Teaching Textbooks or Saxon-- the debate!

[makagrin]

Hi!  So we've been using Singapore Math Primary Mathematics U.S. Edition and need to transition into 7th grade math.  I'm looking at either moving into Saxon 7/6 or Teaching Textbooks Grade 7.   We had started first grade with Math U See and it didn't work for us, but Singapore has done us well.  I'd love to hear some thoughts/wisdom from any of you who have  made a similar switch.  Also, my dd is really strong in reading/writing and not as much in math.

[HomeAgain]

I hate Saxon but I would choose it over Teaching Textbooks.  The retention seems to be better for a lot of students and doesn't offer the ability to skate by if the parent isn't diligent. If I were to play with TT it would be in the earlier years, not prep for high school maths.

[kiwi mum]

I personally wouldn't go for either of those after Singapore, but whatever you decide on, make sure you do a placement test. She may test further ahead than Saxon 7/6 and will definitely test ahead of TT7.

[kristin0713]

I personally wouldn't go for either of those after Singapore, but whatever you decide on, make sure you do a placement test. She may test further ahead than Saxon 7/6 and will definitely test ahead of TT7.

What would you choose after Singapore?

[wendyroo]

I would not use TT or Saxon.

 

After Singapore 6 I would probably use one or more of the following...

- Math Mammoth 7

- Keys to Algebra series as pre-algebra

- Jousting Armadillos

- AOPS pre-algebra

 

Wendy

[Ellie]

Hi!  So we've been using Singapore Math Primary Mathematics U.S. Edition and need to transition into 7th grade math.  I'm looking at either moving into Saxon 7/6 or Teaching Textbooks Grade 7.   We had started first grade with Math U See and it didn't work for us, but Singapore has done us well.  I'd love to hear some thoughts/wisdom from any of you who have  made a similar switch.  Also, my dd is really strong in reading/writing and not as much in math.

 

I have no preference, having never used Teaching Textbooks. :-)

 

But if you're going to leave Singapore, you would want your dc to take Saxon's placement test rather than choosing a text based on your dc's grade level.

[SparklyUnicorn]

I used Saxon successfully after Singapore.  No problems whatsoever.  We started with Algebra 1.

 

I know nothing about TT. 

[Mike in SA]

Switching to Saxon won't be a problem, per se, but it will be quite a drop off in quality. Saxon works ok, but uses very nonstandard methods and terminology.

 

I second Wendyroo's list. AoPS will require patience but would set her up for a lifetime of success in math.

[KarenNC]

We switched from Singapore to Saxon in 4th grade and never regretted it an instant. My daughter is also very strong in reading/writing and not so much in math. The incremental nature and constant review have been invaluable for her. She will never love math, but she has actually finally occasionally said she likes it (a far cry from her experience with Singapore!). We've had good results with both the at your own pace and the live online Saxon classes at www.virtualhomeschoolgroup.org (they are free).

 

Definitely take a placement test to find the proper level and believe the results. I tried going up a level because my daughter missed placing there by a point or two. I thought that with all the review it would be fine. It wasn't and we ended up having to test back through the previous level (the one she placed in) and then starting the upper level again.

 

Another consideration will be which edition you choose to use as you progress. The new 4th edition of algebra 1 and beyond removes the integrated geometry, so there's a separate geometry text. With the third edition, once the student has done algebra 1, algebra 2, and the first part of Advanced Mathematics, you can give a geometry credit. Art Reed gives a lot of good advice in his newsletters or book http://usingsaxon.com/newsletterpage-2015.php

 

[SparklyUnicorn]

Switching to Saxon won't be a problem, per se, but it will be quite a drop off in quality. Saxon works ok, but uses very nonstandard methods and terminology.

 

I second Wendyroo's list. AoPS will require patience but would set her up for a lifetime of success in math.

 

See I don't know.  My kid had no trouble.  Now granted we did use a few other things for added challenge, but I didn't notice any terminology issues.

[Ellie]

Switching to Saxon won't be a problem, per se, but it will be quite a drop off in quality. Saxon works ok, but uses very nonstandard methods and terminology.

 

 

 

wow, that's quite a statement. :blink:

 

How is "nonstandard methods and terminology" a "drop off in quality"? Even though I don't think it uses non-standard terminology...

[SparklyUnicorn]

wow, that's quite a statement. :blink:

 

How is "nonstandard methods and terminology" a "drop off in quality"? Even though I don't think it uses non-standard terminology...

 

It doesn't use non standard terminology.

[Mike in SA]

See I don't know. My kid had no trouble. Now granted we did use a few other things for added challenge, but I didn't notice any terminology issues.

Not issues that you will see while using the books - issues with using standard content or terminology after. He makes up his own terms from time to time.

[SparklyUnicorn]

Not issues that you will see while using the books - issues with using standard content or terminology after. He makes up his own terms from time to time.

 

Um no there have been no issues.  He is finishing up a college level course and he did very well.  There were no terminology issues.

[Ellie]

It doesn't use non standard terminology.

 

I didn't think so...

[Mike in SA]

wow, that's quite a statement. :blink:

 

How is "nonstandard methods and terminology" a "drop off in quality"? Even though I don't think it uses non-standard terminology...

It does. He makes up his own version of polar and vector notations, for example.

 

Eta: people do use Saxon successfully. Just take my opinion as an experienced instructor's thoughts. Ymmv.

Edited May 5, 2016 by Mike in SA

[Ellie]

It does. He makes up his own version of polar and vector notations, for example.

 

Which still doesn't address "drop off in quality."

[Mike in SA]

Again, just my experience as an instructor of higher math (yes, at a major uni).

[SparklyUnicorn]

I just went and asked my kid about the polar/vector notations.  I asked him to explain to me what that was. He did in detail.  So then I said did we cover that in A2?  Yes, we did, several times.  I said and you went over that in your current class?  Yes.  Did you notice anything unusual about the way this was explained or noted in A2?  Nope, it's the same stuff.

 

 

[SparklyUnicorn]

Again, just my experience as an instructor of higher math (yes, at a major uni).

 

Could there be another explanation for your son changing up notation?  I ask because my kid has done this, but his reasons are usually that he simply wants to because it makes more sense to him, or because for a very long time he literally had difficulty writing certain letters legibly enough.  Now this is less of a problem so he doesn't, but yes he did do this with certain things.

[SparklyUnicorn]

Again, just my experience as an instructor of higher math (yes, at a major uni).

 

Oh well so do you mind if I pick your brain on something? 

[KarenNC]

Not issues that you will see while using the books - issues with using standard content or terminology after. He makes up his own terms from time to time.

 

Could you give some examples?

[Mike in SA]

Could you give some examples?

I really don't want to feed any arguments - people can be very passionate about their curricula of choice. I know some high performing schools use Saxon. Most students will be fine, despite what mathematicians feel.

 

What I can say is that a disproportionate number of "re-teaching" requirements come from students raised on Saxon. It uses nonstandard notation (you may not care nor need to care), skips swaths of theory, and produces more "automatic response" behavior than other curricula, including "weaker" programs like TT.

 

We love to champion programs like AOPS for the very reason many parents detest it - it forces the student to think - to analyze - and not fear a roadblock. Math is full of roadblocks, and drill/kill programs squelch the ability to navigate them.

 

Singapore is a good curriculum. It challenges the student. A's aren't easy. I personally would rather work with a student who registered a natural "c" in AOPS than a student who learned to regurgitate an algorithm skillfully.

 

Of course, a good teacher makes a world of difference and can address a text book's shortcomings.

 

And, if the grade is a concern, teach from the challenging content, but test to the standards. Do that, and you will understand exactly how much of a drop off in quality we are talking about. The standard tests will be absurdly easy for the student.

[Mike in SA]

Oh well so do you mind if I pick your brain on something?

You are absolutely welcome. I can't promise that I have relevant knowledge. :)

[kiwik]

Have you gone over the samples with your child.  If Singapore was a good fit you could add a couple of the other recommendations to the pile for consideration.  

[SparklyUnicorn]

You are absolutely welcome. I can't promise that I have relevant knowledge. :)

 

I'm trying to figure out what we should cover for geometry that we have not covered.  For sure proofs so I have a book for that.  Beyond that, I'm not sure.  I'll list what we have used.  Maybe that helps or not. I don't know.

 

Saxon A 1

Saxon A 2

Understanding Geometry (Critical Thinking Co.)

Algebra and Trig (Stewart)

Next course he is taking uses: Precalc with Limits (Larson)

 

We used various other things here or there. 

 

Can you think of what we may not have covered at all?  If that's too difficult then what should we cover beyond the usual basics?  And/or do you have a recommendation for a book that is not too long to help with this?  My plan is to spend the next three months on it and a little bit in the fall (he'll have a lot on his plate so it can't be too much). 

[SparklyUnicorn]

AoPS alone was not a good fit for my kid at the time.  He just could not handle constant frustration.  He was young though.  But after Saxon A 1 he was able to go back and do challenge problems in AoPS A 1 no problem so I don't get the impression that Saxon is a pile of poo either.  Although full disclosure we did use the first AoPS book (used to prep for math competitions).  it is much shorter than the other books and doesn't cover nearly as many topics though. 

[Mike in SA]

I'm trying to figure out what we should cover for geometry that we have not covered.  For sure proofs so I have a book for that.  Beyond that, I'm not sure.  I'll list what we have used.  Maybe that helps or not. I don't know.

 

Saxon A 1

Saxon A 2

Understanding Geometry (Critical Thinking Co.)

Algebra and Trig (Stewart)

Next course he is taking uses: Precalc with Limits (Larson)

 

We used various other things here or there. 

 

Can you think of what we may not have covered at all?  If that's too difficult then what should we cover beyond the usual basics?  And/or do you have a recommendation for a book that is not too long to help with this?  My plan is to spend the next three months on it and a little bit in the fall (he'll have a lot on his plate so it can't be too much). 

 

Larson precalc is top-notch.  You will be well-prepared doing the Stewart / Larson sequence.

 

I am not familiar with CTC Understanding Geometry.  It does have some proofs (looking at the TOC), but I have no way of accurately assessing the course rigor or content.  If you are using Saxon 3e, I suspect you will want to reverse the sequence, and do the geometry first, or at least in parallel.  Saxon will add some reinforcement.

 

For geometry supplementation, I normally recommend Jacobs, Jurgensen, or even a Schaum's outline (honestly, the outline is the strongest of the three).

 

 

[Mike in SA]

 But after Saxon A 1 he was able to go back and do challenge problems in AoPS A 1 no problem

 

That's largely because the challenge problems in AOPS help the student to develop the methods used later on - you know, the challenge is that the technique has not been taught yet.  It's fairly unique in that regard.

 

I always understand when parents say AOPS is not for them or their kids.  It requires patience and persistence for both student and teacher!

 

Kudos for picking up the AOPS (original) book.  That is still a good series.

[SparklyUnicorn]

Larson precalc is top-notch.  You will be well-prepared doing the Stewart / Larson sequence.

 

I am not familiar with CTC Understanding Geometry.  It does have some proofs (looking at the TOC), but I have no way of accurately assessing the course rigor or content.  If you are using Saxon 3e, I suspect you will want to reverse the sequence, and do the geometry first, or at least in parallel.  Saxon will add some reinforcement.

 

For geometry supplementation, I normally recommend Jacobs, Jurgensen, or even a Schaum's outline (honestly, the outline is the strongest of the three).

 

I think I'll try the outline.  I have another one of those books (pre calc) and I think that will be the quickest to go through and figure out what we have not covered.  Although I think probably the only thing major is we haven't done much in the way of proofs. 

 

Things are just heading in a direction I really did not expect so I'm trying to make sure I get through certain topics in the next 2 years.  My kid wants to finish high school early. 

 

Thanks for taking the time!

[KarenNC]

I really don't want to feed any arguments - people can be very passionate about their curricula of choice. I know some high performing schools use Saxon. Most students will be fine, despite what mathematicians feel.

 

What I can say is that a disproportionate number of "re-teaching" requirements come from students raised on Saxon. It uses nonstandard notation (you may not care nor need to care), skips swaths of theory, and produces more "automatic response" behavior than other curricula, including "weaker" programs like TT.

 

We love to champion programs like AOPS for the very reason many parents detest it - it forces the student to think - to analyze - and not fear a roadblock. Math is full of roadblocks, and drill/kill programs squelch the ability to navigate them.

 

Singapore is a good curriculum. It challenges the student. A's aren't easy. I personally would rather work with a student who registered a natural "c" in AOPS than a student who learned to regurgitate an algorithm skillfully.

 

Of course, a good teacher makes a world of difference and can address a text book's shortcomings.

 

And, if the grade is a concern, teach from the challenging content, but test to the standards. Do that, and you will understand exactly how much of a drop off in quality we are talking about. The standard tests will be absurdly easy for the student.

 

Thanks for the reply. Personally, I really liked Singapore and have recommended AoPS to many folks who have kids who are more math-intuitive. In all honesty, with my background having been more science-oriented, I have had to work to accept that, in spite of what I may have thought might have been her path, my kid is definitely humanities-bound in a culture that currently tends to idolize STEM. She is highly unlikely to head to higher math courses---I will be astounded if she gets through calculus, and expect statistics will be a more likely path. Although very gifted in reading/writing skills, she has found math to be a struggle all of her life regardless of the program. I probably kept her at Singapore much longer than I should have, to the point that by the end she cried in frustration over every lesson and started saying she was stupid and could never do math. It's been a rather rocky road for us as it's hard for me at times to understand why math and science come so much more difficultly for her than they did for me, but she is like her father in that respect. Rather than "drill and kill," Saxon has given her the support she needed to succeed, regain the confidence needed to tackle the harder problems rather than just give them up as impossible for her, and actually find math to be interesting (something I thought I'd never hear her say). Are there other programs that would have done so as well? Probably, but Singapore and AoPS would not have been for her.

 

I wasn't asking for examples to be argumentative or snarky, but because I am genuinely curious. I would be happy to explain the more standard terms and notations as she comes upon the variants in hopes that it will help her in testing situations, just like I explained British vs American terms in English lit. Unfortunately, without a specific list of those nonstandard terms and notations (along with the standard equivalents), I am afraid I am not a sufficiently good math teacher at this point in my life to pick up on them automatically, as it's been almost 35 years since calculus, much less algebra and geometry! :001_smile: If you know of such a list, it would be a service so that those of us who find Saxon's structure useful can be better teachers and address those areas you describe as shortcomings.

Edited May 6, 2016 by KarenNC

[Mike in SA]

 If you know of such a list, it would be a service so that those of us who find Saxon's structure useful can be better teachers and address those areas you describe as shortcomings.

 

I am not aware of a list of the sort.  With a book in front of me, I could pick a few out. 

 

Honestly, though, if calculus is not in the future, I wouldn't expect any problems.  Just try to get all the way through the Advanced Math sequence, because some algebra & geometry content is held out until that last book.

 

Or, take a route like Sparkly was describing, with lots of follow up using classic texts.

[chaya]

Not issues that you will see while using the books - issues with using standard content or terminology after. He makes up his own terms from time to time.

 

I pulled my son out of school mid fifth grade and he used saxon math through pre algebra. he's now in 9th, back in regular high school doing algebra 1 (common core, regents math) and has had no problem transitioning from saxon. I think he was well prepared for it, actually.

the one thing he hated about it was that saxon math is t.e.d.i.o.u.s.

[Janeway]

Can we say neither one?

 

What about Jacob's Algebra or Foresters?

[Janeway]

If you do use Saxon or TT, then do the placement exams. For TT, she would definitely go straight to their algebra. With Saxon, there is a good chance she will go straight to algebra.

[SamanthaCarter]

I don't really know much about this debate, but after Singapore 5, I moved DS to Saxon 7/6 and it has been a bit too easy. It's mostly review for him, except for some fraction stuff.

 

I switched him because I thought I might put him in private school next year and I wanted him to have finished the book they will use in his grade level. I needed an argument to move him up a grade (to prevent math boredom) and having already done the book seemed like it would be a good argument. ;) I should probably have done Algebra 1/2. 

[Janeway]

Could you give some examples?

 

 

Saxon uses a more rote version of a presentation of the topics. It does not show the hows and whys and often wants the student to just memorize algorithms. It is not as thorough because of that. Some students are just quite intuitive so they will walk away from Saxon and do great. Most will not. If Saxon is used in a classroom, a good classroom teacher will add a lot to the instruction. However, because there are such better options available for a cost that is not higher, why bother. 

[Janeway]

I need to add though, people are wired different in their brains. When someone tells me their child did well with Singapore, I think Saxon and TT is not the place THAT particular child belongs in next. Some kids will do well with Saxon, but usually the ones who did well with Singapore have the thought processes in such a way where they would do better with AoP, Forester's, Jacob's, etc next. Some children, of course, will do well no matter what you give them.

[Mike in SA]

I pulled my son out of school mid fifth grade and he used saxon math through pre algebra. he's now in 9th, back in regular high school doing algebra 1 (common core, regents math) and has had no problem transitioning from saxon. I think he was well prepared for it, actually.

the one thing he hated about it was that saxon math is t.e.d.i.o.u.s.

 

You got out in time.  ;)  I don't think you can do a lot to change arithmetic.  It is what it is.

 

The problems show up in the transition to regular calculus, or sometimes precalc.  Again, not for everyone.

[KarenNC]

I don't really know much about this debate, but after Singapore 5, I moved DS to Saxon 7/6 and it has been a bit too easy. It's mostly review for him, except for some fraction stuff.

 

I switched him because I thought I might put him in private school next year and I wanted him to have finished the book they will use in his grade level. I needed an argument to move him up a grade (to prevent math boredom) and having already done the book seemed like it would be a good argument. ;) I should probably have done Algebra 1/2. 

 

Sounds about right. I pulled my daughter after Singapore 4a and she placed almost into 7/6 (a point or so shy). That's why the placement tests are so helpful.

[J-rap]

Of my children (my younger three) who used Singapore math, we moved to TT after that.  My two oldest used Videotext Algebra, following Abeka and Saxon. 

 

Of the three who used TT, one of them did just fine.  She is a real academic and very studious.  The other two were not so much, and this is where the main problem lies with TT, I think.  It is so independent, that you feel that you, as the teacher, don't need to be quite as involved.  But by not being involved, your student can get by and kind of do the problems by rote without really understanding the concepts well.  I think if I had been as hands-on with them and TT as I was with my older two and Videotext Algebra, they would have done better.  

 

I really loved Videotext Algebra.  I changed curriculums though because I felt I needed something that could be done more independently, given a crisis that happened in our family.

[Targhee]

Why not stick with Singapore? You can continue on with Dimensions Mathematics (or NEM) for 2 years and be finished with Alg 1 and Geometry and ready for Alg 2.

[kristin0713]

This thread is very interesting to me because I have one who struggles with math and one who is very math minded. My 10yo DD has always taken a long time to grasp concepts, and so many times while I have worked and worked with her, her younger brother would get it just by over hearing and start calling out answeres. We started with RightStart and transitioned to Singapore because DD needed more of a workbook approach as opposed to games. She is now almost through Singapore 4A and I have had to supplement with Math Mammoth for certain concepts (division and fractions) and give her lots and lots of extra worksheets for drill. She just needs so much drill. I've been wondering if Saxon would be better for her. DS on the other hand (8yo) just seems to absorb the conceptual teaching, probably from a combination of being math-minded and overhearing DD's lessons before he gets to them himself.

 

I am really torn because I agree with the conceptual approach, yet learning the algorithms has been very helpful for my DD. Despite all of our mental math practice, she will write out problems in order to use an algorithm even though she really should be able to solve it mentally. But when she has to think through it mentally, she shuts down. When she can write it out, she feels in control of the problem and successful.

 

So I don't know what to do. I think that math-minded people don't understand what happens in a non-math-minded brain. (I am not math-minded, and let me tell you, numbers raise my anxiety level significantly!). At this point, I know that my DD is not going to be a mathematician, but I want to prepare her well for algebra and I just don't know if we should keep going with Singapore+MM+drill or switch entirely to something like Saxon.

[lmrich]

Honestly one of the most important things I have ever heard about Teaching Textbooks is that it gets done. For a lot of busy families, this is critical. If you have the world's best math curriculum on your shelf and never get to it, Teaching Textbooks is going to 'win' every time.  I always recommend TT for busy famiies. I often recommend using two math curriculums - one that is parent taught and TT as well. 

[lizlatorre]

I have a very non-mathy 15 year-old. We did well with Saxon up through Algebra 1, but did a Geometry class through Kolbe Online this year. It was what I would describe as discovery and conceptual in orientation and has been miserable for her (and me). I am not familiar with TT, but what I like about Saxon is the repetition. For a student that is a language learner as opposed to a numbers learner, that intense repetition is often necessary to enable them to learn the material. We will be back in Saxon in the fall for Algebra 2.

[Janeway]

Kristen, Horizons might be the perfect middle ground for your daughter. Or even Math U See.

[FriedClams]

We used Horizons through Grade 6 and then went into Saxon. I really like Saxon. It's not fancy, but it's thorough and easy to teach (using Art Reed dvds). My kids are doing really well with it, and other kids I know who've used it have gone on successfully to math heavy college majors. I'm thrilled with it.

 

OTOH, I've looked at TT and at one point owned a used copy of Algebra 1. I would not use it with my kids. It's (IMHO) grade levels behind other curriculum and easy for the student to "game". I know some love it, I am not one of them.

[Lori D.]

Hi!  So we've been using Singapore Math Primary Mathematics U.S. Edition and need to transition into 7th grade math.  I'm looking at either moving into Saxon 7/6 or Teaching Textbooks Grade 7.   We had started first grade with Math U See and it didn't work for us, but Singapore has done us well.  I'd love to hear some thoughts/wisdom from any of you who have  made a similar switch.  Also, my dd is really strong in reading/writing and not as much in math.

 

Saxon is about as far away from Singapore in teaching style and presentation as anything I can think of, so if DD understood Math and "clicked" with the mastery-based, visual bar method, math thinking/problem-solving Singapore, I would recommend going with something other than Saxon. If DD struggled or felt weak or lost with Singapore, then the spiral/incremental approach of Saxon or Teaching Textbook (or Horizons) could be a confidence boost and a good fit. Saxon is more abstract/mathematical in presentation and focuses on algorithm and the mathematical steps of problem-solving.

 

If you have researched all the programs and know for sure that you want to go either with Saxon or Teaching Text, then I'd suggest letting DD go through the samples of each and decide for herself which she "clicks" better with.

 

If you are still open to some ideas, one of these might be a fit:

Tablet Class (Pre-Algebra, Algebra 1, Geometry, Algebra 2, College Algebra)

Kinetic Books (Pre-Algebra, Algebra, Geometry)

Horizons (K-6, Pre-Algeba, Algebra 1)

 

And, of course, the free video tutorials from Khan Academy as alternative ways of explaining topics.

 

Another option, esp. since you mention DD is not so strong in math, is to let 7th grade be a little less formal to allow DD some exploration, to get super-solid in foundational skills she'll need for the higher maths, and to allow her a bit more time for brain maturation in the logic and abstract thinking areas needed for Algebra 1 and higher maths. Then she could go with a Pre-Algebra in 8th, and start Algebra 1 in 9th, which would still allow her plenty of time to go all the way up through Algebra 2 and Pre-Calculus. And, giving her the extra year could make the math a much less difficult/time-consuming subject in high school.

 

So if you went with the "exploration" math for 7th grade, then you might use things like:

- Keys To… books (focus on particular skill: fractions, decimals, percents -- or even try Keys to Algebra)

- Challenge Math (Zaccaro)

- Jousting Armadillos and Crocodiles & Coconuts (Rollman)

- TOPS units: #02 Measuring Length, #03 Graphing, #08 Probability

 

 

 

One last thought: If you opt for Saxon or TT or other traditional Pre-Algebra program for 7th, consider taking it at a slower pace -- whatever is comfortable for DD, and perhaps even include some bunny trails from time to time with one or two of those "exploration" ideas -- and allow 1.5 years for completing Pre-Algebra, and then starting Algebra 1 halfway through 8th grade and taking another 1.5 years, completing Algebra 1 at the end of 9th grade. Still puts you squarely on the track for completing 4 solid Math credits in high school, but also allows DD more time to mature the logic/abstract thinking portions of the brain and to get strong in those foundational math topics she'll need for the rest of high school.

 

DD actually is ahead of the curve right now :), what with the possibility of starting Pre-Algebra in 7th grade, so NO need to feel tied to completing Pre-Algebra in 7th, esp. if math is NOT her strong area. FAR better to take the extra time now in middle school to get super solid with foundations (integers/negative numbers, decimals, fractions, factoring, exponents, etc.), then to hit the wall sometime in high school and have to back up or re-do a higher math. :) Just my 2 cents worth. :) BEST of luck, whatever you decide. :) Warmest regards, Lori D.

Edited May 9, 2016 by Lori D.