b at a value (multiply-before-add taught, digit-glue and wrong-grouping distractors); evaluate the real-world formulas V = lwh and V = Bh at given values including fractional (x.5) heights. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Evaluation at specific values, formulas from real-world problems, and conventional order (multiplication before addition) are all exercised — the formula clause is covered cross-skill by the volume generator, which even uses fractional edge values echoing the s = 1/2 example. Self-caught weakness: no evaluated expression mixes an exponent with other operations, so order-of-operations WITH whole-number exponents is only witnessed in the standalone b^e items. |
| 6.EE.3 | PARTIAL | expressionsQ L4 Combine like terms ax + bx → (a+b)x (with the (a+b)x² exponent-drift distractor); distribute a(x + b) → ax + ab (with the unmultiplied-b distractor). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Identifying equivalent expressions — both the like-terms and distributive cases, matching the standard's own examples — is well covered. 'Generate' is a production verb: the child always chooses among three given forms and never produces the equivalent expression. Blocking clause: identify and generate equivalent expressions |
| 6.EE.4 | FULL | equationsSaplingQ L6 branch 0; inequalitiesQ L2 'Which value from the set {x−1, x, x+2} makes ax + b = rhs true?' with the why stating substitution IS the method; 'Which value from the set {...} makes x + a > c true?' with the boundary value excluded by strict inequality. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Both halves — equation and inequality, each with an explicit specified set and substitution testing — are the literal question forms. The answer-set framing appears verbatim in the whys. Clean FULL. |
| 6.EE.5 | PARTIAL | expressionsQ L3 branch 1; equationsSaplingQ L5 Real-world expression selection (cost of b tickets = per·b + k); one-step equations solved for the unknown. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Variables-as-unknowns are used throughout the equations levels, and the any-number-in-a-set reading is carried by the 6.EE.4 items. But 'write expressions' is production — building the expression is always selection — and no item assesses the variable-can-represent-any-number idea as its own target. Blocking clause: write expressions when solving a real-world or mathematical problem |
| 6.EE.6 | PARTIAL | equationsSaplingQ L5 One-step equations in all four operations: x + a, x − a, ax, x ÷ a — each solved by the inverse operation, with the same-operation-again distractors and balance language in the whys. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Solving is fully exercised across all four operation types. Two gaps: 'write' (the equation is always given, never built from a situation), and 'non-negative rational' is realized only as whole numbers — no one-step equation ever involves a fraction or decimal. Blocking clause: Write and solve one-step equations involving non-negative rational numbers |
| 6.EE.7 | PARTIAL | inequalitiesQ L1 + L3 Select h > c for a more-than-c height rule and d < m for less-than-$m money (real-world constraints); 'what does the solution set of x > c look like?' answered as 'open circle at c, shaded right, going on forever'; 'how many solutions?' → infinitely many. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Writing-as-selection covers the x > c / x < c constraint forms, and infinitely-many-solutions is asked directly. But the number-line representation is a described picture the child endorses, not a diagram anyone draws or even sees — the graph-the-solution-set-type clause caps this at PARTIAL per the standing wall. Blocking clause: represent solutions of such inequalities on number line diagrams |
| 6.EE.8 | PARTIAL | equationsSaplingQ L6 branch 1 Real-world two-quantity contexts (cost/pounds at $2 per lb, distance/hours at 60 mph, earnings/lawns at $15 each) asking which is the DEPENDENT variable. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The contexts are exactly the standard's kind, but no variables are ever introduced — the quantities stay in words, and the relationship is never represented symbolically. Only the identification child (8a) is served; 8b and 8c have nothing. Blocking clause: Use variables to represent two quantities in a real-world problem that change in relationship to one another |
| 6.EE.8a | FULL | equationsSaplingQ L6 branch 1 'A car drives at a steady 60 mph. Which is the DEPENDENT variable?' — correct: the distance traveled; distractors: the independent variable and 'neither — they do not depend on each other'; why gives the changes-in-response test. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Identify is the verb and identification is the task, across three rotating contexts with the depends-on reasoning taught. Clean FULL. |
| 6.EE.8b | PARTIAL adversarial: UPGRADE |
No generator writes, selects, or displays an equation relating a dependent to an independent variable (d = 65t-style). The L6 contexts stop at naming the dependent variable; no equation is ever formed. Plainly not covered. | |
| 6.EE.8c | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
No generator presents a graph or table of a two-variable relationship, and nothing relates any graph or table to an equation. Plainly not covered. | |
| 6.G.1 | FULL adversarial: NOTE-ONLY |
geometrySaplingQ L6-L7 L6: triangle area (half-parallelogram why), parallelogram area (perimeter distractor), trapezoid area (missing-÷2 distractor). L7: L-shaped rectilinear figure by decompose-and-subtract; kite area via diagonals (half-rectangle why). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Every named shape class is present — triangles, parallelograms, kites (named in the KS document and generated by name), trapezoids, and a rectilinear compose/decompose figure whose why states composing/decomposing IS the method. All dimensions given numerically; contexts are thin (cm/m labels rather than rich real-world problems) but 'find' is fully met. |
| 6.G.2 | FULL | volumeSaplingQ L4-L5 L4: V = lwh with a fractional (x.5) height, the half-layer meaning taught, rounded-edge distractors. L5: V = Bh given base area B and fractional height, with the B-already-is-the-area why. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Both formulas, applied with fractional edge lengths, each with the packing/layer meaning in the why. Self-caught weakness: the fractional edge is always exactly one half, and always on the height — l and w stay whole — so the fractional-edges claim rests on the narrowest possible fraction. |
| 6.G.3 | PARTIAL | coordinateSaplingQ L5 Distance between two points sharing an x-coordinate (crossing the axis), which is the side-length skill for vertical polygon sides. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Drawing does not exist in the MC engine — standing wall, capped at PARTIAL at best. What does exist is thinner than the cap suggests: the distance item is between two bare points, never framed as a polygon's side, no vertices are ever given, and the same-second-coordinate (horizontal) case is never generated. Blocking clause: Draw polygons whose edges meet at right angles (rectilinear figure polygons) in the coordinate plane given coordinates for the vertices |
| 6.G.4 | PARTIAL | geometrySaplingQ L8 Cube: 'a net is 6 equal a × a squares' → total surface area (volume a³ as distractor). Rectangular prism: net described as three rectangle pairs → SA = 2(lw + lh + wh), with the forgot-the-2 and volume distractors. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Using a net to find surface area is genuinely computed, and the net-is-the-surface-unfolded idea is taught. But 'represent ... using nets' is a display act with no widget behind it (the code comment itself flags this an honest PARTIAL), the nets are described in prose rather than shown, and no net ever contains a triangle — prisms with rectangles only. Blocking clause: Represent three-dimensional figures using nets made up of rectangles and triangles |
| 6.SP.1 | PARTIAL | statisticsQ L1 'Which is a STATISTICAL question?' and 'Which is NOT?' over a 7-entry bank of paired questions (class homework minutes vs YOUR minutes, etc.), why: statistical questions anticipate variety. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Recognition is covered in both directions with well-matched pairs echoing the standard's own example. 'Generate' is a production verb with no item behind it — the child never writes a statistical question. Blocking clause: Recognize and generate a statistical question |
| 6.SP.2 | FULL | statisticsQ L2-L4 Compute mean, median (sort-first taught), mode, range from small data sets; compare spread of two groups by range; identify the outlier in a clustered set; identify which measure an outlier's removal changes most. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Center (mean/median/mode), spread (range), and shape-via-outlier are all analyzed, and the standard's own lists are and/or lists — range without IQR and outlier without the other shape words satisfy the letter. Self-caught weakness an adversary will use: no item ever addresses cluster, peak, gap, symmetry, or skew; data always arrives as a short raw list, never as a distribution to look at. The FULL rests on the and/or reading. |
| 6.SP.3 | FULL | statisticsQ L2-L4 Range why: 'measures how SPREAD OUT the data is, not where it sits'; group-spread item: 'Spread asks how far apart the data sits — not which group has bigger numbers'; house-price item picks the center measure; outlier-removal item contrasts mean/median/mode sensitivity. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The center-summarizes vs variation-describes-spread contrast is recognized across several items and stated verbatim in the whys. Weakness: the contrast is mostly carried by explanations around adjacent tasks — no single item asks the center-vs-variation distinction as its own question. |
| 6.SP.4 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Verified in code: statisticsQ never mentions dot plots, histograms, stem-and-leaf plots, or box plots — the generator comment states the display-building codes 'need a chart widget and stay honestly unbuilt', and the prompts deliberately avoid naming displays (the test-locked honesty rail). No content, no display capability. Plainly not covered. | 04 Sep L5 displays: statisticsDisplayQ L5 build register constructs a real dot plot from listed data (the create verb, on the shipped plot builder). BLOCKING: "histograms, stem-and-leaf plots, and box plots" remain undisplayable. | |
| 6.SP.5 | PARTIAL | statisticsQ L2-L4 Data summarized in context (pets per family, quiz scores, house prices): measures computed, outliers named, measure choice justified. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The umbrella is carried entirely by its 5c/5d children, which are strong. But two of the four listed facets have nothing (5a number of observations, 5b attribute/measurement description), so summarizing 'in relation to their context' happens only along the quantitative axes. Graded to match its children: PARTIAL. |
| 6.SP.5a | PARTIAL | No item asks for or about the number of observations. Counts appear only inside worked whys (e.g. '÷ 5' in the mean computation) — never as something the child reports. Plainly not covered. | 04 Sep L5 displays: L5 dot-plot/histogram reading items ask for the total number of observations from a rendered display. BLOCKING: "reporting" as free production. | |
| 6.SP.5b | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
No item asks about the attribute under investigation, how it was measured, or its units — 'describe how measured' is a production demand with zero supporting content. Contexts carry units incidentally (minutes, $k) but nothing targets them. Plainly not covered. | |
| 6.SP.5c | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE |
statisticsQ L2 + L4 Mean, median, mode, and range each computed as its own question form; the outlier item names the striking deviation in context (pets per family) and the why describes the cluster near the common value. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Quantitative measures of center and variability are given (range satisfies the and/or; IQR absent), and striking deviations are identified with reference to context. Weakness: 'describing any overall pattern' is realized only as outlier-spotting plus cluster language in a why — no item has the child characterize a pattern. |
| 6.SP.5d | FULL | statisticsQ L3 branch 0; L4 branch 1 'Which measure of center BEST describes a typical house?' — median, because the $200k+ outlier drags the mean (with 'the mean — it uses every value' as the trap); 'if the outlier is removed, which measure changes MOST?' — the mean, with the why stating that choosing the measure to fit the data's shape IS the skill. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Relating measure choice to the distribution is the literal content of both items, including why the plausible-sounding wrong answer backfires. The strongest statistics alignment in the bank. |
| Code | Verdict | Evidence (generator · forms) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7.RP.1 | PARTIAL | ratiosSaplingQ L6 kinds 0-2 Price per notebook (whole/half-dollar), train unit rate in mph, better-buy per-ounce comparison. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Unit-rate computation is real but every rate divides whole numbers (or lands on halves). A fraction divided by a fraction — the defining Grade-7 upgrade over 6.RP.2 — never appears; fractionsSaplingQ L7 does fraction÷fraction but never as a RATE with units. Blocking clause: Compute unit rates associated with ratios of fractions ... compute the unit rate as the complex fraction (1/2)/(1/4) |
| 7.RP.2 | PARTIAL | ratiosSaplingQ L8 Is-this-table-proportional (constant y/x, broken-last-pair case, does-not-need-(1,1) distractor); find k from a proportional table. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Recognize is genuinely exercised. Represent is not: the child never writes or selects an equation, graph, or any representation of a proportional relationship. Blocking clause: Recognize and represent proportional relationships between quantities |
| 7.RP.2a | FULL | ratiosSaplingQ L8 kind 0 Three (x,y) pairs; decide proportional or not. Non-proportional case breaks the LAST pair's ratio; distractors include 'no — does not start at (1,1)' and 'cannot tell from three pairs'. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Testing for equivalent ratios in a table is squarely exercised and the distractors are honest misconceptions. Weakness an adversary will name: 'graphing on a coordinate plane and observing a straight line through the origin' — the other half of the e.g. list — never appears anywhere in the app. Credited FULL because the list is illustrative ('e.g.'), but the coverage is single-method. |
| 7.RP.2b | FULL | ratiosSaplingQ L8 kind 1 Given a proportional table, find the constant of proportionality k; distractors k·x1 (the first y) and x1; second row confirms in the why. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The same-unit-rate-in-every-pair idea is exercised on the table half; 'table OR graph' permits either. Weakness: the graph half never appears, and the standard's 'm' framing (rate-as-slope) is never used — k is only ever a table ratio. |
| 7.RP.2c | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
No item ever asks the child to represent a proportional relationship by an equation (t = pn form). equationsSaplingQ L7's choose-the-equation item is y = px + q with a flat fee — explicitly NON-proportional. | |
| 7.RP.2d | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
No graphs exist anywhere in the Grade 7-8 content; a point (x, y) on a graph, (0,0), and (1, r) are never shown or interpreted. | |
| 7.RP.3 | FULL adversarial: NOTE-ONLY · re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
percentsSaplingQ L8; ratiosSaplingQ L5-L7 Tax on a purchase → total (two-step, with the ×1.15-style one-step in the why); percent change from old to new price; recipe scaling, missing-value ratio tables, unit-rate problems. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Multistep percent and ratio solving both happen. Weaknesses an adversary will name: of the standard's example list only tax and percent increase appear (no markdowns, simple interest, gratuities, commissions, or percent error); percent-change answers are drawn from just {10, 20, 25, 50}; and prices are multiples of $20. |
| 7.NS.1 | PARTIAL | integersG7Q L5 (−a) + b computed; a − (−b) computed; distance between p and q asked numerically. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The arithmetic is exercised; the number line exists only in the whys ('climbing', 'movement'). No diagram is ever rendered and the child never places anything on a line — a display wall, same class as the Grade-6 plot walls. Blocking clause: Represent addition and subtraction on a horizontal or vertical number line diagram |
| 7.NS.1a | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
No item on additive inverses summing to zero, opposite-quantity situations, or zero pairs. The nearest content (a − (−b)) uses the opposite operationally but never asks about n + (−n) = 0. | |
| 7.NS.1b | PARTIAL | integersG7Q L5 form 0 (−a) + b = ? with sign-error distractors; why narrates starting below zero and climbing. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The sum is computed correctly or not; the located-a-distance-|q|-from-p conception is carried entirely by the why. A child can pass on sign rules alone — the claim rides on the explanation, so graded down. Blocking clause: Show p + q as the number located a distance |q| from p, in the positive or negative direction |
| 7.NS.1c | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE · re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
integersG7Q L5 form 1 a − (−b) = ? with distractors a − b (ignoring the double sign) and −(a + b); why states p − q = p + (−q) via the remove-a-debt story. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Answering correctly requires actually applying add-the-additive-inverse — the a − b distractor catches anyone who doesn't. Weaknesses: minuend always positive, integers only (the standard says rational numbers; no fractions or decimals with signs anywhere in integersG7Q), one form. |
| 7.NS.1d | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE · re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
integersG7Q L5 form 2 What is the distance between p and q on the number line? (p negative, q positive); distractors |q + p| and |p|. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Distance-as-absolute-difference is directly the question, and the |q + p| distractor punishes sign confusion. Weaknesses: p is always negative and q always positive (never same-sign pairs, where the subtraction actually matters), integers only, no rendered line. |
| 7.NS.1e | PARTIAL | integersG7Q L5 Integer addition/subtraction with negatives across three forms. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Adding and subtracting signed INTEGERS is solid; signed fractions and decimals — the rest of the rationals — never appear in any Grade 7-8 generator. 'Properties of operations as strategies' is also never itself the target. Blocking clause: add and subtract rational numbers |
| 7.NS.2 | PARTIAL | integersG7Q L6 (−a)(−b), (−a)(b), and (−n)÷d computed with sign-rule distractors. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Sign rules for integer products and quotients are well exercised (parity-of-negatives whys). But 'all rational numbers' includes signed fractions and decimals, which never appear. Blocking clause: multiply and divide all rational numbers |
| 7.NS.2a | PARTIAL | integersG7Q L6 forms 0-1 (−a) × (−b) with −ans distractor; single-negative product; whys give flipping-across-zero and count-the-signs arguments. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The child computes with the rules; the WHY-the-rules-hold story (distributive-property extension, (−1)(−1) = 1) lives only in the explanations. Describe is a production verb and it is never demanded. Blocking clause: Describe how multiplication is extended from positive rational numbers to all rational numbers |
| 7.NS.2b | PARTIAL | integersG7Q L6 form 2 (−nd) ÷ d = ? with sign distractors; why verifies by multiplying back. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Signed integer division is computed. The explanation content — every integer quotient is rational, and the three placements of the negative sign are the same number — is never assessed. Blocking clause: Explain that integers can be divided ... −(p/q) = (−p)/q = p/(−q) |
| 7.NS.2c | PARTIAL | integersG7Q L6 Integer sign-rule products and quotients, three forms. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Same integer-only ceiling as 7.NS.1e/2: no signed fractions or decimals anywhere, so 'rational numbers' is only met on its integer floor. Blocking clause: multiply and divide rational numbers |
| 7.NS.2d | PARTIAL | percentsSaplingQ L7 (SAPLING_EQUIV bank) Which decimal equals p%? Which fraction equals 0.xx? — memorized halves/quarters/fifths/tenths equivalences. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Fraction↔decimal equivalence exists only for the terminating bank fractions, as recall. Long division as the method, repeating decimals, and the terminates-or-repeats dichotomy never appear. Blocking clause: convert a rational number in the form of a fraction to its decimal equivalent using long division; know that the decimal form ... terminates in 0s or eventually repeats |
| 7.NS.3 | PARTIAL | integersG7Q L7 Temperature drops r° per hour for h hours (signed product in context); friends split a −$ debt (signed quotient in context). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Real-world signed reasoning is present but both forms are multiplicative, integer-valued, and tiny-range (rate 2-5, hours 3-6). Addition/subtraction contexts, non-integer rationals, and complex fractions are all absent. Blocking clause: problems involving the four operations with rational numbers ... extend the rules for manipulating fractions to complex fractions |
| 7.EE.1 | FULL adversarial: DOWNGRADE · re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED-AFTER-FIX) |
expressionsG7Q L5 Factor −ax − ab → −a(x + b) with sign-trap distractor; expand −(x − b) with the leave-the-second-term-alone trap; combine ax − cx to a negative coefficient. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
All four verbs now live in expressionsG7Q with rational coefficients where the standard requires them: factor (integer-limited, as the standard itself limits), expand −(x−b), expand with rational coefficient 0.5/(1/2), combine ax−cx, and — added 15 Sep 2026 after the second re-adversarial caught the gap — ADD two multi-term expressions with rational coefficients ((m.5x + b) + (k.5x − d), form 4). FULL is now true of the source, not aspirational. |
| 7.EE.2 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
No item asks whether two forms of an expression are equivalent in a problem context. The a + 0.05a = 1.05a idea appears only inside a percentsSaplingQ L8 why ('adding a percent is multiplying by 1.15') — an explanation, never a question. | |
| 7.EE.3 | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE |
percentsSaplingQ L8; equationsSaplingQ L7; integersG7Q L7 Tax-then-total; percent change; flat-fee-plus-rate rental equations; signed real-world products/quotients. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Multi-step real-life problems with rational numbers are solved across three generators. Weaknesses: 'convert between forms as appropriate' and 'assess the reasonableness of answers using mental computation and estimation' are exercised only inside whys (sanity checks like 'the answer should get SMALLER'), never as the assessed move; numbers are integers and clean percents throughout. |
| 7.EE.4 | PARTIAL | equationsSaplingQ L7; inequalitiesG7Q L4 Choose the equation ph + fee = total for a rental scenario; solve two-step equations and inequalities. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Equation construction is exercised (the choose-the-equation item, with swapped-role distractors). Inequality CONSTRUCTION never is — inequalities only ever arrive pre-written and bare. Blocking clause: construct two-step equations and inequalities to solve problems |
| 7.EE.4a | PARTIAL | equationsSaplingQ L7 Solve px + q = r (negative solutions allowed); model a rental as ph + fee = total. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The px + q = r half is solid, with the stop-after-subtracting distractor. The p(x + q) = r form — named in the statement, not an example — never appears, and 'compare an algebraic solution to an arithmetic solution' is never asked. Blocking clause: equations of the form px + q = r, and p(x + q) = r |
| 7.EE.4b | PARTIAL | inequalitiesG7Q L4 Solve px + q > r; solve −ax < rhs with the sign flip (tested by substitution in the why). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Solving is real — including the negative-coefficient flip, which actually exceeds the standard's p > 0 restriction. But no item is a WORD problem, no solution set is ever graphed, and no solution is interpreted in context. Known wall. Blocking clause: Graph the solution set of the inequality and interpret it in the context of the problem |
| 7.G.1 | PARTIAL | geometrySaplingQ L9 kind 2 Map scale 1 cm : k km, towns c cm apart, find real distance; add-instead-of-multiply distractor. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Scale-factor length computation is exercised in one form. Areas under scale (the k² trap — the heart of Grade-7 scale) and reproducing at a different scale never appear, and no drawing is ever shown. Blocking clause: computing actual lengths and areas from a scale drawing and reproducing a scale drawing at a different scale |
| 7.G.2 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
No item on solids of rotation — identifying the cylinder/cone generated by rotating a rectangle/triangle about an edge appears nowhere. (This KS statement replaced the CCSS draw-triangles standard; neither version is covered.) | |
| 7.G.3 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Cross-sections/plane slices of prisms and cylinders appear nowhere. | |
| 7.G.4 | PARTIAL | geometrySaplingQ L9 kind 0 Circumference 2πr and area πr² of a circle, answers exact in π, with the formula-swap distractor guarded at r=2. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Using both formulas is squarely exercised and the rim-vs-inside whys are strong. The derivation clause is a production verb and is never assessed; also no problem ever combines the formulas (e.g. given C, find A). Blocking clause: give an informal derivation of the relationship between the circumference and area of a circle |
| 7.G.5 | PARTIAL | volumeG8Q kind 0; geometrySaplingQ L8; volumeSaplingQ L5 Cylinder volume πr²h; prism surface area from a described net; V = Bh at the Grade-6 levels. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Stem code; graded on its sub-codes. Computation with the formulas exists; the investigate/generalize layer does not — see 7.G.5a-b. Blocking clause: Investigate the relationship between three-dimensional geometric shapes |
| 7.G.5a | PARTIAL | volumeG8Q kind 0; volumeSaplingQ L5 Cylinder volume in terms of π with the circumference-confusion distractor; prism V = Bh at Grade-6 levels. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Volumes are COMPUTED; the generalization — that the same V = Bh spans prisms and cylinders — lives only in the why ('a disk of area r²π stacked h high'). Generalize is a production verb carried by the explanation, so graded down. Blocking clause: Generalize the volume formula for prisms and cylinders (V = Bh) |
| 7.G.5b | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
geometrySaplingQ L8 Cube SA (6 faces) and rectangular prism SA (2(lw + lh + wh)) from described nets, volume-confusion distractors. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Prism surface area is computed from the structure 2B + lateral faces. Cylinder surface area appears nowhere in the app, and the SA = 2B + Ph generalization is never itself assessed — items give the faces pre-listed. Blocking clause: in the case of a cylinder, perimeter is replaced by circumference |
| 7.G.6 | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE · re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
geometrySaplingQ L6-L8; volumeG8Q Triangle/parallelogram/trapezoid/kite areas; L-shape decomposition; cube and prism surface area; cylinder (and cone/sphere) volume, π-exact. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Area of 2-D objects, volume, and surface area of 3-D objects including cylinders and right prisms are all genuinely solved, and no item requires roots (the KS restriction is honored by construction). Weaknesses: cylinder SURFACE area never appears (volume only), and most items are bare-numbers rather than real-world. |
| 7.SP.1 | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE |
statisticsSamplingQ L6 Pick the most representative sample for a stated population (6 scenarios, cross-scenario bad distractor); explain why a named sample is biased. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Stem code — using sampling to learn about a population is the entire generator's frame. Weakness: the credit rides on recognition items; see 7.SP.1a for the production gap. |
| 7.SP.1a | PARTIAL | statisticsSamplingQ L6 Choose the representative sampling method among biased alternatives; whys carry the equal-chance principle. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Knowing that generalization requires representativeness is exercised by selection. GENERATING a sample — designing one rather than recognizing one — is a production verb and never happens. Blocking clause: generate a valid representative sample of a population |
| 7.SP.1b | FULL | statisticsSamplingQ L6 (bias form) Why is sample X biased for population Y? Correct reason vs 'too large' and 'not paid' foils; six fixed scenario pairs. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Identify-and-justify is directly the item; the size/payment foils force the child to locate bias in the selection mechanism. Weaknesses: the justification is selected, not produced, and the bank is six fixed scenarios with fixed reasons — memorizable across sessions despite dedupeKeys. |
| 7.SP.2 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
No item estimates an unknown population characteristic from sample data, and 'generate multiple samples ... to gauge the variation' is a conduct/simulate verb with nothing behind it. The team-comparison item compares two given means — 7.SP.3-4 territory, not sample-to-population inference. | |
| 7.SP.3 | PARTIAL | statisticsSamplingQ L6 (comparison form) Team A mean vs Team B mean 'with similar spread' — pick the valid informal conclusion; over-claim and refuse-to-compare foils. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Informal center-difference-given-similar-spread reasoning is exercised. But the difference is never expressed as a multiple of variability, MAD never appears anywhere, and no dot plot or distribution is ever displayed — the visual-overlap half is a display wall. Blocking clause: measuring the difference between the centers by expressing it as a multiple of a measure of variability (requires introduction of mean absolute deviation) |
| 7.SP.4 | PARTIAL | statisticsSamplingQ L6 (comparison form) Two means compared, spread stated qualitatively; conclusion about typical performance. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Measures of center (mean) are used for a comparative inference. No measure of variability is ever a number — spread is only ever the word 'similar' — and median/mode/range/IQR/MAD never appear. One scenario family (team points), one form. Blocking clause: measures of variability (range, interquartile range and/or mean absolute deviation) for numerical data |
| 7.SP.5 | FULL adversarial: NOTE-ONLY · re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
probabilityG7Q L4 P(color) = favorable/total from a marble bag; the a/b part-to-part distractor is explicitly named as not-a-probability in the why. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Expressing probability as a 0-to-1 fraction is directly exercised, and the part-to-part trap is the right one. Weakness an adversary will name: the likelihood SCALE — near 0 unlikely, around 1/2 neither, near 1 likely — is never assessed; no item ever asks the child to interpret a probability's size. |
| 7.SP.6 | PARTIAL | probabilityG7Q L4-L5 Expected count = P × trials ('about' emphasized); experimental probability heads/flips vs the theoretical 1/2 foil. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Both computational directions of the standard are exercised — predict frequency from probability, and read experimental probability from observed results, with the experimental/theoretical distinction as the actual test. Collecting data is a conduct verb the app cannot host. Strong PARTIAL. Blocking clause: Collect data from a chance process (probability experiment) |
| 7.SP.7 | PARTIAL | probabilityG7Q L5 Experimental vs theoretical coin probabilities; die model used for P(> k). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
USING models and comparing model to observed frequency both happen. DEVELOPING a model does not — every model arrives fully built. The explain-the-discrepancy clause appears only in whys. Blocking clause: Develop a probability model and use it to find probabilities of events |
| 7.SP.7a | PARTIAL | probabilityG7Q L5 (die form) P(rolling more than k) on a fair die; the k/6 wrong-side distractor; why enumerates favorable outcomes. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The uniform model is USED correctly (count favorable over 6 equally likely). Assigning the probabilities — building the model — is given, never asked. The use half is genuinely strong. Blocking clause: Develop a uniform probability model by assigning equal probability to all outcomes |
| 7.SP.7b | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE |
probabilityG7Q L5 (coin form) Flip n times, get h heads, state the experimental probability h/n; the theoretical 1/2 is the key distractor. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Building the probability estimate FROM observed frequencies is exactly what the item demands, and rejecting 1/2 is the whole point. Weaknesses that make this a thin FULL: one form, coins only, data always near-uniform (never a genuinely non-uniform process like the tossed cup), and the do-the-outcomes-appear-equally-likely judgment lives in the why. |
| 7.SP.8 | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE · re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
probabilityG7Q L6 P(two heads) = 1/4 with the 1/2 and equally-likely-counts 1/3 foils; spinner × die sample-space size m×n. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
A compound-event probability is found via the sample space, with the standard's canonical misconception (1/3) as a distractor. Weaknesses: the only item that finds a compound PROBABILITY is fully hardcoded (two coins, no randomization — one item, memorizable); the m×n item counts outcomes but never asks a probability; simulation (one of the listed methods) is absent. |
| 7.SP.8a | FULL adversarial: NOTE-ONLY · re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
probabilityG7Q L6 (two-coin item) Sample space HH/HT/TH/TT enumerated in the why; answer is the fraction of outcomes composing the event. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The probability-as-fraction-of-the-sample-space idea is exactly what separates 1/4 from the 1/3 foil. Weakness: the SAME single hardcoded item carries this code and 7.SP.8 — the enumeration itself is in the why, and no second context exists. |
| 7.SP.8b | PARTIAL | probabilityG7Q L6 (spinner-die form) How many outcomes are in the sample space of (color, number) pairs? m+n and n foils. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The child COUNTS the sample space by multiplying; representing it — producing or reading a list, table, or tree — never happens (lists/trees are mentioned only in whys), and identify-the-outcomes-composing-an-event is never asked for a described everyday event. Blocking clause: Represent sample spaces for compound events using methods such as organized lists, tables and tree diagrams |
| 7.SP.8c | NOT COVERED re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
— | Design-and-use-a-simulation is a conduct/simulate verb; nothing in the app runs or interprets a simulation. Known wall. |
| Code | Verdict | Evidence (generator · forms) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8.NS.1 | PARTIAL | irrationalsQ L1 Which number is irrational (√non-perfect vs √perfect vs terminating/repeating decimals and fractions); why is √perfect rational (with the every-root-is-rational foil). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Knowing irrational-vs-rational and why is well exercised, including the crucial √perfect = integer case. Showing that a rational's expansion repeats, and converting a repeating decimal to a fraction, never appear. Blocking clause: convert a decimal expansion which repeats eventually into a rational number |
| 8.NS.2 | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE |
irrationalsQ L2-L3 Between which consecutive integers does √n sit (boxing with perfect squares); which integer is √n closer to (midpoint-squared test in the why). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Rational approximation of irrationals is the entire generator, and the method (perfect-square boxing, then the .5² refinement) is the standard's own example. Weaknesses: comparisons are only root-vs-integer, never irrational-vs-irrational; no expression estimates (π² style); π never appears as an irrational; no rendered number line — 'locate approximately' is exercised only as between-which-integers. |
| 8.EE.1 | PARTIAL | irrationalsQ L1 (adjacent) √perfect evaluated (√16 = 4 style) inside irrational-identification items; √2-class irrationality is the L1 target. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
KS's rewritten 8.EE.1 (roots, not exponent laws). Square-root evaluation happens only as a by-product of the rational/irrational sort — no x² = p solve items — and cube roots appear nowhere in the app. Note: the expressionsG8Q product-of-powers form is NOT credited here or anywhere in KS (MO-only; KS deleted CCSS 8.EE.1). Blocking clause: cube root symbols to represent solutions to equations of the form x³ = p ... cube roots of whole number perfect cubes |
| 8.EE.2 | PARTIAL | expressionsG8Q kinds 0-1 Single digit × 10^k written from and expanded to standard form. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The single-digit-times-power-of-10 form is handled fluently in both directions. The standard's point — using those forms to ESTIMATE real quantities and compare magnitudes (world population is 20× the US) — never appears: no estimation framing, no how-many-times comparison. Blocking clause: express how many times as much one is than the other |
| 8.EE.3 | PARTIAL | expressionsG8Q kinds 0-1 Write d×10^k in scientific notation (format-rule distractor d0×10^(k−1)); convert d×10^k to a decimal numeral (exponent-counts-places why). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Read and write, in both directions, with the front-part-between-1-and-10 rule as an actual distractor — the core is genuinely exercised. Blocked on the units clause, and additionally: exponents are always positive (very SMALL quantities never appear), mantissas are always single digits, and no technology-generated notation (E-notation) is ever interpreted. Blocking clause: choose units of appropriate size for measurements of very large or very small quantities |
| 8.EE.4 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
ratiosSaplingQ L8 Constant of proportionality from a table; proportionality test on pairs. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The unit rate k is extracted from tables, but this standard is about GRAPHS — graphing, slope-as-unit-rate on a graph, and comparing two proportional relationships represented in different ways all require the graph wall. functionsQ L2 compares rates but of non-proportional linear functions. Known wall (the graph half of the KS slope cluster). Blocking clause: Graph proportional relationships, interpreting its unit rate as the slope (m) of the graph |
| 8.EE.5 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
functionsQ L2 Rate of change computed from two table points (Δy/Δx in the why). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The slope formula is exercised in effect (difference of y's over difference of x's from a table). The similar-triangles argument never appears, slope is never computed from two named coordinate points as such, and the child never generates either equation — production verbs behind the graph wall. Blocking clause: Use similar triangles to explain why the slope (m) is the same between any two distinct points ... Generate the equation y = mx ... and the equation y = mx + b |
| 8.EE.6 | PARTIAL | functionsQ L3-L4; ratiosSaplingQ L8 Linear-but-misses-(0,0) distractor rejected; b as the starting value in y = mx + b; proportional-does-not-need-(1,1) why. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The ingredients (constant rate everywhere, origin only for proportional, b as the shift) each appear somewhere, but no item ever asks about the y = mx ↔ y = mx + b relationship itself, and 'vertical translation' framing appears nowhere. Blocking clause: Describe the relationship between the proportional relationship expressed in y = mx and the non-proportional linear relationship y = mx + b as a result of a vertical translation |
| 8.EE.7 | FULL | equationsG8Q kind 0; equationsSaplingQ L5/L7; inequalitiesG7Q L4 One-step (all four operations), two-step px + q = r, variables both sides ax + b = cx + d, and two-step inequalities including the divide-by-a-negative flip. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
One-step, two-step, multi-step-ish (both sides), equations AND inequalities, same variable both sides — the enumeration is actually met. Weaknesses: 'fluently' is asserted, not measured; no equation ever requires distribution before solving; coefficients are always integers. |
| 8.EE.7a | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE |
equationsG8Q kinds 1-2 ax + b = ax + d classified as no solution (b ≠ d) or infinitely many (b = d), with the opposite case and x = d as foils. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The one/none/infinite trichotomy is directly assessed and the why performs the successive transformation (subtract ax, judge b = d). Weaknesses making this a thin FULL: the child CLASSIFIES canned same-coefficient cases rather than giving examples (the standard's verb), the one-solution case never appears in this form (only implicitly via kind 0), and the equation shape is always ax + b = ax + d. |
| 8.EE.7b | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
equationsG8Q kind 0; equationsSaplingQ L7 Both-sides equations solved by collecting like terms; two-step equations. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Collecting like terms across the equals sign is exercised. No equation or inequality ever requires distributing or factoring first, and coefficients are integers, never non-integer rationals. Blocking clause: solutions require expanding and/or factoring expressions using the distributive property |
| 8.F.1 | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE |
functionsQ L1 Given three (input, output) pairs, is it a function? Both polarity variants; the legal two-inputs-share-an-output case is the key distractor. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The exactly-one-output-per-input rule is the whole item, and the distractor set (shared outputs are fine; 'cannot tell from three pairs') is honest. Ordered-pairs framing matches the graph-as-set-of-pairs clause. Weakness: tables/pair-lists only — never a graph or a verbal rule; function notation correctly absent per KS. |
| 8.F.2 | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
functionsQ L2 y = m1x + b1 (equation) vs a table through (0,0) — which grows faster? Rate read off the table; starts-higher foil separates rate from intercept. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Two linear functions in two different representations, compared on rate of change — the standard's own example. Weaknesses: single form; only rate is ever the question (greater y-intercept and intersection point are foils, never targets); the representations are always equation-vs-table (graphs and verbal descriptions never appear). |
| 8.F.3 | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE |
functionsQ L3 Table of (x, y): linear (constant +m) vs nonlinear (x² + b, growing jumps); misses-(0,0) and only-a-graph-can-decide foils. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Linear-means-constant-per-step-change is directly assessed, and the misses-the-origin foil kills the proportional/linear conflation; the standard's own A = s² nonlinear example is essentially the item. Weaknesses: nonlinear is only ever quadratic-from-a-table; y = mx + b is interpreted as linear only implicitly (via L4's context item). |
| 8.F.4 | PARTIAL | functionsQ L2/L4 Rate of change from a table; b interpreted as the starting cost in a rental context (with per-hour and max-hours foils). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Determining the rate from two (x, y) values and interpreting rate/initial value in context are both exercised. CONSTRUCTING the function — producing y = mx + b from a described relationship — never happens, and nothing is ever read from a graph. Blocking clause: Construct a function to model a linear relationship between two quantities |
| 8.F.5 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Analyzing a graph qualitatively (increasing/decreasing, linear/nonlinear regions) and sketching a graph from a verbal description both require rendered/produced graphs; none exist. Known wall — both halves are graph verbs. | |
| 8.G.1 | PARTIAL | geometrySaplingQ L9; geometryG8Q; arcsQ Angle measures used fluently across supplements, vertical pairs, triangle sums, transversals, and arc fractions. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
KS pulled this angle-concepts cluster down; the app USES degree measures everywhere but never assesses the concept of measurement itself (rays sharing an endpoint, angle as turn). Stem graded on its sub-codes: 1a PARTIAL, 1b NOT COVERED. Blocking clause: understand concepts of angle measurement |
| 8.G.1a | PARTIAL | arcsQ L11 θ/360 as the fraction of the circle, driving arc length and sector area; whys name 90° = a quarter, 120° = a third, 180° = half. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The angle-as-fraction-of-a-circle conception is genuinely exercised — arcsQ is built on it. The one-degree-angle definition itself is never assessed, and no angle is ever shown against a circle; the fraction reasoning always serves an arc/sector computation. Blocking clause: An angle that turns through 1/360 of a circle is called a "one-degree angle" |
| 8.G.1b | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
The n-one-degree-angles-means-n-degrees definition is presupposed by every angle computation in the app but never itself the target of any item. Presupposed is not exercised. | |
| 8.G.2 | NOT COVERED | — | Measuring with a protractor and drawing angles of specified measure are tool/draw verbs; nothing in the app renders a protractor or accepts a drawing. Known wall. |
| 8.G.3 | PARTIAL | geometrySaplingQ L9 form 1; geometryG8Q kind 1 Supplementary partner (180 − a, with the complementary-confusion foil); third angle of a triangle (180 − a − b, with the quadrilateral-360 foil). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Additive unknown-angle arithmetic is genuinely solved — the equation-with-an-unknown-angle move is the actual work. But every angle arrives as text; no diagram is ever rendered, and decomposition of a shown angle into parts never happens. Display wall on the diagram clause. Blocking clause: find unknown angles on a diagram |
| 8.G.4 | PARTIAL | geometrySaplingQ L9 form 1 Vertical angles equal (supplement as foil); supplementary pairs (complement as foil). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Supplementary and vertical facts are directly assessed with the right confusions as distractors. But every item is single-step, complementary appears only as a foil (never a target), adjacent angles never appear, no equation is ever written, and there is no figure. Blocking clause: in a multi-step problem to write and use them to solve simple equations for an unknown angle in a figure |
| 8.G.5 | PARTIAL | geometryG8Q kinds 1-2 Triangle angle sum (180 − a − b); corresponding and alternate-interior angles equal under parallel lines, supplement foil. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The FACTS (angle sum, transversal angle pairs) are computed with correctly. The informal ARGUMENTS — the three-copies-form-a-line arrangement, transversal reasoning as proof — live only in whys, and two named facts (exterior angle of a triangle, angle-angle similarity) never appear at all. Blocking clause: Use informal arguments to establish facts |
| 8.G.6 | NOT COVERED | — | Drawing shapes with given conditions and judging unique/multiple/no triangle from three measures — draw verbs plus a construction judgment that appears nowhere. Known wall. |
| 8.G.7 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
'Explain a proof of the Pythagorean Theorem and its converse' — the theorem is USED in geometryG8Q, but no item explains or selects a proof, and the converse (is this triangle right?) never appears. | |
| 8.G.8 | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE |
geometryG8Q kind 0 Find the hypotenuse from two legs, or a leg from hypotenuse + leg, over a 7-triple bank; legs-sum foil ('the walk around the corner') and near-miss foil; hypotenuse-is-longest check in the why. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Applying the theorem to determine unknown side lengths, in both directions, is squarely exercised with the canonical a+b error as a distractor. Weaknesses making this a thin FULL: sides are ALWAYS Pythagorean-triple integers (never an irrational answer, which is where 8.NS would bite), every problem is a bare triangle — no real-world setting — and the statement's three-dimensional clause (slant heights of pyramids and cones) is never touched. |
| 8.G.9 | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Distance between two coordinate points via the Pythagorean Theorem appears nowhere. (transformationsQ moves coordinate points but is MO-only and never asks a distance.) | |
| 8.G.10 | PARTIAL | arcsQ L11; volumeG8Q L6 Arc length (θ/360 × 2πr) and sector area (θ/360 × πr²), π-exact over a 9-pair bank; cone volume (third of the cylinder) and sphere volume (4/3 πr³). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Arc length, sector area, cone volume, and sphere volume are all genuinely computed — the KS-only HS pulldowns exist because arcsQ was built for them. Blocked on: pyramids appear nowhere (no volume, no anything), and SURFACE area of pyramids/cones/spheres never appears (sphere SA shows up only as a distractor). Blocking clause: surface areas and volumes of pyramids, cones, and spheres |
| 8.G.11 | PARTIAL | volumeG8Q L6 Cone volume via the one-third-of-the-enclosing-cylinder relationship; sphere volume. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Stem code; graded on its sub-codes. The cone-cylinder relationship is at least computed with (the distractor set includes the full cylinder); the investigate layer is why-carried. 11a PARTIAL, 11b NOT COVERED. Blocking clause: Investigate the relationship between the formulas of three dimensional geometric shapes |
| 8.G.11a | PARTIAL | volumeG8Q kind 1 Cone volume with the enclosing-cylinder volume and 2/3-of-it as foils; why tells the three-cones-of-water experiment. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The 1/3 relationship is exercised for CONES — choosing cyl/3 over cyl is the item. Pyramids never appear, and the generalization (same V = 1/3 Bh across both families) is carried by the why, not asked. Blocking clause: Generalize the volume formula for pyramids and cones (V = 1/3 Bh) |
| 8.G.11b | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Surface area of pyramids and cones (SA = B + 1/2 Pl) appears nowhere — no slant heights, no lateral areas, no pyramids at all. | |
| 8.G.12 | PARTIAL | arcsQ L11; volumeG8Q L6 Arc-length, sector-area, cone-volume, and sphere-volume problems, all π-exact. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The arc/sector and cone/sphere volume halves of this problems standard are genuinely solved. Blocked the same way as 8.G.10: no pyramids, no surface area of any of the three solids, and every item is bare-numbers rather than real-world. Blocking clause: surface area of three-dimensional objects including pyramids, cones and spheres |
| 8.SP.1 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Constructing and interpreting scatter plots requires rendered bivariate plots; none exist anywhere in the app. Known wall. | |
| 8.SP.2 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Informally fitting a line to a scatter plot and judging fit by closeness of points is display + production on a plot that is never rendered. Known wall. (twoWayTableQ is MO-only 8.DSP.A.4 — absent in KS — and credits nothing here.) | |
| 8.SP.3 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
functionsQ L4 y = rate·x + start in a rental context; the intercept interpreted as the starting cost, rate as the per-hour cost foil. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Interpreting slope and intercept of a linear model in context is genuinely exercised — the closest thing in the app to this standard's 1.5 cm/hr example. But the context is always a deterministic pricing rule, never a fitted model of measured bivariate data, and the model is never used to solve a prediction problem about data. Blocking clause: in the context of bivariate measurement data |
| Code | Verdict | Evidence (generator · forms) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| RL.6.1 | PARTIAL | comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-secondlap, p6-static) Evidence-bound inference items: why Jonah smiles, what Priya's passing 'without looking over' suggests, what the brother's giving up his turn reveals. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Inferences drawn from the text are genuinely assessed and each answer is anchored to a quoted line — but the quoting happens in the WHY, after answering. The child never selects or produces the piece of evidence that supports a reading; the citing act itself is why-carried. Blocking clause: Cite textual evidence to support analysis |
| RL.6.2 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-secondlap) Which sentence best states the passage's theme? — theme-as-idea-under-the-plot, with topic-word and false-moral distractors. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Determining a theme is directly assessed and the why ties it to particular details (the smile AFTER losing). No item ever asks for or elicits a summary, and the how-conveyed-through-details half is why-carried. One theme item, one passage. Blocking clause: provide a summary of the text distinct from personal opinions or judgments |
| RL.6.3 | PARTIAL | comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-secondlap, p6-static) Why does Jonah smile at the end; what the brother's action reveals; why the ending silence is 'exactly enough' (reversal from the opening). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
How characters respond and change as the plot moves toward resolution is genuinely probed (annoyance-to-wonder, the defeated quit-voice). Plot-as-a-series-of-episodes is never analyzed — both stories are single-episode vignettes and no item asks about sequence or unfolding. Blocking clause: how a particular story's or drama's plot unfolds in a series of episodes |
| RL.6.4 | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE · re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-secondlap item 2, p6-static item 2) 'Rehearsed' most nearly means (context-fixed meaning); the 'like a held breath' simile — what it makes Saturn FEEL like (impact of a word choice on tone). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Word-in-context meaning and the impact of a specific figurative choice on feeling are each directly the question. Thin FULL an adversary will attack: exactly two items total, one per half, one word and one simile ever; connotative meaning appears only via the simile item; no item isolates word choice on tone across options. |
| RL.6.5 | FULL | comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-secondlap item 5, p6-static item 4) How does the question 'the race was already decided, wasn't it?' work in the story (doubt staged so its defeat means something); why the closing silence is 'exactly enough' (reversal of the noisy opening). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Both items ask exactly how a particular sentence fits the whole and feeds the theme — the strongest craft items in the bank. Weaknesses: two fixed items, both in literary vignettes; chapter/scene/stanza scale never appears (no drama, no poem in the passage set). |
| RL.6.6 | PARTIAL | comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-static item 1) From whose point of view is the story told, and why does that matter? — first-person skeptical sibling, so the reader feels annoyance turn to wonder. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Identifying the narrator's POV and its effect is assessed. HOW the author develops it (first-person interiority, ironic detail selection) lives in the why; explain is a production verb and the item is selection of a why-it-matters, not of a how-it-is-built. One item. Blocking clause: Explain how an author develops the point of view |
| RL.6.7 | NOT COVERED | — | Comparing reading a text to listening to or viewing an audio/video/live version requires media the app never presents at Grade 6. Multimedia wall — not stretched. |
| RL.6.8 | NOT COVERED re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
— | KS's own statement is 'Not relevant to literature' — a deliberate placeholder (the argument-evaluation slot has no literature analogue). Nothing to cover and nothing claimed; excluded from any coverage percentage in marketing copy. |
| RL.6.9 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
No item ever puts two texts side by side; every comprehension item is single-passage, and no poem or drama exists in the Grade-6 set to compare against a story. | |
| RL.6.10 | NOT COVERED | — | Using knowledge of language and its conventions to improve comprehension is presupposed by every reading item but never itself the target of any item. Presupposed is not exercised (house precedent). |
| RL.6.11 | PARTIAL | comprehensionSaplingQ (word-in-context); vocabularySaplingQ (SAPLING_ROOTS) 'Rehearsed' in context; root/affix meaning and word-decode items. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Stem graded on its sub-codes: a covered (context), b capped PARTIAL (shared bank), c and d not covered. Multiple-meaning words never appear anywhere in the Grade-6 content — every vocabulary item has one target sense. Blocking clause: unknown and multiple-meaning words |
| RL.6.11.a | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE · re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-secondlap item 2) In this passage, 'rehearsed' most nearly means… — context ('in his head all week', the 'what he had not rehearsed' contrast) fixes the meaning. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Using context to determine a word's meaning inside a literary text is exactly the item. Thin FULL: ONE word, one passage, ever — the single most memorizable FULL in this crosswalk. |
| RL.6.11.b | PARTIAL adversarial: NOTE-ONLY |
vocabularySaplingQ (SAPLING_ROOTS, 15 entries × 2 forms) What does the root/prefix/suffix X mean (distractors are other parts' real meanings); using its word parts, 'telescope/portable/predict…' means… ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The clause is genuinely exercised in isolation — tele/port/dict/aud/bio/spect/chron plus affixes, decode form included, etymologies fact-checked. Capped PARTIAL by house rule: the identical SAPLING_ROOTS bank is the sole credit for BOTH RL.6.11.b and RI.6.11.b (and feeds SL.6.8), and the words are bank-standalone — never a word met in a literary text being read. Blocking clause: Use common, grade-appropriate Greek or Latin affixes and roots to define the meaning of a word |
| RL.6.11.c | NOT COVERED | — | No reference materials, print or digital, exist anywhere in the app — no dictionary lookup, no pronunciation, no part-of-speech determination. Interaction-mode wall. |
| RL.6.11.d | NOT COVERED | — | Verifying a preliminary meaning against context or a dictionary is a multi-step checking behavior no item hosts; the closest content (context confirmation of 'rehearsed') performs the check FOR the child in the why. |
| RL.6.12 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-static item 3) The 'held breath' simile item. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Stem graded on sub-codes: a covered by one strong simile item; b and c not covered — word relationships appear only inside vocabulary whys (transport/export families), and connotation-among-similar-denotations is never assessed. Blocking clause: word relationships and nuances in word meanings |
| RL.6.12.a | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-static item 3) The comparison 'like a held breath' makes Saturn feel… — still/fragile vs loud/fast and imaginary foils; why names what a simile transfers. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Interpreting a figure of speech in its context is squarely the item and the foils are honest misreadings. Thin FULL: ONE simile, one passage, ever; no metaphor, personification, or idiom at Grade 6 (the K-5 figurative skill tops out below the Sapling band and credits nothing here). |
| RL.6.12.b | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED-AFTER-FIX) |
Cause/effect, part/whole, item/category word relationships are never an item. Root families ('transport and export grow from port') live only in vocabulary whys — rationale-only content credits nothing. | |
| RL.6.12.c | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
No item ever distinguishes connotations of words with similar denotations. K-5 synonym banks compare meanings, not associations, and sit below the band. | |
| RL.6.13 | PARTIAL | comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-secondlap, p6-static) Two literary passages read by the child (passageSelfRead: true — reading it yourself IS the task), each with 4-5 analysis items. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Independent reading of well-crafted literary prose genuinely happens. Blocked on complexity and range: both passages are ~110-word vignettes (quantitative complexity far below grade-6 text length), and 'dramas, prose and poetry' is met on exactly one leg — no drama, no poetry, anywhere. Blocking clause: of appropriate quantitative and qualitative complexity for sixth grade |
| RI.6.1 | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE |
comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-octopus items 2, 5) Which detail supports the claim that the disguise happens fast? (true-but-irrelevant details as foils); what can you infer about why two hearts serve the gills (smallest-step inference). ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
The evidence-selection item is the citing act in selection form — matching the one detail that supports a stated claim, against details that are true but support other points — and the inference item stays evidence-bound. Thin FULL: one informational passage, one evidence item and one inference item, ever. |
| RI.6.2 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-octopus item 1) What is the central idea of the passage? — must cover camouflage + blue blood + three hearts + brief life, with single-detail and overreach foils. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Central-idea determination is directly assessed and the why shows how the details converge on it. No summary is ever asked for or produced. One item, one passage. Blocking clause: provide a summary of the text distinct from personal opinions or judgments |
| RI.6.3 | PARTIAL | comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-octopus item 4) Why does the author most likely mention that the blood is blue? — the next exhibit in the case about strangeness. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
One item genuinely asks how an idea is elaborated (detail-as-evidence-in-a-case). Introduction and illustration are never analyzed, 'in detail' overstates a single item, and the same item is the sole credit for RI.6.6 — shared-item cap applies. Blocking clause: how a key individual, event or idea is introduced, illustrated and elaborated |
| RI.6.4 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-octopus item 3) Based on the passage, chromatophores are… — the definition sits beside the word; the why teaches where technical texts pay for their hard words. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Technical meaning-in-context is genuinely assessed (one item). Figurative and connotative meanings in informational text never appear — the enumeration is met on one of three legs. Blocking clause: including figurative, connotative and technical meanings |
| RI.6.5 | NOT COVERED | — | TEMPTED AND DECLINED: the blue-blood item ('the disguise is only the start of its strangeness' as a pivot sentence) brushes structure, but it is already the sole credit for RI.6.3 and RI.6.6 — stretching one item across three analysis standards is exactly what an adversary would flay. No item targets how a sentence/paragraph/section fits the overall structure. |
| RI.6.6 | PARTIAL | comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-octopus item 4) Author's most likely purpose for mentioning the blue blood — building the case for strangeness, vs warning and mechanism foils. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Local authorial purpose (why this detail) is assessed once. The author's overall point of view and whole-text purpose are never determined, and 'explain how they are conveyed' is why-carried. Same single item shared with RI.6.3. Blocking clause: Determine an author's point of view |
| RI.6.7 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Integrating information across different media or formats (visual, quantitative) requires media the app never presents — all Grade-6 content is prose text. Multimedia wall. | |
| RI.6.8 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED-RECORD-CORRECTED) |
TEMPTED AND DECLINED: the supports-the-claim item matches evidence to a claim, but the octopus passage is expository, not argumentative — no argument is ever traced, and supported-vs-unsupported claims are never distinguished. That item is credited to RI.6.1 where it belongs. | |
| RI.6.9 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Comparing two authors' presentations of the same events requires paired texts; only one informational passage exists and no item is cross-text. | |
| RI.6.10 | NOT COVERED | — | Same as RL.6.10 — conventions knowledge is presupposed by reading, never assessed as the target. Presupposed is not exercised. |
| RI.6.11 | PARTIAL | comprehensionSaplingQ (chromatophores item); vocabularySaplingQ (SAPLING_ROOTS) Technical word defined from context; root/affix bank. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Stem graded on sub-codes: a covered, b capped PARTIAL (shared bank), c and d not covered. Multiple-meaning words never appear. Blocking clause: unknown and multiple-meaning words |
| RI.6.11.a | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-octopus item 3) Chromatophores defined from the appositive right beside the word — 'tiny sacs of pigment called chromatophores.' ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Using context (an in-text definition) to determine a word's meaning is exactly the item, and the why teaches the transferable move. Thin FULL: one word, one passage, ever — flag with RL.6.11.a as the weakest FULLs. |
| RI.6.11.b | PARTIAL | vocabularySaplingQ (SAPLING_ROOTS) Same 15-entry roots/affixes bank as RL.6.11.b, both forms. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Identical bank, identical cap: one shared item bank is the sole credit for both strands' .11.b, and no bank word is ever encountered inside an informational text being read. Capped PARTIAL per the shared-bank rule. Blocking clause: Use common, grade-appropriate Greek or Latin affixes and roots to define the meaning of a word |
| RI.6.11.c | NOT COVERED | — | No reference materials anywhere in the app. Interaction-mode wall. |
| RI.6.11.d | NOT COVERED | — | The verify-your-inference checking behavior is never elicited; the whys perform it for the child. |
| RI.6.12 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Stem falls with its sub-codes: no figurative-language, word-relationship, or connotation item exists in an informational context. The one simile item lives in a literary passage and is credited to RL.6.12.a only. | |
| RI.6.12.a | NOT COVERED | — | TEMPTED AND DECLINED: the 'held breath' simile item could be waved at this strand-duplicate, but it interprets a figure in a STORY — no figurative language is ever assessed in informational text. |
| RI.6.12.b | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED-AFTER-FIX) |
Word relationships are never an item; root families appear only in whys. | |
| RI.6.12.c | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Connotation among similar denotations is never assessed anywhere. | |
| RI.6.13 | PARTIAL | comprehensionSaplingQ (p6-octopus) One informational passage read by the child (passageSelfRead), five items across central idea, evidence, technical vocabulary, purpose, inference. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
Independent reading of quality informational prose happens, and the passage carries genuine technical content. Blocked on complexity and range: ONE ~110-word passage is the entire informational reading diet — neither grade-6 length nor any range of topics or structures. Blocking clause: of appropriate quantitative and qualitative complexity for sixth grade |
| W.6.1 | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE · re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
WRITE_PROMPTS wp-six-argument (writing-coach L4) Should your school start an hour later? — real written production, min 250 chars, LLM-judged against rubric: arguable claim, two distinct pieces of evidence/reasoning, answers an opposing view, organized paragraph. |
The Writing Coach genuinely elicits argument writing with claims, reasons, and evidence — production, not selection. Weaknesses an adversary will name: ONE fixed prompt and topic, ever; the rubric is the judge's whole contract, so anything outside it (style, transitions, conclusion) goes ungraded; feature is runtime-gated (writingOn) and paid. |
| W.6.1.a | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE · re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED-EVIDENCE-REANCHORED) |
WRITE_PROMPTS wp-six-argument rubric lines 1 and 4 'A clear, arguable claim' and 'Complete sentences, organized as one paragraph' are judged on the child's own writing. |
Introducing a claim and organizing the argument are both rubric-enforced on real production. Thin FULL: organization is judged only as one-paragraph coherence — 'organize the reasons and evidence clearly' is graded coarsely, and only on this single prompt. |
| W.6.1.b | PARTIAL | WRITE_PROMPTS wp-six-argument rubric line 2 'Two distinct pieces of evidence or reasoning' judged on the child's writing. |
Supporting a claim with reasons and evidence is genuinely produced and graded. No sources exist in the flow — the child argues from experience, so credible-source use and demonstrating understanding of a TEXT are never met. Blocking clause: using credible sources |
| W.6.1.c | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Cohesive words/phrases/clauses clarifying claim-reason relationships are neither demanded by the prompt nor present in the rubric — the judge grades only the four rubric lines, so this dimension is never assessed even when a child happens to do it. | |
| W.6.1.d | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Formal style is not in any wp-six rubric; register is never established, maintained, or graded. | |
| W.6.1.e | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
No concluding-statement line exists in the argument rubric (unlike the inform prompt's closing line, which is credited to W.6.2.f). Ungraded means uncovered. | |
| W.6.2 | PARTIAL adversarial: NOTE-ONLY · re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
WRITE_PROMPTS wp-six-inform (writing-coach L4) Explain something you know how to do better than most people — framed opening, three+ precise steps/facts in logical order, domain-specific words, closing that says why it matters; min 250 chars, LLM-judged. |
OFFICIAL DEFECT, stated per instructions: KS's printed W.6.2 statement is a copy-paste of RL.6.2 (theme/summary — a READING standard); this verdict judges W.6.2 by its sub-codes, which carry the real informative/explanatory writing standard. The blocking clause is quoted from sub-code W.6.2.c for the same reason. Verdict: real informative production exists and is rubric-graded (b, d, f met), but transitions, organizational strategies as such, and formal style are never graded — sub-codes split 3 covered / 1 partial / 2 not. Blocking clause: Use appropriate transitions to clarify the relationships among ideas and concepts |
| W.6.2.a | PARTIAL | WRITE_PROMPTS wp-six-inform rubric lines 1-2 'An opening that frames the topic' and 'in a logical order' judged on production. |
Introducing a topic and organizing ideas are genuinely graded. The named organizational strategies are never demanded or assessed — the only organization ever graded is step/fact sequence. Blocking clause: using strategies such as definition, classification, comparison/contrast and cause/effect |
| W.6.2.b | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
WRITE_PROMPTS wp-six-inform rubric line 2 'Three or more precise steps or facts, in a logical order' judged on the child's own explanatory writing. |
Developing a topic with relevant facts and concrete details is rubric-enforced production. Thin FULL: one prompt; quotations and other-information legs of the enumeration never come up (the standard's list is illustrative). |
| W.6.2.c | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Transitions are not in the rubric and never graded. | |
| W.6.2.d | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
WRITE_PROMPTS wp-six-inform rubric line 3 'Domain-specific words used correctly' judged on the child's chosen expertise topic. |
Precise, domain-specific language is an explicit rubric line on real production — the child must deploy the vocabulary of something they genuinely know. Thin FULL: a single rubric line on a single prompt; flag among the weakest FULLs. |
| W.6.2.e | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Formal style is not in the rubric. | |
| W.6.2.f | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
WRITE_PROMPTS wp-six-inform rubric line 4 'A closing that says why it matters' judged on production. |
A concluding section that follows from the explanation is rubric-enforced. Thin FULL: one prompt, one closing shape (why-it-matters). |
| W.6.3 | PARTIAL adversarial: DOWNGRADE · re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
WRITE_PROMPTS wp-six-narrative (writing-coach L4) Write a scene, not a summary: two characters, one moment of tension, two+ lines of correctly punctuated dialogue, pacing slows at the key moment, sensory/concrete detail; min 280 chars, LLM-judged. |
Real narrative production with technique (dialogue, pacing, description) rubric-enforced — the strongest single writing item in the app. Weaknesses: one fixed prompt; scene-only scope means event SEQUENCES are never developed; imagined-vs-real experience is the child's choice, untested. |
| W.6.3.a. | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
WRITE_PROMPTS wp-six-narrative rubric line 1 'A single scene with two characters and real tension' judged on production. |
Introducing characters and establishing a situation are graded via the scene requirement. But the prompt deliberately forbids a sequence ('a scene, not a summary') — event-sequence organization and reader orientation/context-establishment are never graded. Blocking clause: organize an event sequence that unfolds naturally and logically |
| W.6.3.b | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
WRITE_PROMPTS wp-six-narrative rubric lines 2-4 Dialogue (two+ correctly punctuated lines), pacing (the key moment gets the most words), description (sensory/concrete detail, not labels) — each a graded rubric line. |
The standard's three named techniques — dialogue, pacing and description — are each an explicit rubric line on real production. The cleanest FULL in the Writing strand. Weakness: one prompt. |
| W.6.3.c | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Transition words signaling time-frame or setting shifts are structurally excluded — the prompt confines the child to a single scene, so shifts never occur and are never graded. | |
| W.6.3.d | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
WRITE_PROMPTS wp-six-narrative rubric line 4 'Sensory or concrete detail, not labels' judged on production. |
Precise words and sensory language conveying the experience are rubric-enforced. Thin FULL: a single rubric line on a single prompt; 'relevant descriptive details' is graded only as concrete-vs-label. |
| W.6.3.e | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
No conclusion line exists in the narrative rubric; an ending that follows from the events is never graded. | |
| W.6.4 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
WRITE_PROMPTS wp-six-argument/inform/narrative/analyze Four distinct task types (argue, inform, narrate, analyze), each rubric-judged for development and organization on real production. |
Clear, coherent, task-appropriate writing is genuinely produced and graded across four purposes. AUDIENCE is never specified, varied, or graded on any prompt — the third leg of the clause is untouched — and style is graded only where a rubric line happens to imply it. Blocking clause: appropriate to task, purpose and audience |
| W.6.5 | PARTIAL | WriteBox try-again flow (one revision invited after coaching feedback) On a below-rubric submission the coach shows targeted feedback (grow items) and invites exactly one revision before resolution. |
Revision with guidance genuinely happens — the child gets coaching on their own draft and rewrites once. But it is one revision of one draft: planning is never elicited, editing/rewriting beyond the single retry never happens, and trying a new approach is impossible. Guidance is machine, not 'adults and peers.' Blocking clause: by planning, revising, editing, rewriting or trying a new approach |
| W.6.6 | NOT COVERED adversarial: DOWNGRADE |
— | Producing writing with technology genuinely happens — every wp-six response is typed and machine-evaluated. Publishing, interacting, and collaborating never happen (writing goes only to the judge), and the three-pages-in-a-sitting keyboarding benchmark (min 250-280 chars) is nowhere near met. Blocking clause: to produce and publish writing as well as to interact and collaborate with others |
| W.6.7 | NOT COVERED | — | Short research projects drawing on several sources — research wall; the app hosts no sources, no inquiry, no refocusing. Not stretched. |
| W.6.8 | NOT COVERED | — | Gathering information from print/digital sources, assessing credibility, quoting/paraphrasing with attribution — research wall, nothing behind any verb. |
| W.6.9 | PARTIAL adversarial: RECLASSIFY |
WRITE_PROMPTS wp-six-analyze Name the theme of a book you finished this year and defend the reading with two specific moments — rubric: theme as idea not topic word, two specific moments as evidence, explains HOW each moment shows the theme. |
Drawing evidence from a literary text to support analysis is genuinely produced and graded — the child must cite two concrete moments and connect each to a claimed theme. Blocked on the second leg: evidence is only ever drawn from a literary text (a self-chosen, outside-the-app one at that); informational-text evidence writing never happens. Blocking clause: analysis, reflection and research |
| W.6.10 | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED-EVIDENCE-REANCHORED) |
writing-coach L4 rubrics ('Complete sentences') + WriteBox coaching Every wp-six rubric demands complete sentences on production; coaching flags convention breaks in the child's own draft. |
Stem graded on its sub-codes (blocking clause quoted from W.6.10.b). Baseline grammatical command is genuinely enforced on real writing — complete sentences are a graded line everywhere. But every named sub-skill (sentence variety, pronoun case, intensive pronouns, pronoun shifts, vague pronouns, style/tone consistency) goes untargeted: 1 of 8 sub-codes partially covered. Blocking clause: Ensure that pronouns are in the proper case (subjective, objective, possessive) |
| W.6.10.a | NOT COVERED | — | Sentence-pattern variety is never demanded by a prompt or graded by a rubric. |
| W.6.10.b | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (UPGRADED) |
Pronoun case is never assessed at Grade 6; no K-5 bank targets subjective/objective/possessive case either. | |
| W.6.10.c | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (UPGRADED) |
Intensive pronouns (myself, ourselves) appear nowhere in any generator or rubric. | |
| W.6.10.d | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Shifts in pronoun number and person are never presented for recognition or correction. | |
| W.6.10.e | FULL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (UPGRADED) |
Vague-pronoun recognition and correction never appears. | |
| W.6.10.f | PARTIAL | WriteBox coaching feedback + one-revision flow The coach identifies variations from standard English in the child's OWN draft (grow-flagged feedback) and the child may revise once. |
The recognize-and-improve loop exists for the child's own writing, in a thin machine-mediated form — the COACH does the recognizing, the child applies the fix. Others' writing is never examined, and the strategies half is coach-supplied, not child-identified. Blocking clause: in their own and others' writing |
| W.6.10.g | PARTIAL | WriteBox coaching feedback + one-revision flow Continuation fragment of W.6.10.f ('…conventional language.') — the extraction preserves KS's own line break as a separate code. |
Not a standalone standard: this code is the tail of W.6.10.f's sentence in the KS layout. Graded identically to W.6.10.f and stated as a fragment so no one counts it as independent coverage. Blocking clause: in their own and others' writing |
| W.6.10.h | NOT COVERED | — | Consistency in style and tone is never graded — no rubric line, no coaching target. |
| W.6.11 | PARTIAL | wp-six-narrative rubric ('correctly punctuated dialogue'); all wp-six rubrics ('Complete sentences') Dialogue punctuation graded on production; sentence-boundary capitalization/punctuation enforced by every rubric. |
Stem graded on sub-codes (blocking clause quoted from W.6.11.a). Punctuation command IS demonstrated on real writing — dialogue punctuation is genuinely grade-band work — but the named grade-6 punctuation skill (nonrestrictive elements) and spelling are never assessed. Blocking clause: Use punctuation (commas, parentheses, dashes) to set off nonrestrictive/parenthetical elements |
| W.6.11.a | PARTIAL re-audited ×1 · re-audited ×2 (CONFIRMED) |
Commas/parentheses/dashes setting off nonrestrictive or parenthetical elements are never demanded, presented, or graded. | |
| W.6.11.b | PARTIAL adversarial: UPGRADE |
No wp-six rubric names spelling, so the judge does not grade it; K-5 spelling banks sit below the band and their clause ('spell correctly' at grade 6 level) is not genuinely met by them. | |
| W.6.12 | PARTIAL | writing-coach L4 (four prompts, repeatable single-sitting sessions) Short-time-frame written production across four discipline-relevant purposes, routinely available in the play loop. |
Single-sitting routine writing for a range of tasks and purposes genuinely happens. Extended-time-frame writing — multi-day pieces with research and sustained revision — is structurally impossible in the app; drafts do not persist across sessions. Blocking clause: extended time frames (time for research, reflection and revision) |
| SL.6.1 | NOT COVERED | — | Collaborative discussion with partners — interaction-mode wall (no peer or adult interlocutor exists). Not stretched; applies to the whole SL.6.1 family. |
| SL.6.1a | NOT COVERED | — | Coming to discussions prepared presupposes a discussion; none exists. |
| SL.6.1b | NOT COVERED | — | Rules, goals, and roles for collegial discussion — interaction-mode wall. |
| SL.6.1c | NOT COVERED | — | Posing and responding to questions in live discussion — interaction-mode wall. |
| SL.6.1d | NOT COVERED | — | Reviewing others' ideas and paraphrasing multiple perspectives — interaction-mode wall. |
| SL.6.2 | NOT COVERED | — | Interpreting information in diverse media and formats (visual, quantitative, oral) — no Grade-6 item presents any non-text medium. The K-5 listening-comprehension branch tops out below the band and its clause is not this one. Multimedia wall. |
| SL.6.3 | NOT COVERED | — | Delineating a SPEAKER'S argument requires oral argument input; none exists at Grade 6. |
| SL.6.4 | NOT COVERED | — | Oral presentation of claims and findings — speaking wall. The written argument prompt is credited to W.6.1, not stretched here. |
| SL.6.5 | NOT COVERED | — | Multimedia components in presentations — multimedia + speaking wall. |
| SL.6.6 | NOT COVERED | — | Adapting SPEECH to contexts and tasks — speaking wall. |
| SL.6.7 | NOT COVERED | — | Grammar conventions WHEN SPEAKING — speaking wall; applies to the whole SL.6.7 family regardless of the sub-skills' overlap with W.6.10. |
| SL.6.7.a | NOT COVERED | — | Sentence variety in speech — speaking wall. |
| SL.6.7.b | NOT COVERED | — | Intensive pronouns in speech — speaking wall (and never assessed in writing either). |
| SL.6.7.c | NOT COVERED | — | Pronoun-shift correction in speech — speaking wall. |
| SL.6.7.d | NOT COVERED | — | Vague-pronoun correction in speech — speaking wall. |
| SL.6.7.e | NOT COVERED | — | Recognizing variations from standard English in speaking — speaking wall. |
| SL.6.7.f | NOT COVERED | — | Style and tone consistency in speech — speaking wall. |
| SL.6.8 | PARTIAL | vocabularySaplingQ (SAPLING_ROOTS); wp-six-inform rubric line 3 Academic word-part acquisition across 15 roots/affixes; 'Domain-specific words used correctly' graded on the child's own informative writing. ▶ Play a live item from this skill |
KS houses the acquire-and-use-vocabulary standard in SL. Acquisition is exercised (roots bank — the same shared bank capped elsewhere) and accurate USE is genuinely produced and graded once, via the inform rubric's domain-vocabulary line. The gathering-strategies clause (independent word-learning when comprehension demands it) is never elicited, and general academic vocabulary is never a graded target. Blocking clause: gather vocabulary knowledge when considering a word or phrase important to comprehension or expression |
These are the rulings the adversarial passes changed, kept in the open: a report that never shows its corrections is asking to be trusted on faith.
| Code | Change | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| 6.RP.2 | FULL → PARTIAL | The standard's lead verb phrase is 'Use unit rate language (“for each one”, “for every one” and “per”) and unit rate notation to demonstrate understanding'. The mappers' own house rule graded KS 6.RP.1 PARTIAL because 'Use ratio language to describe' is production — the identical verb construction here got FULL. ratiosSaplingQ L6 (content.ts ≈9472-9511): the child computes/compares unit rates and RECOGNIZES rate language in answer options; no item has the child use the language, and the a/b fraction-notation clause ('3/4 cup of flour for each cup of sugar') has zero content — every generated rate is a whole or half-dollar amount. The FULL note itself concedes both gaps. Cross-state: the same generator is PARTIAL under MO 6.RP.A.2's weaker 'describe the meaning' clause. blockingClause: 'Use unit rate language … and unit rate notation'. |
| 6.NS.6 | FULL → PARTIAL | Statement: 'Understand a rational number as a point on the number line and a coordinate pair as a location on a coordinate plane.' Verified in code: integersQ L1 n = 2 + rnd(18) (integers only), coordinateSaplingQ nz() = ±(1+rnd(8)) (integers only). No fraction or decimal is ever placed anywhere in either generator, and no number line or plane is ever rendered — the number-half of the standard is one verbal-description form (‘n units LEFT of zero’). The draft's own precedent grades umbrellas against their statement text (6.EE.2, 6.SP.5 both graded down); 'a rational number as a point' witnessed only through integer cases with no line is the same kind of gap the mapper's own note flags and defers to 6.NS.6c. The pair-as-location half is genuinely covered; the number-as-point half is not — that is the definition of PARTIAL. |
| 6.NS.7a | FULL → PARTIAL | Statement verb: 'INTERPRET statements of inequality as statements about the relative position of two numbers on a number line diagram.' The cited items run the opposite direction: integersQ L2 form 0 asks the child to PRODUCE the order ('Which is LESS: −a or −b?'), and L3 form 1 has the child endorse a true statement — that is 6.NS.7d's distinguish task (already claimed there as FULL). No item ever presents a written inequality (−3 > −7) and asks what it says about position; the positional reading lives entirely in the whys ('−lo sits farther left'), which the mapper's own note admits. Feedback text is not assessed content anywhere else in this crosswalk — 6.NS.7c was capped at PARTIAL for exactly the explanation-lives-in-the-feedback reason. blockingClause: 'Interpret statements of inequality as statements about the relative position of two numbers on a number line diagram'. |
| 6.EE.1 | PARTIAL → PARTIAL | Forms-description mismatch with code: the draft says exponent bases run 'b 2-6'; content.ts 10272 is `const b = 2 + rnd(4)` — bases 2-5 (the MO draft says 2-5, correctly). Exponent e is 2-4 for b≤3, 2-3 for b 4-5. Verdict (PARTIAL, blocked on 'Write') is unaffected; correct the forms string. |
| 6.EE.2c | FULL → PARTIAL | The standard contains a named operational clause: 'Perform arithmetic operations, INCLUDING THOSE INVOLVING WHOLE-NUMBER EXPONENTS, in the conventional order.' Verified in expressionsQ L2 (content.ts 10270-10291): the exponent branch is a bare single-operation b^e item; the evaluate branch is ax + b with no exponent. No generated expression anywhere mixes an exponent with another operation, so order-of-operations WITH exponents — the clause that makes this a Grade-6 standard rather than a Grade-5 one — is never exercised. The mapper's own note names this exact gap and graded FULL anyway. Evaluate-at-values and the formula clause (volumeSaplingQ V=lwh/V=Bh at x.5) are genuinely covered; the exponent-order clause is not. blockingClause: 'including those involving whole-number exponents, in the conventional order'. |
| 6.EE.8b | NOT COVERED → PARTIAL | Content the mappers missed: expressionsQ L3 branch 1 (content.ts 10304-10311) — 'Each ticket costs $per and you pay a flat $k for shipping. Which expression gives the cost of b tickets?' correct: per·b + k. This has the child select the expression for the DEPENDENT quantity (total cost) in terms of the INDEPENDENT variable (b, tickets) — the exact d = 65t-family relationship the standard names, minus the equation form ('c =') and minus 'write' (selection). Under this crosswalk's own conventions, selection covering part of a write clause yields PARTIAL, not NOT COVERED (cf. 6.EE.7, graded PARTIAL on write-as-selection of h > c). Blocked remainder: the equation form is never posed, nothing is written, and the list-and-graph-ordered-pairs example content is absent — so PARTIAL, no higher. |
| 6.G.1 | FULL → FULL | Verdict held under attack, but a hostile evaluator will press the closing clause 'apply these techniques in the context of solving REAL-WORLD and mathematical problems': verified in geometrySaplingQ L6-L7, every area item is a bare labeled shape (cm/m units, no situation — no garden, wall, or floor context anywhere). All named shape classes (triangle, parallelogram, trapezoid, kite, rectilinear L) and compose/decompose are genuinely present, which carries the standard's core; recommend one contexted area form to close the flank. Same exposure on 6.G.2 (bare prisms). |
| 6.SP.5c | FULL → PARTIAL | Internal-consistency overturn. The statement's second half is a production clause: 'as well as DESCRIBING any overall pattern and any striking deviations from the overall pattern with reference to the context.' The mapper's note concedes 'no item has the child characterize a pattern' — the identical concession that produced PARTIAL at 6.NS.5b ('explaining'), 6.NS.7c ('explain'), 6.SP.1 ('generate'), and 6.EE.2a ('write'). The outlier item (statisticsQ L4) identifies a striking deviation by recognition, which keeps this above the give-measures-only floor, but describing an overall pattern has zero content (cluster language appears only in a why). Giving mean/median/mode/range is fully covered; the describing clause is blocked by the house production wall. blockingClause: 'as well as describing any overall pattern … with reference to the context in which the data were gathered'. |
| 6.SP.4 | NOT COVERED → PARTIAL | statisticsDisplayQ L5 build register constructs a real dot plot from listed data (the create verb, on the shipped plot builder). BLOCKING: "histograms, stem-and-leaf plots, and box plots" remain undisplayable. SELF-ASSESSED after the adversarial pass — re-adversarial required at go-live. |
| 6.SP.5a | NOT COVERED → PARTIAL | L5 dot-plot/histogram reading items ask for the total number of observations from a rendered display. BLOCKING: "reporting" as free production. SELF-ASSESSED after the adversarial pass — re-adversarial required at go-live. |
| Code | Attack | Why the claim held |
|---|---|---|
| 6.SP.4 | Rescue attempt (would flip NOT COVERED upward): K-5 dataQ has real display machinery — rendered pictographs/bar charts, a BUILD-the-line-plot interactive (consPlotQ, 3.MD.4 'make' clause), tally charts, and 4.MD.4 line-plot reading in fractions of a unit. A line plot is essentially a dot plot, so this looked like accidental 6.SP.4 coverage. | dataQ caps at level 3 (`Math.min(3, level)`, content.ts ≈2441) and has no sapling register in catalog.ts — not Sapling-reachable, so it cannot count for Grade-6 attribution under the house rule. Even ignoring reachability, KS 6.SP.4 names four display types (dot plots, histograms, stem-and-leaf, box plots) and the K-5 content touches at most the dot-plot cousin; histograms/stem-and-leaf/box plots appear nowhere in the repo. Same result for MO 6.DSP.B.4a/4b. NOT COVERED stands, all four codes. |
| 6.NS.2 | Fluency claim: every quotient is exact (nd = q0×dv by construction), dividends top out ~1218 (L6) / ~3465 (L7), MC with q±1 distractors verifies the answer, not an efficient algorithm; no remainders ever. | The standard's verb is 'divide multi-digit numbers' and multi-digit ÷ 2-digit is genuinely computed; the q±1 distractors cannot be beaten by estimation alone, forcing the actual division. The KS parenthetical defines fluently as efficiently/accurately/flexibly without mandating remainders or a shown algorithm, and no MC engine can observe algorithm choice — the house standard accepts computation-by-MC for fluency codes (same grade both states). The no-remainders ceiling is honestly recorded in the note. |
| 6.NS.4 | Bounds audit against the standard's explicit numeric limits, plus a production attack on 'express … as a multiple of a sum'. | Verified in code: GCF pool filter keeps both operands ≤100 (`g*m1 <= 100 && g*m2 <= 100`); every LCM pair ∈ {[4,6],[6,8],[4,10],[6,9],[8,12],[6,10],[8,10],[9,12]} has both operands ≤12; distributive branch guarantees coprime remainders (SAPLING_COPRIME) so g is genuinely the GCF and the rewrite matches the 18+48=6(3+8) exemplar, with the un-divided-addends distractor g(a+b) requiring the factoring to be performed. Express-by-selection is the house-accepted reading of 'use … to express' (graded identically at MO 6.NS.B.4b). Tie-check: a×b ≠ LCM for every pair (all share a factor >1), so the distractor never collides. |
| 6.NS.7 | Integers-only scope: the umbrella says 'ordering and absolute value of RATIONAL NUMBERS' and no fraction/decimal is ever ordered or absolute-valued (integersQ generates integers exclusively) — the same textual ground on which 6.NS.6 fell. | Deliberate asymmetry with 6.NS.6, on principle: 6.NS.6's statement makes a representational demand ('a point on the number line') that nothing renders, while 6.NS.7's statement names two concepts — ordering, absolute value — both directly assessed by generated items, and every worked example in its own children (−3 > −7, −3°C, |−30|) is an integer. An understand-standard whose own exemplars are integers survives integer-only instantiation; the rational-scope thinness is already carried by the PARTIALs at 7b/7c (and now 7a). Same reasoning preserves MO 6.NS.C.7 FULL (definition-of-absolute-value directly assessed, distance-from-zero why verbatim). |
| 6.NS.6b | The reflection item's source point is ALWAYS Quadrant I (x = 1+rnd(8), y = 1+rnd(8), both positive — verified) and the asked reflection is ALWAYS across the x-axis; the y-axis and both-axes relations are never the correct answer. | The standard's demand is to 'recognize that when two ordered pairs differ only by signs, the locations are related by reflections across one or both axes' — and the distractor set IS that recognition task: choosing (x,−y) over (−x,y) and (−x,−y) requires mapping each sign pattern to its reflection, and the why names all three. The quadrant branch independently covers the signs→quadrant clause across all four quadrants (nz() draws both signs). Same hold for MO 6.GM.A.3b. Recommend rotating the asked axis, but the FULL survives. |
| 6.EE.4 | Checked whether the 'specified set' framing is real or cosmetic, and whether the inequality half exists (the standard demands both equation AND inequality). | Both stems carry literal sets: equationsSaplingQ L6 '{x−1, x, x+2}' against ax + b = rhs, inequalitiesQ L2 '{c−a−1, c−a, yes}' against x + a > c, with the boundary value c−a excluded by strictness — the exact substitution logic of the standard, and the whys state 'testing each value from the set IS the method'. The cleanest FULL on the sheet; identical hold for MO 6.EEI.B.4. |
| 6.EE.8a | The generator only ever asks 'Which is the DEPENDENT variable?' — the standard says 'Identify the independent AND dependent variable', and the independent variable is never the asked-for answer. | The independent variable is always the discriminating distractor (plus a 'neither' option), so a child who cannot tell the two roles apart cannot answer; picking the dependent over the independent identifies both in one act, and the why teaches the changes-in-response test in both directions. Three rotating contexts. Thin, but the verb is met. |
| 6.G.2 | 'Fractional edge lengths' (plural) realized as the narrowest possible case: verified in volumeSaplingQ that the fractional edge is ALWAYS exactly +0.5 and ALWAYS the height (l, w, B whole); also the real-world-context clause — both items are bare prisms. | Both named formulas (V=lwh, V=Bh) are applied with a genuinely fractional edge, the half-layer meaning connects to the packing concept the KS parenthetical invokes, and the rounded-edge distractor (l×w×hWhole) is exactly the missing half-layer — the fractional edge is load-bearing, not decorative. The standard sets no breadth requirement on which or how many edges. Same hold for MO 6.GM.A.2b; the .5-only narrowness is recorded for the content team in the KS note already. |
| 6.RP.3c | Breadth: only two conversion pairs exist in the entire generator (inches→feet, hours→minutes) — no metric, no capacity, no weight, no between-system conversion, no compound units. | KS's text names no systems and no breadth ('Use ratio reasoning to convert measurement units; manipulate and transform units appropriately when multiplying or dividing quantities'): both transformation directions occur (÷12 small→large, ×60 large→small) with the .5h→50min ratio trap making the ratio-reasoning clause real. The contrast case proves the method: MO 6.RP.A.3d, whose text DOES demand 'between two systems', was correctly graded PARTIAL on the same generator. |
| 6.SP.2 | Shape clause without displays: no item addresses cluster, peak, gap, symmetry, or skew; data is never presented as a distribution to look at. | KS's shape list is verbatim '(cluster, peak, gap, symmetry, skew (data) AND/OR outlier)' — outlier alone satisfies the disjunction, and the L4 outlier items assess it directly, with cluster language in the why as a bonus. Center (mean/median/mode) and spread (range, 'and/or' again) are computed outright. The FULL rests on the and/or reading, which is the standard's own text. |
Some verbs in the standards cannot be honestly assessed by an app, and we do not pretend otherwise: conducting real surveys, experiments, or simulations (we assess the design-judgment half); freehand drawing and construction; and the entire speaking & listening strand. Codes built on those verbs appear above as NOT COVERED or with the limitation named in their notes.