Ekkk - Everyday Math...

[littlefamily]

So we have settled into a nice routine. I am doing history in the morning before school and then we are doing a read aloud at night. I am also requiring the girls to read independently everyday. When did schools stop reading actual books??? But that is another post for another day....

 

I knew going in that the school uses Everyday Math and knew it would be a struggle making the switch. We have been doing Singapore Math at home. So my 3rd grader comes home with a subtraction worksheet. She was supposed to use a grid to figure out the difference... They had problems like 70-58, which Singapore teaches how to do mentally which is what she did. Then she had to explain what she did and she did, "I added 2 to 58 to make it 60, so 10 plus 2 is 12". She lost points for not using the grid, which is how she was taught to do it.

 

I'm torn. She was taught the skill of using the grid and then expected to put it into practice, yet she didn't. But at the same time she did explain a correct way of getting the answer.... For now I am going to let her talk it out with the teacher and see what happens.

 

Anyone else dealing with Everyday Crazy Math as we call it round these parts??? :glare:

[Tabrett]

This is the worst math program I have ever seen. My dd had been doing Saxon before she entered the middle of 2nd grade in PS. They did Everyday Math and I told my dd NOT to do it the way they were teaching her. She would loose points even though she had the correct answers. I worked at the middle school at the time and helped teach a low level 6th grade math class. I had to take kids out and teach them how to multiply and divide. Kid were combining the different methods EM taught. In the middle school the teachers only demonstrated the "regular" way of multiplying and dividing and told kids they could use the other methods, but they weren't going to help them using those methods. Several of us teachers had to get students to show US how they were multiplying and dividing! Some kids just spent their time drawing boxes! The teachers and parents hated the program. Everyday Math must have a really good marketing scheme, because it is the worst program I have EVER seen. Your child will go backwards with this program!

[Mesa]

The schools here use Everyday Math as well. It's a horrible horrible program form what I've seen. Why on earth do all these schools use this program... dont the teachers see how awful it is?

[msjones]

I'm a part-time math teacher at a school which uses Everyday Math. I work only with struggling students, so my view is skewed.

 

My observations:

 

Let's begin with something positive!

Some kids do very well with this program. They enjoy it and their parents do, too. They are able to solve problems using a variety of strategies, explain the strategies, and apply the strategies in new situations. Wow! That's saying something, wouldn't you agree? Much deeper understanding than we achieved with the old program.

 

Lots of kids are doing 'so-so.' They're a bit baffled some of the time, but they 'get it' some of the time, too. They have a deeper understanding of some of what they're doing (compared to what they were learning in the more traditional program). But,(compared to the old program) most kids aren't as confident working through problems because there isn't a lot of practice. Their parents don't like the program, so the homework time can be stressful for everyone.

 

Also, they really aren't taught the multiplication facts at school (ouch). They are taught HOW to figure them out, but drill is not part of this program. So, for example, they may not know 8 x 5. But, they'll probably know that it's the same as 5x5 plus 3x5 and be able to figure that out. (Most kids I worked with wouldn't have known that with the old program.) There is some real value in understanding that. But, it can be painful to watch a 3rd grader plow through that 'figuring out' process.

 

Finally, the kids who are failing seem to fail badly. They don't even have step-by-step algorithms to fall back on. With the old program, some kids would be far, far from understanding subtraction with trading, but they could still do it; we just persistently 'crammed' the steps into their heads. Now, the focus is on understanding and the steps are secondary, so they are quite desperately behind.

 

Their parents are unfamiliar with what it being taught, so they feel angry and helpless. Who wouldn't?

 

My opinion is that schools who choose this program need to train the teachers thoroughly. They absolutely need to inform parents about the methods their children will be taught. They need to allow kids to do it the 'old way' if they can also demonstrate understanding of the 'new way.' And, they'd better add some drill, or they're going to wish they had.

 

I'm interested in others' experiences, since I'm working with this. I understand parents' concerns and want to be able to help their kids. This isn't the program I would have chosen, but it's here to stay (for a while, at least) at my school, so I'm trying to make the best of it and intervene in helpful ways.

 

I'll be checking back on this thread!

[Perry]

it is the worst program I have EVER seen. Your child will go backwards with this program!

 

Everyday Math and clones are the reason we got started homeschooling. That's the only positive thing I can think of to say about it.

 

Although I think TERC Investigations is even worse than EM.

[Mesa]

Everyday Math and clones are the reason we got started homeschooling. That's the only positive thing I can think of to say about it.

 

Ditto, although it isn't the only reason we pulled our son from the public school. The decision was certainly made easier by knowing the schools here use EM.

[Shay]

I was scared to death when our school switched to EM....so I know right where you are coming from.

 

If your dc did well with Singapore, I will step out here and say for you to try not to worry too much. You might get very irritated at some of the homework at times (I do) , but do try to keep the irritation to yourself and not let your children pick up on it (ask me how I know:)).. I have been irritated many times at the weird algorithims, but thankfully the teachers have been good to let the children stick with one that they've learned well.

 

With my own children I had used Singapore as an afterschooling (mostly summer) supplement to a traditional math program. Then the school switched to Everyday Math and they have continued to do very, very well. Standardized math scores for my kids are still great as well. So, perhaps my children are in the group that this program does indeed work well for. But, I also think the work we'd done with Singapore got them off to a great start.

 

My approach to dealing with EM is to

1. Make sure we drill math facts

2. Teach standard algorithim for pencil work, but also use the other methods for quick mental work.

 

I don't work with my dc tons, but really try to hit it well in the summer . I pull out the Singapore textbooks and we go through only the trouble spots. For example, last year in 3rd, my dd didn't come away learning how to multiply multi-digit. She hated the lattice and just clammed up on it. So, this summer I sat down with her and a SM 3rd grade text and she caught on to the "standard" way. We also worked a little bit on fractions. I really saw no other "holes" in her 3rd grade math education with EM.

 

Now that she's in 4th, I can foresee that I'll have to do the same next summer with division.

 

My 3rd grade ds has been using EM since 1st and he really has amazed me with his math knowledge. Is it due to EM??? I don't really know for sure, but I don't think it's harming him.

 

Many of my friends dc really struggled with EM in the beginning but are thankfully doing much better now. Also, I do think that you really need well trained teachers teaching it....one year with a not-so-good math teacher can really cause problems, IMHO.

 

Shay

[tracywag]

This is what our school uses. My daughter, who was doing math while playing as a toddler, has been squashed by it. She would know the right answer, but get penalized for not drawing boxes and grids. She'd draw the boxes and grids, and get distracted by the drawing and not come up with the answer. She is now in 5th grade, convinced that she is bad at math, and just guesses at what the teacher is asking for instead of solving problems. Funniest thing is she gets good grades. Saddest is she can no longer do quick mental math, she thinks there's a trick in there that she's not seeing.

 

I'm not sure where to begin. I have printed out a bunch of ten minute drills, and ordered some software that has drilling interspersed with advancing levels. If have to keep it light and build confidence I think.

 

Argh. For the teachers, I have this comment. Some kids learn differently. Some are visual, some need the gimmicks, some need the repetition, and some need something else. To me, forcing every child to do fuzzy math is just wrong. If the kids are not learning in big numbers, even with their parents being involved and trying at home, there is something very big missing.

 

Sigh. I'l take any advice you have.

[JFSinIL]

Everyday Math is the major reason my youngest is NOT in school this year...and that I pulled her out halfway through last year. I'd go ahead and teach her math with Singapore and let the chips fall where they may at school - let the teacher know that you are doing math at home. If they do standardized testing at school your kid will end up scoring higher than the kids who ate stuck with EM!!!

[Mallorie]

EM is the reason we pulled our boys from public school as well. They are now enrolled in a Christian School that uses Saxon, and my oldest is doing SO much better! MsJones, I'm going to pick on you a bit. :)

 

Let's begin with something positive!

Some kids do very well with this program. They enjoy it and their parents do, too. They are able to solve problems using a variety of strategies, explain the strategies, and apply the strategies in new situations. Wow! That's saying something, wouldn't you agree? Much deeper understanding than we achieved with the old program.

 

I would have to wonder how many kids fit this profile? In our school, they didn't have enough time for the varied ways that EM teaches, so many teachers would cut steps short, or eliminate altogether (as in the case of my sons class). Also, when we pulled our kids out, we attended a homeschool convention, where I took a class about choosing the correct math curriculum for your child. Out of 25 people/couples in the room, all but 2 had pulled their children out of school because of EM failing their children. It took the first half hour to get through parents venting their frustration over it before we could even begin the session!

 

Lots of kids are doing 'so-so.' They're a bit baffled some of the time, but they 'get it' some of the time, too. They have a deeper understanding of some of what they're doing (compared to what they were learning in the more traditional program). But,(compared to the old program) most kids aren't as confident working through problems because there isn't a lot of practice. Their parents don't like the program, so the homework time can be stressful for everyone.

 

 

I just find this paragraph contradictory in itself. First off, I WHOLEHEARTEDLY disagree (and I'll wrap this point up in a minute) that a deeper understanding of math is the end result. For us, it resulted in a vague understanding of a broader scope. Kind of like "Jack of all trades, master of none" result. Also, while i'll agree that parents don't like the program, that is not what makes homework stressful. It's the fact that parents don't UNDERSTAND the program, because hardly any of us learned it this way, so we can't help them if we wanted to.

 

Also, they really aren't taught the multiplication facts at school (ouch). They are taught HOW to figure them out, but drill is not part of this program. So, for example, they may not know 8 x 5. But, they'll probably know that it's the same as 5x5 plus 3x5 and be able to figure that out. (Most kids I worked with wouldn't have known that with the old program.) There is some real value in understanding that. But, it can be painful to watch a 3rd grader plow through that 'figuring out' process.

 

My kids were taught their facts very well with EM. It just didn't progress farther than that. The bolded part is one of the reasons my son lost progress with EM, it added so many steps to basic math that if they didn't keep very good track of their "path", they were going to screw it up and get it wrong anyway.

 

Finally, the kids who are failing seem to fail badly. They don't even have step-by-step algorithms to fall back on. With the old program, some kids would be far, far from understanding subtraction with trading, but they could still do it; we just persistently 'crammed' the steps into their heads. Now, the focus is on understanding and the steps are secondary, so they are quite desperately behind.

 

 

I get your point here, but I disagree that EM teaches understanding. IMO, manipulatives are the best way to teach that, and the only manipulative my ds's got with EM was a calculator. SO really, EM drops the ball with understanding and basic number computation.

 

 

Their parents are unfamiliar with what it being taught, so they feel angry and helpless. Who wouldn't?

 

Agreed!

 

My opinion is that schools who choose this program need to train the teachers thoroughly. They absolutely need to inform parents about the methods their children will be taught. They need to allow kids to do it the 'old way' if they can also demonstrate understanding of the 'new way.' And, they'd better add some drill, or they're going to wish they had.

 

Again, agreed. But it's not feasible, because there just isn't enough time in the day to do all this, or at least that's what the teachers/administrators around here would say.

 

Now, to wrap up my point, I agree with you that there are some students whose way of thinking about math is very well suited to EM lattice work and such. But I am in total disagreement with changing the norm to suit a handful of students. Sure, educate the teachers in the lattice method, so when such a student comes along, the teacher can show the student and parent an alternative method. I don't think any one curriculum will meet the needs of all. So the objective is to find the curriculum to meet the needs of MOST, and make available alternatives to those who need it.

 

I'm interested in others' experiences, since I'm working with this. I understand parents' concerns and want to be able to help their kids. This isn't the program I would have chosen, but it's here to stay (for a while, at least) at my school, so I'm trying to make the best of it and intervene in helpful ways.

 

I hear ya, and I hope I don't come off too argumentative, i'm just trying to articulate my point as a parent. I would have appreciated someone like you working with my kids with EM rather than the people who blew me off when my kids were doing EM. :)

[Mallorie]

Ok, now, to the OP. IMO, if you're going to keep your child in a school with EM, here are my recommendations:

 

Use manipulatives at home. I've heard Singapore is a great program to supplement with (i've not used it). But I would also use plenty of manipulatives, and flashcards. Make sure they have their basic tables down. Finally, teach them the correct terms and definitions: What is a quotient, dividend, divisor? One of the issues we had with my son when he switched was that he could do a lot of the basic math, but the word problems would confuse him because he didn't know the terms.

 

Finally, for those that are stuck with this program, don't put much stock in grades!! Tutor them in Math at home, make it fun, play math games when you can. Teach them with the method they use best. Standardized testing (and real life-hehe) don't care whether you showed your work with the correct method. Elementary grades have very little value beyond a basic measure of whether or not a child is ready to "advance" to the next grade, and most often is not even dictated by skill, but rather punished by menial things. By the time they get to jr/sr high, they'll know the math, and the method won't even matter.

[fractalgal]

Everyday Math and clones are the reason we got started homeschooling. That's the only positive thing I can think of to say about it.

 

Although I think TERC Investigations is even worse than EM.

 

Although my daughter's former public school was considering switching to Everyday Math it was currently using TERC Investigations. It made my decision to homeschool so much easier.;)

[Tabrett]

I'm a part-time math teacher at a school which uses Everyday Math. I work only with struggling students, so my view is skewed.

 

My observations:

 

Let's begin with something positive!

Some kids do very well with this program. They enjoy it and their parents do, too. They are able to solve problems using a variety of strategies, explain the strategies, and apply the strategies in new situations. Wow! That's saying something, wouldn't you agree? Much deeper understanding than we achieved with the old program.

 

What my question would be-The kids who are "doing well", do they have parents who teach them math at home? That is what I did with my child. I taught her how to do problems the traditional way at home. I would tell her to solve the problems in school the traditional way, put down the answer, then set up the problem the way the school wanted it set up. It probably "looked" as if my child was doing good using different methods to solve the math, but in reality she was only using one.

[msjones]

(I'm new to the boards and dont know how to do those quotes, so bear with me! I'll try to make this legible as I quote Mallorie's very interesting post.)

 

"MsJones, I'm going to pick on you a bit."

Well, I don't mind. :)

 

"I would have to wonder how many kids fit this profile?"

This is a good question, and I've wondered this myself. I sometimes help my students in their classrooms (instead of pulling them out) and I can see most of the class doing well enough with that days' assignment. That isn't the same as a real evaluation, obviously.

 

" I WHOLEHEARTEDLY disagree (and I'll wrap this point up in a minute) that a deeper understanding of math is the end result. For us, it resulted in a vague understanding of a broader scope. Kind of like "Jack of all trades, master of none" result. Also, while i'll agree that parents don't like the program, that is not what makes homework stressful. It's the fact that parents don't UNDERSTAND the program, because hardly any of us learned it this way, so we can't help them if we wanted to. "

 

What I have observed is that some students can explain to me why the traditional algorithms work. They can even understand why long division works. (I can now, too, which is new for me!) The old program I taught with (Addison-Wesley) did not teach that at all.

 

I also observe, however, the 'inch deep and a mile wide' problem that you refer to. EM seems to promote it with their various methods, lack of practice, and spiraling schedule. Many kids have mastered none of what is presented. And if my child was one of those students, I'd pull him out, too.

 

"My kids were taught their facts very well with EM. It just didn't progress farther than that. The bolded part is one of the reasons my son lost progress with EM, it added so many steps to basic math that if they didn't keep very good track of their "path", they were going to screw it up and get it wrong anyway."

I'd be interested in how your son mastered multiplication using EM. Did his teacher supplement? Or did you supplement? I just do NOT see this happening at my school.

And I agree that all those steps can be a big mess. Some kids just don't work that way, and it's hard to watch them struggle through the multi-step methods when I could just teach a simpler one. So, I do! That's why I like my job.

 

As far as parents not understanding the methods....I'm proposing a meeting at which I'll teach the EM algorithms to the parents. (I was surprised the school didn't offer this last year when they started with EM.) I realize this won't solve all the problems with EM, but I believe it could prevent some of them.

 

Regarding your concern about lack of understanding...I think the EM idea is that strategies are to be taught. I think the strategies are mostly sound, but I don't believe there is enough opportunity for strategy practice. They learn the strategy one day and the next day they're on to something entirely new. UGH! That's what frustrates me the most.

 

" I am in total disagreement with changing the norm to suit a handful of students."

I think the district response to this (which would probably turn your stomach) would be that they are trying to change the students' way of thinking about math. Schools that adopt this program are choosing it in order to teach a new kind of math. Naturally, the problems begin when the parents aren't looking for that type of math education for their child.

 

I would like to see school districts allow parents to choose. I don't know why this hasn't happened, but my guess is that money is part of the problem. (I'm sure it would cost more to have 2 sets of training, books, materials, etc.)

 

As far as parents feeling "blown off" regarding their concerns...that is a shame. With a program as non-traditional as EM, I think schools need to have a family support plan in place -- they should expect a lot of questions and concerns and be glad to address them.

 

Thanks for putting up with my sloppy post. (Can anyone link me to some directions for doing the quotes correctly?)

msjones

[Melinda in VT]

My kids' school uses EM, and I have to say that despite my initial reservations, it seems to be working quite well.

 

I don't do much afterschooling of math. I do provide base 10 blocks for my daughter who likes manipulatives. Sometimes using them helps her when she gets stuck on a problem. And sometimes I drill math facts.

 

I will say that our school does regular math fact drill. Whether this is part of EM or something they have added, I don't know.

 

In any case, I give my kids the Singapore placement tests at the end of the year, and so far they seem to be keeping pace with Singapore, other than not knowing grams and kilograms as well as they should.

 

My three kids are starting 7th and 3rd (twins) this year.

[Tabrett]

MsJones,

 

If PS is trying to change the way students think about math, why not teach logic as a subject.

 

I have a feeling that if you teach parents how to do all the forms of multiplication and division shown in EM, they are going to lash out even more.

 

Did anyone watch the youtube video? It really disturbed me. Why are they teaching "trips around the world" and so much calculator. A child really doesn't need to know how to use a calculator till Algebra and above (if then). When I was in school (in the 80's) Algebra was the first class I ever used a calculator.

It seems to me they are trying to dumb down student and try to get them to think "globally" as if they are preparing them to accept a one world government.

 

Like I said before; the teachers and parents disliked EM where I live. So why are the state forcing it upon us? Parents constantly voice their concern and no one will listen.

[Mallorie]

msjones, thank you for not taking my post as snarky, but just debating. I do appreciate your articulation of the position of the schools. I just happen to be one of those who has become so irritated by them, that i'm just plain angry. It's not directed at you though, and I hope you know that. :)

 

**for quotes, I don't know the technical terms, but there's a line of symbols above this box, the last one is a "quote bubble", click on that and it will do it for you, or else you can use this {QUOTE}put the quoted material here{/QUOTE}, only use [] [/], I did that so it would show up. :)**

 

Now about your questions/statements.

 

I'd be interested in how your son mastered multiplication using EM. Did his teacher supplement? Or did you supplement? I just do NOT see this happening at my school.

 

He had some teachers who made learning their times tables a part of homework, and we did it. I did not mean to imply that he mastered multiplication, just his basic tables. Like 1x2, 2x2, etc, up to 12. When he hit fourth grade, he had a rotten teacher. That is the year he was supposed to learn his lattice work multiplication. He managed to limp through the year until Christmas, and then after that it was a steady spiral down. He became frustrated, angry, distant. Just not a happy child at all. He never had math homework though, so I made the mistake of assuming all was ok with that subject, just that the overall issues with the teacher were what was causing it. So many people have complained about this teacher, and the other fourth grade teacher, I cannot believe they still have jobs. Anyway, one day he brings home some math homework, and there's multiplication. I see him take half a page for one problem, struggle through it, and get it completely wrong. I tell him it's wrong, and he becomes agitated. I can't help him, because I don't know what the heck he is doing. So he tries to walk me through it, and I see where he missed carrying over some numbers. Does another one. Again, struggle, wrong answer. This continued for about half an hour. I give him a fairly basic division problem, with no remainders, and he shows me their way of doing that. Again, struggle, but correct answer. Now, here's the funny part. I go over and get his report card and testing results that he just got and he's showing advanced on the testing, with an A- on his report card. Then I look over at my son, and he's dang near in tears. Shortly after, we pulled him. There were various factors in the decision, but this really solidified it.

 

Now, at this time, I didn't put any one curriculum on him (he REALLY needed a break), but we worked some basic math here and there. That's when I saw the gaps. Up until 4th grade, and even then, we heard how great of a student he was, how he's doing excellent in math, blah blah. After we pulled him I started doing some research on Everyday Math, and peoples experience with it, because I wanted to know what was going on. Time and again, I hear the same things, same gaps, same frustration and anger. I just don't get why it's being used as a main curriculum. Using some methods as an alternative, ok. Just not solely.

 

When my son started Saxon in his new school, it was a blow. If the gaps weren't apparent before, they sure are now! He's catching on quickly, because the new ways suit him, and he really is a bright kid. But it's work. Simple things, like problems that he could solve if you wrote out the problem for him, but if you gave him a word problem and told him to find the "sum" or "product", he'd be lost. He never learned the terms. So he's had basic exposure to many types of math, algebra, geometry, etc., but it was so vague and so fleeting, and INCOMPLETE that he never comprehended it to the point that he a)would be able to use it in real life and b)would not be able to advance to higher levels as an older child because of the gaps. He wants to be a scientist, and math is really key here.

 

Now, another point i'd like to make, my son always got A's and B's. The tests that the schools use placed my son as "advanced". I think there are a LOT of parents out there who are in the dark about how good their kids really are at math. Maybe living in the comfort that their kids marks are well, but when they hit the advanced stuff in high school, how are they going to do?

 

As far as parents not understanding the methods....I'm proposing a meeting at which I'll teach the EM algorithms to the parents. (I was surprised the school didn't offer this last year when they started with EM.) I realize this won't solve all the problems with EM, but I believe it could prevent some of them.

 

Regarding your concern about lack of understanding...I think the EM idea is that strategies are to be taught. I think the strategies are mostly sound, but I don't believe there is enough opportunity for strategy practice. They learn the strategy one day and the next day they're on to something entirely new. UGH! That's what frustrates me the most.

 

Yep, but gotta go with Tabrett here (with a huge nod to the bolded):

 

If PS is trying to change the way students think about math, why not teach logic as a subject.

 

I have a feeling that if you teach parents how to do all the forms of multiplication and division shown in EM, they are going to lash out even more.

-------------------

I would like to see school districts allow parents to choose. I don't know why this hasn't happened, but my guess is that money is part of the problem. (I'm sure it would cost more to have 2 sets of training, books, materials, etc.)

 

I've no doubt money (and a little thing called accountability) have to do with it. The other part, how many parents care? They get good grades, no or very little homework, what's the big deal? I'm ashamed to admit that I found false comfort in their grades and test scores. I thought they were fine. When I realized the issues here, I started speaking to parents. The majority just didn't care because the scores were fine. The ones who do, you'll find homeschooling or afterschooling, or moving their children to a different school with a different curriculum.

 

msjones, I think you and I are probably in close agreement as far as how well this curriculum works, we're just standing on opposite sides of the issue. You're a teacher, and trying to make what you were given work. That's your job, and you obviously care about it. I'm a parent of one of the kids who needs and loves math, and has come to hate it because of this curriculum, so I fight it.

[Parrothead]

Wow! This thread just solidified my decision to keep dd from the local ps which uses EM.

[EKS]

Although I think TERC Investigations is even worse than EM.

 

TERC Investigations is one reason my kids don't attend the schools here. Even the local private school uses it.

[BabyBre]

I thought I would post this link, since it pertains to the topic at hand.

 

 

 

 

OMG! I'm completely floored by this video! The quote from Everyday Math's teacher's manual about how learning the long division algorithm is a waste of time because quotients can be more efficiently found with a calculator is SO over the top I can't believe educators are buying this.

 

I'm not entirely sure dc's school is using TERC Investigations, but now I'm praying it's a different curriculum called "Investigations"! (What are the chances?)

 

Anyone with questions about TERC or EM should check out this link.

[Mallorie]

I forgot to comment on that video. I had been linked to it when all this started. It's disturbing.

 

Breann, In the beginning of that video, she calls it "Investigations in Numbers, Data and Space, otherwise known as TERC", if that helps you at all.

[msjones]

OMG! I'm completely floored by this video! The quote from Everyday Math's teacher's manual about how learning the long division algorithm is a waste of time because quotients can be more efficiently found with a calculator is SO over the top I can't believe educators are buying this.

 

This video actually originated in my district (I'm up here in Seattle). The school from which it originated currently has a waiver from EM and is using Saxon. That is all the result of parent effort. I think they're pretty happy with Saxon.

 

For the record, at the school where I tutor, the teachers are indeed teaching the long division algorithm. They teach 2 methods -- the one we remember and one called 'partial quotients' which I believe is referred to in the video.

 

I have not seen the use of calculators for long division although I know the EM teacher's guide does indeed promote their use for long division. I have yet to meet a teacher who would actually skip the teaching of long division. Most of the teachers I know share the same concerns being discussed in this thread.

 

msjones, thank you for not taking my post as snarky, but just debating. I do appreciate your articulation of the position of the schools. I just happen to be one of those who has become so irritated by them, that i'm just plain angry. It's not directed at you though, and I hope you know that.

 

 

I don't blame you for being angry. Everyday Math is controversial -- a huge departure from the 'norm' in elementary math education. Believe me when I say there are teachers with the same concerns. If you combine EM with a crummy teacher it, in my opinion, is a recipe for disaster.

 

It sounds as if that is what happened with your son. I'm amazed that a teacher would require extensive use of the 'lattice method' for multiplication. At my school, it is presented as something of a novelty, not as THE method for multiplication. The partial products method is taught for 'regular use,' and the kids seem to do okay with it. It's just sooooo long and gets messy. So, I teach my students the traditional algorithm and hopefully they can use both/either.

 

I have a feeling that if you teach parents how to do all the forms of multiplication and division shown in EM, they are going to lash out even more.

-----

 

Well, we'll see. I'll let you know!:) When I've demonstrated the methods for individual parents I haven't had that response. They still seem unhappy and concerned, but at least see that there is some sense to the method and also feel able to work with their student.

 

The other part, how many parents care? They get good grades, no or very little homework, what's the big deal? I'm ashamed to admit that I found false comfort in their grades and test scores. I thought they were fine.

 

This makes me cringe. I wonder if we'll have a California-whole-language-type disaster on our hands in a few years.

 

I'm a part-time tutor hired by the PTA at this point. I taught in the district for years, but am currently homeschooling my kids and just working this part-time position. So I am very much on the sidelines in terms of what's happening with math. I take the kids referred to me and do what I can for them.

 

If PS is trying to change the way students think about math, why not teach logic as a subject.

 

This is a great question. And I don't know the answer. I've never even heard it discussed.

 

Like I said before; the teachers and parents disliked EM where I live. So why are the state forcing it upon us? Parents constantly voice their concern and no one will listen.

 

In our state these decisions are made at a district level. So the math curricula for any district have to be approved by the school board. The state isn't involved. And in my district some parents and teachers have managed to be heard. At least one school is using Saxon. (As I said earlier, it's the school from which that video originated.)

 

I really believe that both types of programs have value and I'd like to see school districts offer parents a choice. We could probably go around and around about this all weekend, and not agree. As someone wrote earlier, all kids approach math differently. There are students doing well with EM. Ideally, families would be able to choose. Does anyone know of a district where that is the case?

 

msjones, I think you and I are probably in close agreement as far as how well this curriculum works, we're just standing on opposite sides of the issue. You're a teacher, and trying to make what you were given work. That's your job, and you obviously care about it. I'm a parent of one of the kids who needs and loves math, and has come to hate it because of this curriculum, so I fight it.

 

We may not be on opposite sides. ;) I'm still sort of in the middle, but mostly seeing that the success of EM depends on the student's learning style and the skill of the teacher. I enjoy my job very much because I get to 'jump right in' to the heart of this problem and do something practical about it for individual kids.

[BabyBre]

Breann, In the beginning of that video, she calls it "Investigations in Numbers, Data and Space, otherwise known as TERC", if that helps you at all.

 

 

I did look it up again and they are indeed using TERC. I poked around on the website at the 2nd grade content which is the grade dd's in now, and it's not so far removed from what she's learned with Saxon. From what I saw very briefly online, it even seems like the two may complement each other for the time being.

 

The 4th and 5th grade content that was displayed on the video, however, is extremely disturbing. With schools adopting this mindset, how on earth is the US supposed to compete with the rest of the world? Our knowledge will be superficial, dependent on the technology of calculators for our success. (Sound a bit like an analogy of the "world government" that someone else mentioned in this thread?) Scary to think of this.

[EKS]

TERC Investigations and Investigations are the same thing (sorry). It is very popular in WA because it is, to quote a ps teacher in our district, "wonderfully aligned with the WASL" and that is really what it's all about around these parts.

[BabyBre]

It is very popular in WA because it is, to quote a ps teacher in our district, "wonderfully aligned with the WASL" and that is really what it's all about around these parts.

 

 

That's so true, and unfortunate.

[littlefamily]

This discussion has been very interesting. We are only 3 weeks into EM. I do make my children work the problems and then check them with a calculator. Boy does that kill me when they give me, "but Mom, we are supposed to use a calculator!" My response is always, "When you show me you can get 100% without the calculator, I might consider it!" :)

 

It will be an interesting year. The school also uses Study Island as another way of preparing students for testing. I found it very interesting to see my 5th grade daughter's assessment. She scored 100% on both computation and the word problem section, but received 50% and 60% on probability and geometry. She was crushed. I had to explain to her that Singapore Math covers topics in a different way and we can catch her up on anything she hasn't mastered, but the important stuff to Mom and Dad she did very well with. But it makes me question the focus, it seems to be a very wide range of topics covered with little depth.

 

Oh well.... we did let her know not to participate in any dice games on the playground until she had a better knowledge of probability! ;)

[Julpost]

My 3 school aged dc went back to ps for 2 years. The school used EM. My dd's 1st grade teacher drilled them on their math facts in addition to the EM program. Dd did well. My 3rd grade dd was in a gifted math group so EM didn't really seem to hurt her. However, my ds, who was in the 6th grade last year, did awful. His math skills absolutely went backwards. For some reason, you wouldn't know it from his grades. But this year, now that the dc are back home, I can't believe what I see him doing. Or rather not doing. He couldn't remember how to do long division because they used calculators at school. He is struggling w/relearning what he knew before he went to school. We used MUS before but are now w/Saxon.

[Zanyan]

littlefamily: I am a strong supporter of Singapore Math, and used it with my son, and came back to it for my dd after using a California math curriculum (not Singapore) with her last year. I did want to let you know, though, that the older Singapore Math editions shown on the video (Primary Math, and Primary math U.S. edition) have no probability problems at all at the elementary level. They have recently come out with a "standards" edition that correlates with the California standards, and that edition does include probability problems.

[Shay]

msjones,

I going to put you on the spot :tongue_smilie:.

 

You are a part-time math teacher for a school that uses Everday Mathematics and you are homeschooling your child(ren), correct?? I would assume, then, as a math teacher you have looked over many of the homeschool math curriculums out there. With that in mind, which homeschool program would you say Everyday Mathematics is most like?

 

I was thinking of this thread last night as my 3rd grader was doing his Homelink and was working on "fact extensions." He was doing this so very well that I just can't see how this is all bad, KWIM? I also don't understand the common cry of not enough work with EM. My dc are so tired of math by the time they come home they could scream. I've seen their various EM workbooks and I'd have to say they do a lot of work each day. Much of what they do reminds me of some of the Singapore lessons (I do know that Singapore is described as more "mastery", and that's a big difference.)

 

Please know I understand completely if, for any reason, you choose not to answer this question.

 

~Shay

[msjones]

Hmmmm..... this is a new question. It's a good one.

 

I've been sitting here pondering, and I don't know of any homeschool math program that is much like EM at all.

 

I'm also watching Alvin and the Chipmunks with my kids as I ponder, so maybe I'm a bit distracted. (ya think?)

 

I'm going to do some reading in my EM teacher's guide and get back to you. The kids go to bed in about 30 mins.

 

msjones

[JudyJudyJudy]

Last year my family was struggling financially, so I went back to work in December and taught for 21 weeks of the school year. Boy, was it an eye opener for me!

 

I was teaching all subjects in sixth grade (not typical), so I was able to see the problems in all areas. My district began Connected Math last year, and it is awful. It is the middle school version of TERC Investigations, which is used in elementary school. My students were frustrated with it, and so were the teachers. The teachers had to spend much of their planning time trying to learn how to teach it. The teachers also had to miss school time to go to workshops to get more training on how to teach the curriculum.

 

The students who are using this curriculum must "discover" their ways into doing math, including learning such skills as adding and subtracting fractions with unlike denominators. It is all about "discovering" how to do that, and it doesn't teach algorithms. There is no mastery of anything, yet it moves slowly. The problems are tedious and time-consuming just to get to a simple answer (usually wrong, sadly).

 

As standardized testing time was approaching last year, we math teachers were told to toss aside the books and use the "CRCT Coach" books instead to teach "the test." (I live in Georgia.) This may sound exaggerated, but I felt unethical because I knew that I wasn't giving the kids the education that I should. I did end up teaching algorithms as much as I could, especially on days when I knew that I wouldn't be evaluated by an administrator (the administrators expected us to use the Connected Math program), but I didn't often have the time. I felt like my students and the other students in the district were being cheated. Despite teachers' and parents' complaints about the program, the district is stuck with it for seven years.

 

If things had worked out well during last school year, I planned to continue to work and put my son into school this year (my husband is self-employed, so my son stayed with him while I was working). However, after what I saw in school last year, I knew that I didn't want my son in that mess. It wasn't working for me, either (I have health issues that were being made worse by the school's poor air quality), so my husband and I decided that we'd do whatever we had to do to continue to homeschool.

 

Connected Math was a huge problem that I saw, but I saw some other problems as well. My sixth graders had poor writing skills, and I realized that it was because they had not been taught the basics. They were expected to write research papers when they didn't even have the skills to write a complete sentence properly.

 

On top of that, their spelling was atrocious. The kids informed me that they were told to use "Kid Spell" in elementary school. I found out that "Kid Spell" is when the kid just spells a word the way it sounds to them. The kids were not corrected, and they weren't expected to learn spelling at all. The assumption was that they would mainly use computers during their lives, so teaching spelling wasn't necessary. However, some of them spelled so poorly that Microsoft Word couldn't even offer suggestions.

 

I didn't mean to get off topic, but, in my experience, our schools are in serious trouble in some areas. To get back to the math issue, programs such as Everyday Math and Connected Math are sometimes called "whole math" because they are very much like "whole language." This type of program might look good in theory, but it doesn't work.

 

You all might find this interesting. It is a letter that was written to the U.S. Department of Education about these math programs. It was signed by over 200 people (I think there are closer to 230), mostly college math professors, but some are psychologists and superintendents of schools.

 

http://mathematicallycorrect.com/riley.htm

Edited September 26, 2008 by JudyJudyJudy

[msjones]

Shay,

I've been thinking, did some reading in my teacher's guide, and talked with my husband (who is a public high school math teacher) and don't think I have an answer.

 

I guess I'm the wrong person to ask; I'm more familiar with public school-type curricula than I am with hs curricula. When I started researching what I would use for my own kids, I found one I liked right away. (We use RightStart.) So, I didn't look at any of the others very well.

 

At some point we'll have to switch (RightStart only goes through 4th or 5th grade, I believe). At that time, I think I'll choose an EM type program and use it at home for a while to see if we can make it work. With a good teacher, I do believe it can be a strong program.

 

 

It sounds as if your child, Shay, is one of the kids for whom EM is working. And, when it is taught well and the child 'gets' it, the results are truly impressive. I'm amazed at what some of the kids at school can do and explain. I didn't see that depth of understanding with our old program. I'm glad to hear about someone having success, because I see some success, too.

 

I'd be interested to know whether your 3rd grader can explain why the traditional algorithms work. That is the skill I find most impressive.

 

msjones

[Shay]

msjones,

 

Thank you so much for taking the time to try to answer my question. I wrote a long reply yesterday, but for some reason it didn't show up. Today, I'm too busy to try to recreate that.

 

Basically, I will have to say that I've really had to work on my attitude about the program. Initially I read all the stuff on the web and was just convinced this was all bad. Once my kids started doing the math my opinion of it improved somewhat. My dh (an engineer , btw) doesn't have a problem with it thus far and likes what he sees. I am much more involved in their homework, though, as he works a lot.

 

We do have "mathy" kids and they seem to be "getting it." If that weren't the case, I'd more than likely have a different outlook .....and can totally understand people's frustrations (some of my friends have been frustrated). A choice of programs (as mentioned in another post) would be good, but I do wonder if that could really ever happen.

 

I agree that a good teacher is a must. With that in mind, IMHO, departmentalizing instruction for elementary math is necessary. Only the good math teachers should be teaching this. My ds's 5th grade teacher took some "fraction stick" away from the kids, calling it a "crutch." Good for her! Also, I just haven't seen lots of calculator usage either (I ask the kids from time to time). My ds in 7th is using it this year for homework, but prior to that, never.

 

What is interesting to me is that my kids, although doing well with math, say they hate math. I think it's because they do so much of it at school. They (the school) has put math on the front burner and are requiring it to take up X amount of time each day.

 

Judy,

Your post made me thankful for my school district! Sounds like EM is way better than Connected. Also, my kids are taught spelling and writing. If I were in your shoes I would definitely choose an alternative (a different school, or homeschool). I hope that continues to work out for you to be able to homeschool.

As I mentioned just above, departmentalization with these "new math" programs should be necessary. Trying to teach all subjects as you had to do is just crazy IMHO. Bless your heart!

Also, I had already read the link you provided. It is from 1999, though, and I wonder (haven't looked) if there are any updated or more recent articles?

 

~Shay

[JudyJudyJudy]

Shay, teaching all subjects at the middle school level isn't typical. The position I had was created after the school year started because the classes were over capacity. The administrators decided that instead of mixing up a lot of different kids' entire schedules, they would hire one teacher who was certified in all areas to teach one class of each subject. The other eight sixth grade teachers were allowed to pull the kids they wanted to pull from their classes to move to the new teacher's classes. The only stipulation was that the new teacher wasn't supposed to have the same student more than once (I ended up having two students twice who got kicked out of Gateway). A teacher was hired about six weeks into the school year, but he only lasted nine weeks, so I took over after him. Even the administrators realized and admitted that they made a lot of mistakes, including having one teacher teach all subjects (which also meant having to attend every department meeting each week, both sixth grade team meetings each week, and the grade meeting each week) and letting the teachers pick the students they wanted to move. (You can guess that they didn't pick the easiest students to teach for the most part.)

 

Anyway, to answer your question, I haven't been able to find a lot of new information, but apparently, the National Science Foundation is attempting to gather some:

 

http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward.do?AwardNumber=9986372

 

I'm going to send this link to some of the teachers with whom I taught last year.

[BabyBre]

For the younger kids they are using "Bridges in mathematics" which I can't find any information on but since it leads into TERC I will stay far away.

 

Our school just switched from Bridges to TERC entirely. Last year was our first in ps and they used Bridges at the K and 1st grade levels and Investigations in 2nd and up, I think. Now they've switched the whole school to TERC.

 

Bridges was certainly nothing to write home about. The math was very weak in both K and 1st grade. My dc's precious time was seriously wasted.

 

In light of this new information I'm gathering on TERC, I'm stepping up their math at home as much as possible.

[Susan in IL]

The quote from Everyday Math's teacher's manual about how learning the long division algorithm is a waste of time because quotients can be more efficiently found with a calculator is SO over the top I can't believe educators are buying this.

 

 

 

Ds2 had EM through elem. school. Took Alg. 1 in 8th grade and the teacher always let them use a calculator. He is now in honors Alg. 2 in high school and PRAISE!!! the teacher does not let them use a calculator most of the time. Many of the kids struggle because they do not know how to do the basic algorithims. I am constantly reteaching him and he thinks it is because he is not good at math.

 

I was a mean math mom when I hsed my oldest and did not let him use a calculator until the middle of Alg. 2. Keep in mind, if your child gets to AP Calculus there are sections on the test where calculators are not allowed. Also, in many Calculus classes in college, they are often not allowed to use a calculator or only a scientific one.

 

He did have one teacher that did teach EM correctly (2nd grade) but that was the only one. Most of his teachers admitted they hated to teach math and EM was part of it, along with their lack of math skills.

[BabyBre]

Ds2 had EM through elem. school. Took Alg. 1 in 8th grade and the teacher always let them use a calculator. He is now in honors Alg. 2 in high school and PRAISE!!! the teacher does not let them use a calculator most of the time. Many of the kids struggle because they do not know how to do the basic algorithims. I am constantly reteaching him and he thinks it is because he is not good at math.

 

 

Ds15 has been after me to buy him a graphing calculator for his 10th grade honors math class and I've said that I will start saving, but that in the meantime he'll have to do the calculations without one. His teacher recently sent home a letter (to all students) stating that the $139 TI-84 Plus Silver graphing calculator is REQUIRED for this class, ASAP! I have a feeling they're not even taught how to do the calculations without a calculator.

 

In our district, this begins in the elementary grades with TERC Investigations teaching students how to be dependent on a calculator rather than self-reliant. And it's extended so far that the SATs and other college tests allow the use of calculators (I don't recall that they did when I took the SATs). This specifically tests the students' ability to use the calculator, not their own knowledge.

[Susan in IL]

 

And it's extended so far that the SATs and other college tests allow the use of calculators (I don't recall that they did when I took the SATs).

 

I am so old that when I took the SAT and ACT, calculators cost $200 and all they did was add, subtract, multiply, and divide. I still have my slide rule from high school.

 

:lol::lol::D:D:lol::lol:

[Blessedchaos]

My kids' school just switched from Investigations (which I hated) to EM. I was unable to find a single positive review for EM online, which led to my decision to continue using MUS at home with them after school. So far, it seems slightly better than Investigations, but we got so very little homework last year it's hard to tell. All I know is that I don't understand it at all. But, my math-oriented ds likes it and seems to get it. My younger ds now wants to use a calculator all the time:glare:.

 

My dh had a theory that the school districts must receive some sort of pay off from the EM company to use their products. I have a teacher friend (different district) who says it isn't so butwith all the poor reviews this program gets I still wonder...

[BabyBre]

My dh had a theory that the school districts must receive some sort of pay off from the EM company to use their products.

 

 

As someone else from my state on this board revealed when I wondered how intelligent educators could buy these programs in mass quantities, TERC Investigations teaches in the way that our highly controversial state assessment is taught. In an effort to increase test scores, they've just adopted a program that teaches to the test year round--and allowed the use of calculators.

[Sara R]

I didn't see this thread before. I have passionate views on this subject. :)

 

My son's and younger daughter's elementary school uses TERC. I could have sent them to the charter school where they use Saxon, but I like the Spanish my son is learning and I feel confident supplementing math (which my son is weird enough to think is fun).

 

I read this review of TERC by Bill Quirk. The review is detailed and informative; it's a good read for anyone involved with TERC. One of the big problems with TERC is that it never covers some aspects of basic arithmetic, like long division or reducing fractions. My accelerated son is in the middle of Singapore Primary Math 4A, and based on the information in that review, he's already passed everything TERC teaches on the 5th grade level. Drawing all of those pictures after the student understands the concept takes a lot of time and is inefficient, and that inefficiency means that not as much gets taught. I don't see how students can be prepared for 9th grade algebra if they are taught at this pace through elementary and middle school.

 

Singapore does a great job of teaching the "deeper meaning" behind math, without sacrificing the standard algorithms or important topics. Why reinvent the wheel with this expensive program? Also, why is understanding the deeper meaning thought to be in opposition to the standard algorithms? If everyone had to invent all school subjects for themselves, we would never be able to "stand on the shoulders of giants."

 

So we'll keep supplementing at home with Singapore before school. I like doing it. I kind of roll my eyes at the TERC homework, and I'm sure my attitude has rubbed off on my kids, but I don't really care. He gets good grades in that math, but I don't take it seriously.

[BabyBre]

Thanks for waking this thread, Sara R. I was about to do so myself because my 2nd grade dd's TERC homework for next week includes an introduction to calculators! I actually didn't expect it until about 3rd grade. I can't conceive of any operation she may learn in her entire elementary school career that would require her, or on which it would be advisable for her, to use a calculator. Aaaakk!

 

Today I'll question the teacher. She's been very tolerant of me so far!

[WTMindy]

I'm a part-time math teacher at a school which uses Everyday Math. I work only with struggling students, so my view is skewed.

 

My observations:

 

Let's begin with something positive!

Some kids do very well with this program. They enjoy it and their parents do, too. They are able to solve problems using a variety of strategies, explain the strategies, and apply the strategies in new situations. Wow! That's saying something, wouldn't you agree? Much deeper understanding than we achieved with the old program.

 

Lots of kids are doing 'so-so.' They're a bit baffled some of the time, but they 'get it' some of the time, too. They have a deeper understanding of some of what they're doing (compared to what they were learning in the more traditional program). But,(compared to the old program) most kids aren't as confident working through problems because there isn't a lot of practice. Their parents don't like the program, so the homework time can be stressful for everyone.

 

Also, they really aren't taught the multiplication facts at school (ouch). They are taught HOW to figure them out, but drill is not part of this program. So, for example, they may not know 8 x 5. But, they'll probably know that it's the same as 5x5 plus 3x5 and be able to figure that out. (Most kids I worked with wouldn't have known that with the old program.) There is some real value in understanding that. But, it can be painful to watch a 3rd grader plow through that 'figuring out' process.

 

Finally, the kids who are failing seem to fail badly. They don't even have step-by-step algorithms to fall back on. With the old program, some kids would be far, far from understanding subtraction with trading, but they could still do it; we just persistently 'crammed' the steps into their heads. Now, the focus is on understanding and the steps are secondary, so they are quite desperately behind.

 

Their parents are unfamiliar with what it being taught, so they feel angry and helpless. Who wouldn't?

 

My opinion is that schools who choose this program need to train the teachers thoroughly. They absolutely need to inform parents about the methods their children will be taught. They need to allow kids to do it the 'old way' if they can also demonstrate understanding of the 'new way.' And, they'd better add some drill, or they're going to wish they had.

 

I'm interested in others' experiences, since I'm working with this. I understand parents' concerns and want to be able to help their kids. This isn't the program I would have chosen, but it's here to stay (for a while, at least) at my school, so I'm trying to make the best of it and intervene in helpful ways.

 

I'll be checking back on this thread!

 

This is interesting, and I think you have an accurate summary of the pros and cons of these types of math problems. It actually goes deeper to an underlying educational philosophy called constructivism, that says that students learn better when they construct the knowledge themselves and centers on lots of exploration, which leaves less time for teaching math facts and basic algorhythms that we learned as kids.

 

I also think that your break down is true of any curriculum. THere are a small percentage that get it and do well. These are the kids who would do well with anything you gave them. There is a big group in the middle that struggle and a small group that never get it for whatever reason.

 

In an ideal classroom there would be time for the basics AND time for exploration, but in a public school classroom, you just can't do both well. There is not enough time! So, the pendalum (which used to be way over on the side of drill-and-kill, basics, etc) has now swung too far to the other side. I think, if you look at the research coming out of the national mathematics standards, you will start to see a swing back the other way. Of course, the district have invested a HUGE amount of money into these programs and training the teachers how to teach them and so it will take a while before anyone is ready to switch again.

[Tired_Mama]

I came to home-schooling reluctantly after our introduction to Everyday Math when my kids were in the public schools here. I have countless horror stories, as I know many home-schoolers do; I can't count how many people have cited Everyday Math and programs like it as their impetus to consider home-schooling!

 

In any event, I have a lot of friends with kids still in the same school and I just wanted to thank you, kinsa, fro sharing that YouTube link. I plan on forwarding it to a lot of friends who've also had misgivings about Everyday Math.

 

At this point, even if our school district changed to something better we would continue to home-school, but it sure would be nice to know that the kids still there are getting a decent math education!

[EmilyK]

I'm replying late on this -- hope that's OK.

 

My kids go to a school that uses TERC. Ironically, I have a lot of good things to say about it, even though it was what drove me to afterschooling.

 

First of all, I don't think it is good for advanced math kids. Even our teachers and principal agree it is very difficult to differentiate for the higher kids. And it isn't well-suited to parents leading break-out sessions for the advanced kids, which was one of my earlier forays in trying to help my older son be less bored in math.

 

On the other hand -- with a gifted teacher, which we have a lot of -- it can be at times like living math. (The livingmath site and email list explain that concept better than I can.) They play lots of games and read living math books. They do a lot of the more "fun" aspects of math -- tangrams, logic etc. It *isn't* good on math facts, so our school does magic minutes and encourages parents to work with their kids at home on math facts (I always roll my eyes since I'd rather do the tangrams at home!).

 

I see that there are kids that wouldn't like traditional math and a lot of focus on drilling math facts who enjoy math because of how it is presented. And they may very well understand the "why" of it better, and have a better number sense. My son's teacher spent a lot of time this year making sure kids knew (for example) when multiplying big numbers, what approximate answer they should get, so that if they got the columns mixed up, they would realize their mistake. That was helpful for my son. And they spend a lot of time on the "why". My son's teacher fell in love with math learning to teach this way, just as many people love living math.

 

TERC doesn't lend itself to parent involvement. I find the workbooks that they do at school pretty hard to follow. When they come home, I'm not inclined to do the blank pages in it. I'm not sure why it can't be as attractive and accessible as a homeschool curriculum.

 

The thing with living math as a homeschooler, you can follow the pace of your child. TERC seems pretty glacial to me, and older kids who are mathy can end up not being positioned to take the "right" math sequence in high school unless their parents supplement them at home.

 

Just my two cents. Everyone's mileage varies on this one, especially since it is so dependent on the quality of the teachers and the personality and ability of the child.

[BabyBre]

Is anyone familiar with the current TERC 3rd grade curriculum?

 

Dd's teacher for next year was kind enough to let me peruse the many, many teacher books and I saw a lot of calculator use. This is primarily what I want to avoid. In most operations, dd already favors algorithms over number lines (which are not being taught accurately in our school, but I think that's a teacher issue, not a curriculum issue) or tally marks or cubes or any of that other stuff she did in preschool. :glare:

 

I'm trying to consider how to approach her teacher with what will be quite an annoyance to her, I'm sure - my desire that dd not use calculators in class. From what I could tell by my superficial look into the curriculum, calculators are used in probably half of the lessons. Does anyone have recent experience with the 3rd grade level?

[tarana]

Is anyone familiar with the current TERC 3rd grade curriculum?

 

Dd's teacher for next year was kind enough to let me peruse the many, many teacher books and I saw a lot of calculator use. This is primarily what I want to avoid. In most operations, dd already favors algorithms over number lines (which are not being taught accurately in our school, but I think that's a teacher issue, not a curriculum issue) or tally marks or cubes or any of that other stuff she did in preschool. :glare:

 

I'm trying to consider how to approach her teacher with what will be quite an annoyance to her, I'm sure - my desire that dd not use calculators in class. From what I could tell by my superficial look into the curriculum, calculators are used in probably half of the lessons. Does anyone have recent experience with the 3rd grade level?

 

My girls are going into 2nd grade. I am very apprehensive about using calculators. To me using calculators & TV watching fall in the same category.

When I told my kids' ELL teacher, my daughter could not spell, her response was - well all editors have spell check these days. I had to really control myself. When tecahers have this attitude, it is not easy.

Anyway how to to convince 7yr olds using calculators are bad, if they are to use them at school all the time?

[BabyBre]

As someone else from my state on this board revealed when I wondered how intelligent educators could buy these programs in mass quantities, TERC Investigations teaches in the way that our highly controversial state assessment is taught. In an effort to increase test scores, they've just adopted a program that teaches to the test year round--and allowed the use of calculators.

 

 

I'm going to quote myself above and add that the state's now done away with the standardized test that was so crucial to students' success (although less than half of them could pass it). In my dc's school, it used to be that an entire month out of the school year was devoted to teaching to this test, and just last year they decided to adopt TERC Investigations to teach to it year-round.

 

So, now we've got a new state standardized test. What are the chances we'll get another new math curriculum, too? :001_rolleyes:

 

I've decided I'm going to withold dd8 from math in the classroom next year. I haven't figured out how this is going to work just yet. Hopefully, her teacher is scheduled enough to teach math at the same time every day. I'm thinking about teaching her on site while the class does math. Wish me luck getting the teacher and principal on board.

[talexand]

Breann,

I do something like that at my school. Actually I pull the kids out for half of the day. In our case we have a great math program at school so that is part of the school time. I pick them up after lunch. They get half of their schooling at public school and the other half at homeschool.

 

Before I started this arrangement I had my oldest at a private school which used EM. I knew EM wasn't sufficient for him, he was also ahead in math which they couldn't (wouldn't) meet at school. So I bought Singapore Math and I afterschooled him at home, actually before school in the mornings. I considered this his primary math education and the EM was just extra. I told the teacher what we were doing and he brought in his workbook periodically to keep her in the loop. She supported the effort by excusing him from EM math homework. It helped that he was ahead though so that he was learning the traditional algorithms first at home and then later he would have the EM algorithms. I figured as long as he was solid in the traditional algorithms the alternate ones wouldn't hurt him, they might even help his math sense to learn things more than one way. And the calculator use wouldn't hurt him as long as he had a full math curriculum at home.

[BabyBre]

Breann,

I do something like that at my school. Actually I pull the kids out for half of the day. In our case we have a great math program at school so that is part of the school time. I pick them up after lunch. They get half of their schooling at public school and the other half at homeschool.

 

Before I started this arrangement I had my oldest at a private school which used EM. I knew EM wasn't sufficient for him, he was also ahead in math which they couldn't (wouldn't) meet at school. So I bought Singapore Math and I afterschooled him at home, actually before school in the mornings. I considered this his primary math education and the EM was just extra. I told the teacher what we were doing and he brought in his workbook periodically to keep her in the loop. She supported the effort by excusing him from EM math homework. It helped that he was ahead though so that he was learning the traditional algorithms first at home and then later he would have the EM algorithms. I figured as long as he was solid in the traditional algorithms the alternate ones wouldn't hurt him, they might even help his math sense to learn things more than one way. And the calculator use wouldn't hurt him as long as he had a full math curriculum at home.

 

 

I have considered half-time, but our principal puts up his deflectors at the mere mention of it. Our district has a "homeschool" program, which is where he thinks we should be in that case. In WA I know part-time attendence is within our right, but I haven't figured out entirely if it's within my right to attend my resident school part-time or if that's at the principal's discretion to allow. I'll go that route if I can and need to.

 

For the last two years that dc have been in ps, I have afterschooled with Saxon while they've used Bridges and Investigations at school. So far, so good, but I disagree with you on the calculator use even if they solidly learn the traditional algorithms at home first (which they do). Not knowing the algorithms isn't my concern with calculator use, it's the sense of dependency that it forms.

 

For example, ds16 who is also back in ps (and therefore using reform math) for two years now, recently took a Teaching Textbooks test to see how he would place in a traditional program at this point in his education. The test started out with simple multi-digit multiplication problems. He took one look at it and said, "Can I have a calculator?" I thought he would at least give it a try before he fell back on his crutch! He then, with no calculator, proceeded to place into pre-algebra which (as a kind friend pointed out) is right where we were in Saxon Math before he returned to public school. So, basically, he hasn't learned anything in two years of high schools honors reform math, but has retained what we learned two years ago in a traditional program at home.

 

My point about calculator use is that all ds16 has learned in those two years is how to use and rely on his fancy calculator, rather than his own efforts, to find solutions. That's the last thing my dc need at the young ages of 7 and 8.

 

Thank you for your post. What kind of treatment do you get from your school or district staff on your arrangement? You're not in Washington state by chance, are you?

 

Does anyone else have experience with a similar arrangement?