Why NOT Teaching Textbooks?

[UnlikelyHomeschoolingMama]

My DD is in 3rd grade and is has been doing ABEKA Math since the beginning.  For fourth grade I'm looking to switch to something a little more independent, but still strong.  We borrowed a Saxon Textbook from a friend and she likes the idea of reading through, working her problems, and using me for help if needed.  I'm also considering the DIVE CD to really make sure she has the support she needs (math isn't my strong suit).  

 

A friend asked me last night why not just do Teaching Textbooks?  Saxon is spiral like Abeka and is so well-respected and proven, which is why I am considering it.  But why not TT?  How are they different in terms of math instruction?  

 

Thanks!! 

[Mom28kds]

I don't know about TT but am interested in the responses. I went from Abeka to CLE (Christian Light Education). It's spiral and like Saxon (which I've used on older kids) but uses workbooks so they write them. Saxon you need to use your own paper. CLE also teaches to the student like Saxon. TT might be a great fit, I just wanted to add another option for you in case you decide you don't want TT. I've looked into it but can't give you any input. I know this isn't what you asked so I hope it's ok that I responded in this way. 

[Jess4879]

You will get a lot of responses about it being behind and not as rigorous.  Definitely read reviews elsewhere, and do the placement test and check out the samples.  It isn't a fit for everyone, but it's worked very well for us.  If you decide to go with it, I'd make sure your child is working on paper as well as on the computer.  The computer program isn't perfect - one example that sticks out is long division - the computer automatically moves the cursor to the next position, and it is easy for a child to not understand why.  The program also offers hints and second chances, so it may act as a crutch for a child who isn't fully getting the concept.  If you read the "how to use this program" in the front of the books, they recommend watching the lecture, working the problems on paper, and then inputting into the computer. 

 

The word problems in TT are very simplistic.  We supplement in this area.  We also add in math fact review.

 

Things I like - it isn't wordy!  We tried MM and we burnt out on it and often times the lessons were so complicated that I couldn't sort the "why".  I find TT very straight forward. 

 

Some people say it isn't suitable for mathy kids.  Others say the opposite.  There are a lot of reviews on the web about kids going on to tutor in university after using TT.  There are also reviews of kids not doing well.  I think it's like anything, it depends on how it was used and on each child.  The majority of the negative reviews I've read came from people who looked at a sample but never used the program, or they handed the book to their kid and never looked to see if they were understanding the material. 

 

It definitely doesn't have the same scope and sequence as other programs, so it's something to be mindful of.  Typically people use it a grade level ahead.

 

When we started TT my oldest felt like she "sucked at math" and she was reluctant to even attempt a tougher problem because she felt like she'd never get it.  TT gave her a confidence boost and she now really likes math.  When she's faced with a tougher concept she just keeps working at it.  I like that TT does the teaching, as math is not my strong suit!

[momtofive]

We love TT for our oldest who's mathy and loves the format, and independence it offers. Our next child much prefers Saxon because of the smaller bites of new concepts each day, and the wonderful review they include. 😊 We noticed with TT, that sometimes they were presenting practice problems to work that we're taught in a future lesson?!? Not sure if that was an error in the program, but it threw my younger student for a loop. They also test on topics just learned, where Saxon waits until they've had several lessons to practice the concept before presenting it on a test. Everyone's different, and so each curriculum might work out a little bit differently for each student or family. If you do go with Saxon, I highly recommend getting the Saxon Teacher CD's as they are presenting the same lesson as what the book teaches, and they also have every single problem in the course worked out step by step on the cds. Very helpful resource! The Art Reed dvds are also a fantastic resource for teaching the Saxon lessons. My kids love Art Reed! 😊

 

If you'd like something with more of a workbook format that presents solid math teaching similar to Saxon, CLE is absolutely wonderful! We've used that before Saxon for all the kids, and it's been phenomenal! 😉

 

Wish you the best! 😊

[KrissiK]

I thought I had found a great program with TT and I'm sure it has worked for some but.... you can game the system. My DS was low in math and we battled in math. So, TT was a great fit, initially. But, I found out he wasn't learning anything except how to game the system and when I finally because aware of all this and gave him a placement test for CLE... he placed in 4th grade math as a 7th grader. He knew nothing about fractions at all. This is a bit off topic, but I think CLE does a great job teaching fractions - the factoring part, etc. My daughter was doing TT and wasn't learning a whole lot, either. So, we're all doing CLE and doing much better. Especially with the fractions part. Fractions and factoring and that whole thing is hard to teach and I like the way CLE does it. They do that whole digit-sum thing and I find that to be quite effective.

[cintinative]

I thought I had found a great program with TT and I'm sure it has worked for some but.... you can game the system. 

 

I have a friend whose son did the same thing. Something about completing the first assignment and getting 100% and then skipping the rest and the system still showing 100%??  I could be wrong on the exact nature of the infraction but there was definitely "gaming" going on. It's something to keep an eye on if you have a kid using TT. 

[MrsKriknav]

Use it for 2 of the 4 kids I'm currently teaching. Love it and they scored ahead in state testing. Not sure about the whole "gaming" the system thing. Never heard of that and guess my kids haven't figured it out.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[Heart_Mom]

I've been very pleased with TT. My 9th, 7th, & 4th graders are using it and my younger children are using Horizons. 

[wapiti]

Here is a long, old thread hashing out some of the strengths and weaknesses:  Does TT Help a Child Understand Math?  The program may have changed its sequence since the time of that thread, though I don't recall seeing posts mentioning change in depth/challenge level - maybe someone else can provide an update.  Good luck finding an appropriate fit for your student!

[forty-two]

Not sure about the whole "gaming" the system thing. Never heard of that and guess my kids haven't figured it out.

 

One pp seemed to be talking about conscious, on-purpose "gaming the system" - where the student figured out how to fool the system into thinking he'd done the work when he hadn't.

 

But my dd does another sort of unconscious, "accidental" gaming the system (no experience wrt TT, but on other things): where she manages to learn how to do the assignments *without* learning what the assignments were meant to teach :svengo:.  She's very good at pattern matching, and sometimes she finds patterns that allow her to figure out the assignment-maker's intent and uses that to figure out the answer instead of analyzing and using the actual content.  Usually she doesn't even realize she's doing it - I have to stay on my toes to catch it early and then modify my teaching or the assignment to (try) to ensure she's learning what I *wanted* to be teaching her with that work.  (Trying to teach her to read with phonics was a continual exercise in her visually subverting the phonetic point - it took me a long time to notice, and then several iterations before I could eliminate all the outside clues she was using to read *without* sounding out.)

 

For an example that I'm doing on purpose with my youngest: after we read our Bible story in devotions, we ask each kid a question.  Ds is just starting to learn the stories and how to answer questions, so when he doesn't know the answer, we give him three choices, where the first two answers are *always* wrong, and the third answer is *always* right.  He's picked up on the pattern, and so he knows the third answer is the right one, even if he doesn't actually *know* the answer, kwim?  Here we're doing it on purpose to help him learn things he doesn't know - but if a program has those sorts of patterns on *accident*, then students who are good pattern matchers and are good at reading the assignment-maker's mind can learn how the program does things instead of learn what the program teaches.  I've seen people saying that TT can be more prone to that than some programs.

[u2006kids]

it is good for teaching and u can finish a grade  pretty quickly...

But follow it up with Beast Academy or Singapore or Dream box 

[Penelope]

One pp seemed to be talking about conscious, on-purpose "gaming the system" - where the student figured out how to fool the system into thinking he'd done the work when he hadn't.

 

But my dd does another sort of unconscious, "accidental" gaming the system (no experience wrt TT, but on other things): where she manages to learn how to do the assignments *without* learning what the assignments were meant to teach :svengo:. She's very good at pattern matching, and sometimes she finds patterns that allow her to figure out the assignment-maker's intent and uses that to figure out the answer instead of analyzing and using the actual content. Usually she doesn't even realize she's doing it - I have to stay on my toes to catch it early and then modify my teaching or the assignment to (try) to ensure she's learning what I *wanted* to be teaching her with that work. (Trying to teach her to read with phonics was a continual exercise in her visually subverting the phonetic point - it took me a long time to notice, and then several iterations before I could eliminate all the outside clues she was using to read *without* sounding out.)

 

For an example that I'm doing on purpose with my youngest: after we read our Bible story in devotions, we ask each kid a question. Ds is just starting to learn the stories and how to answer questions, so when he doesn't know the answer, we give him three choices, where the first two answers are *always* wrong, and the third answer is *always* right. He's picked up on the pattern, and so he knows the third answer is the right one, even if he doesn't actually *know* the answer, kwim? Here we're doing it on purpose to help him learn things he doesn't know - but if a program has those sorts of patterns on *accident*, then students who are good pattern matchers and are good at reading the assignment-maker's mind can learn how the program does things instead of learn what the program teaches. I've seen people saying that TT can be more prone to that than some programs.

Absolutely. It is easy for some bright kids to figure out how to fill out the math worksheets, the grammar book, etc. and not really understand or retain the information. Especially when the program has easier types of problems and doesn't require much conceptual thinking, but even with stronger programs sometimes.

 

 

 

 

I think it's a mistake for a child to be independent with math before the teen years, and even then a lot of independence isn't going to work for everyone. If something needs to be more hands off for the homeschooling parent due to time constraints for an elementary-aged child, have it be history, or science (even if it's just reading books), not a skill subject like math. I think that people who are more successful with TT would be still somewhat hands-on. You could use it as teaching instruction and still check them by having them show you how to do some of the problems regularly. MUS is another video program that is sometimes said to be less strong, yet usually you hear that students who use it have good understanding of what it does teach, because although there are videos to watch, the parent still HAS to be involved in the daily work.

Edited March 28, 2017 by Penelope

[stacyh270]

I have used TT6 with my son and he definitely learned to game the system.  He also hated the review problems in each lesson so he'd skip those and just answer the questions pertaining to the lesson. His score would show 100% (because he'd only answer 6-7 out of the 20+ problems).  We switched to MM the next year,  but I got desperate last year and ordered TT Pre-Algebra because we had gotten burned out on Math Mammoth (too wordy and too much on a page).  Big mistake, too.  He never even finished it.  

 

For my girls this year, I borrowed my SIL's TT4 but I wasn't impressed.  I switched all my kids to CLE 3 weeks and honestly, I REALLY like it so far.  Just enough review without overkill and new info presented in small chunks.  

 

[FawnsFunnyFarm]

Any kid can game the system with the hints and all. This is why I tell everyone that TT is NOT meant to take you or working problems on paper outof the equation.

 

TT is a great program and works well for many kids. You just need to use it properly.

[BrittiBop16]

Hi, I created an account just to add my two pennies :) We used Teaching Textbooks Level 5 for my 4th grader this year. For background, this has been our first full year homeschooling (K-3 in public school), math is one of dd9's favorite subjects, and she is a quick learner. Neither of us minded TT, but we are switching to Horizons 5 next year.

 

One thing I found is that the beginning lessons of Horizons 5 pretty much pick up right where TT5 left off. I know I've seen here on the forums that children have fared just fine on standardized tests after using TT5, even without bumping up a level. I could be wrong, but I can only assume this just means that Horizons (among other math programs) is that much more advanced, as opposed to TT being far behind. HTH!

[8Arrows4theLord]

  We haven't used the TT elementary levels but have used the Pre-Alg. - Alg. 2 levels. We have also used Saxon 1- Pre- Alg. and Adv. Math. We switched, because Saxon was so difficult in Alg 1. BAD choice. TT was not as rigorous as Saxon. In our opinion we found TTs, if used on grade level as they suggest, do not prepare a child well for the PSAT or the SAT tests. The child also gets to be dependent on the hints and the second chances given by the program. I would not suggest TT to a family serious about sending their child to college. My DD is finding all she didn't cover in TT, as she is working through the Saxon Adv. Math book.  

   On a positive note- TT's automatic grading is really nice, especially if you have several children to keep track of. It also would let a child who is a little behind work on grade level and feel successful. So it has a place.

  Saxon is difficult and some kids do not like it very much (mine included! :001_smile: ), but it is a good program. Art Reed's DVDs are great for the older grades to help instruct. Too bad he didn't make any to help out the 54-65 books. Our least favorite part of Saxon are the investigations. Saxon does do an excellent job preparing a child for the major tests, and the material is covered well. 

Hope you can find a good program that will fit your family.

  

[OneStepAtATime]

I really like TT but it was too easy for the kids to subconsciously game the system. This was not deliberate.  It is just that with the way it is structured a bright child can work through the material and get great grades but not actually truly understand and retain the material.  Not so for all kids.  Some thrive with this program.  Honestly, some really do thrive and do great in higher level math.  I have noticed, though, that those that do tend to really do well with TT have hands on parents that also work with them on the side with other materials such as supplementing the word problems, doing some hands on math stuff, etc.  Not all, but a lot need that extra reinforcement.  

 

The issue I see with TT is if you have your student work through it mostly independently and they do "game" the system consciously or subconsciously, you may not realize how little they are truly learning until way down the road, maybe the entire school year, or multiple years if you really aren't involved in math at all (I have a friend who did this). Then you find out your kid is grade levels behind.

 

TT is a very useful program but I would not have my child doing TT without input/review from the parent and supplementing with outside resources periodically to beef up the word problems and confirm understanding and internalization.

 

(On a side note, I agree that CLE is a great fit for kids that like instruction written mainly to them.  Parent still needs to grade the material but the TM makes that super easy and quick to do.  I am currently using CLE paired with CTC math (through Homeschool Buyer's Co-op) since that gives a good video explanation and quick lessons in whatever topic needs review, from Kindergarten through Calculus.  A student can use CTC to solidify weak areas or go as far forward as they are able in areas they are strong while still working through areas of weakness at a lower level.)

[KrissiK]

The issue I see with TT is if you have your student work through it mostly independently and they do "game" the system consciously or subconsciously, you may not realize how little they are truly learning until way down the road, maybe the entire school year, or multiple years if you really aren't involved in math at all (I have a friend who did this). Then you find out your kid is grade levels behind.

)

This was my problem with it. And honestly, I resent the remarks that "if used properly" kids won't game the system. Yes, kids do need to do the work in paper and enter the answers. And a parent, theoretically should be keeping on top of that. But that would mean the child would have to neatly number the problem on a piece of paper, neatly copy down the problem and work the problem and write down the answer, so that the parent can then look and see what they did and say, "yes, Jonny did actually do the work himself and does understand the concept." Or the parent can make copies of the entire book that comes with the program unless you just want the child to write in the book, which would then make it impossible for a sibling to use it. And then the parent needs to get the answer key and make sure the answers on his paper are correct. And by that time, in my opinion, the whole purpose of doing TT has been defeated because you might as well have just gotten a curriculum with a write in workbook. Which is why we went with CLE because if I am going to have to hover, I might as well make it easier on myself and not try to decipher all of my kid's terrible writing and figure out if he really copied the problem correctly, etc. Edited March 31, 2017 by KrissiK

[BrittiBop16]

This was my problem with it. And honestly, I resent the remarks that "if used properly" kids won't game the system. Yes, kids do need to do the work in paper and enter the answers. And a parent, theoretically should be keeping on top of that. But that would mean the child would have to neatly number the problem on a piece of paper, neatly copy down the problem and work the problem and write down the answer, so that the parent can then look and see what they did and say, "yes, Jonny did actually do the work himself and does understand the concept." Or the parent can make copies of the entire book that comes with the program unless you just want the child to write in the book, which would then make it impossible for a sibling to use it. And then the parent needs to get the answer key and make sure the answers on his paper are correct. And by that time, in my opinion, the whole purpose of doing TT has been defeated because you might as well have just gotten a curriculum with a write in workbook. Which is why we went with CLE because if I am going to have to hover, I might as well make it easier on myself and not try to decipher all of my kid's terrible writing and figure out if he really copied the problem correctly, etc.

I found myself in this boat, as my daughter didn't like the computer's explanations. We spent $119 for what ultimately became used as a workbook. This is another reason why we're switching.

[frogger]

Short answer, after having used it as a gap filler for 4 different children at different times, TT is a tool. It can be used well by a teacher who can speed up or slow down according to their child's needs and can check for actual conceptual understanding at times.  I think it can be useful and great for certain children when skillfully used by a teacher not as a replacement for a teacher. 

 

Students who get math can usually apply concepts to new situations without specifically being taught. They will probably test fine with using just TT. 

 

Students who struggle will probably do better with TT then a curriculum they just don't get and flounder in. They will get the constant review and it will go slow enough for them. 

 

Both these students can get something from TT especially if placed in the appropriate level. 

 

I think it does the most disservice to those who are in between. Who might have a chance to learn more and make more applications to a variety of circumstances but can't make that leap by themselves. 

 

If you want the longer answer you can keep reading. :)

 

I also think that learning from a computer requires maturity. It is self-teaching not computer taught because a child must be able to decide if they have learned something  and know when they need extra information or sit and problem solve through different problems until the light comes on. I doubt many elementary students are that motivated. My oldest went through VideoText by himself using only the corrections book but he was motivated to really learn it. When he struggled (which was seldom) I could usually help him but there came a day I just had to ask him questions and have him explain it to me until he figured it out himself, because it has been about 25 years since Algebra 2. He managed it and it was good for him but now we outsource. :)  But to ask an elementary student to do that is a pretty tall order!

 

Currently I am using TT with my 2 youngest. I have a math day  and we go through 1-4 lessons depending on how easy they are and how I want to teach the lesson and then I give them a couple days to become familiar friends with the concepts by doing the practice sets on their own. I'm not sure I'm happy with how challenging the practice sets are for at least one of them but we will continue this year with them. It is possible that it is right for my third child even if not for my 4th. Just remember you are still the teacher and the curriculum is only a tool. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[J&JMom]

I started using TT6 this with my sixth grader who was stumbling with retention using Envision Math.  He loved it and finished the entire CD series in about 3 months. He averaged 3 lessons a day and took about 45 minutes to finish it all (about 60 problems). Granted, we were about 60% of the way through the Envision, but switched when he bombed a benchmark test which tested what he remembered from that 60%.  I also supplemented with MobyMax everyday while on TT (after taking their placement test) to fill in any wholes.  TT is very computation based with limited problem solving.  Each lesson has a video, 5 practice problems and the problem set which includes 2 "concept" true and false questions about that lesson, about 20 straight computation problems with lots of spiral review (maybe 5-7 of those problems will deal with that lesson), and 1, yes only 1, word problem. . I plan to use Study Island and IXL for the rest of the year as well as Moby Max to solidify concepts and problem-solving now that he has gained confidence in math.  The confidence boost was worth the investment and the program has a high re-sale value if eBay prices are anything to base it on.  

Edited March 31, 2017 by J&JMom

[Guest]

Because my 2nd grade dd who had finished half of CLE 200 placed into TT4.

Because my boys were using TT6 and covering nothing new from CLE 300-400.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KrissiK]

You asked "why not" so my short answer is that it allows the teacher to check out too much.

 

.

you could put it that way. Which makes it sounds like it's a lazy mom's way of getting out of teaching her kids math.

 

I would say it is a program that is set up in a way that makes it difficult for a mom to effectively and easily monitor her kids' progress in math. But that's the way it is for anything that is computer based. A computer program will only show you the answers a kid puts down. You will have to go elsewhere to see the process. And that's where I find the problem to be. My kid does the lesson, I look at the grade book... Oh you got 65%. So, you go back and see which problems they missed. And then you look at the scrawl on the scratch paper and try to find where they worked that problem. And then you try to help them figure it out. But since you weren't sitting there right with them for the lecture part of the lesson, you're not sure how that concept was taught exactly. So you go back through it and listen to the lecture yourself, just to be sure everyone is on the same page.

[Farrar]

I think two things... one, if you have an average or better student without any emotional or other special learning needs and you the teacher don't have any special time constraint needs, I don't understand why you would purposefully choose a program that is simply not as in depth as most other programs. That just makes no sense to me as a teacher who wants to challenge my kids. It's a box checker program, not a challenging program. It covers all the topics, but in less depth than even average programs. Obviously, for kids or families who do have some of those special needs, it's a life saver. I've suggested it to people to check out on numerous occasions for kids who are struggling, parents who feel the relationship is struggling over math, etc. But if you don't have any of those needs, it is behind other programs.

 

Two, you get out what you put in. 3rd grade is not typically the time to be more independent. If you want to raise a kid who loves math, who has a depth of understanding of math, who is prepared for math challenges, then it takes your time and energy. Programs like TT (or other online programs, whether it's something like Khan or a drill program like Xtramath or whatever) can work - absolutely - but only when you are there supporting and supplementing and doing more. So examine your expectations and what you think will be the outcomes.

[Jess4879]

you could put it that way. Which makes it sounds like it's a lazy mom's way of getting out of teaching her kids math.

 

I would say it is a program that is set up in a way that makes it difficult for a mom to effectively and easily monitor her kids' progress in math. But that's the way it is for anything that is computer based. A computer program will only show you the answers a kid puts down. You will have to go elsewhere to see the process. And that's where I find the problem to be. My kid does the lesson, I look at the grade book... Oh you got 65%. So, you go back and see which problems they missed. And then you look at the scrawl on the scratch paper and try to find where they worked that problem. And then you try to help them figure it out. But since you weren't sitting there right with them for the lecture part of the lesson, you're not sure how that concept was taught exactly. So you go back through it and listen to the lecture yourself, just to be sure everyone is on the same page.

 

This is really going to depend on HOW you use the program.  *If* you use the program as it's designed, a student would listen to the lecture, work the problem on paper (in the workbook or a notebook, not on scrap paper), enter the answer, receive immediate feedback, and continue on to the next problem.  A parent still needs to check the work.  They need to look at the grade book, see how many attempts a child makes and ensure they are completing all the problems.  I do think the design of the program makes it very easy for a parent to step too far back...it's something to be mindful of if a person chooses to use the program. 

 

If your child doesn't understand a lesson in CLE or MM or whatever, you'd still be going back and having to figure it out before you could assist them.  I think this is the same for any independent style math.