Math Mammoth vs CLE

[jmjs4]

Between Math Mammoth and CLE which one do you like better?

[OneStepAtATime]

They are both great programs, IMHO. But they present material differently. What are you looking for? What age student? What have you used before, if anything?

[jmjs4]

This will be for my dd who will be in first grade next year. She used Math Lessons for a Living Education 1 for Kindergarten. I am just curious which one of these everyone else prefers.

Edited May 7, 2017 by jmjs4

[sbgrace]

If I could re-wind time, I would still use RightStart for my kids at that age. I love the foundation it gave us, and there is little writing in the early stages.

 

But of those two, I prefer CLE. I really love CLE's spiral--it's a great way to teach math for retention. It's weak in word problems, but FAN Math process skills and problem solving books can easily supplement that part of the program. Just the look of the page of Math Mammoth made my son melt down when he was younger. Math Mammoth will be stronger conceptually (why the process works). CLE has more conceptual teaching than I expected, and it was easy for me to add if needed. 

 

 

[wendyroo]

I think they are both good programs, but I think they have some major differences:

 

- CLE is pretty heavily religious.  Math Mammoth is completely secular.

 

- CLE requires teacher's guides that contain the actual instruction.  Math Mammoth does not have teacher's guides - the instruction is written directly to the student, though, obviously, young students still need a parent to go over the instructions with them.

 

- CLE is more expensive; each year looks to be ~$35 for student books and ~$14 for teacher's guides.  The full Math Mammoth curriculum (grades 1-7/prealgebra) is frequently available in ebook form from Homeschool Buyers Coop for ~$80 total - for the price of printing, I will be able to use it for all four of my kids.  If you don't want to print (or work directly from a tablet or computer), you can also buy it from Rainbow Resource for less than CLE even if you want it in color.

 

- CLE is a super tight spiral - each lesson consists of a few problems each from a multitude of topics.  One lesson in first grade might have problems about counting money, single digit addition, subtraction, horizontal vs. vertical lines, writing monetary amounts, 2 and 3 digit addition, converting meters to centimeters, fractions and geometric shapes.  Math Mammoth is pretty much mastery, with only a very loose spiral.  A typical first grade lesson would focus primarily on one topic.  Skills are built upon lesson to lesson and grade to grade, and there are cumulative reviews at the end of each chapter, but each day's lesson does not include review of many past topics.

 

- Math Mammoth has WAY more problems than most students needs, plus online worksheet generators and optional tests.  It can be customized to fit the needs of students who require a lot or a little review and parents who want to implement their own type of spiral.  CLE appears to be one size fits all.

 

- Math Mammoth is more conceptual, and CLE is a bit more procedural.  Math Mammoth spends a lot more time teaching kids how to manipulate the numbers rather than just get the right answer.  Kids are explicitly taught mental math strategies, problem solving strategies, different models of mathematical operations, etc.

 

  For example, a typical word problem in the middle of CLE 1 is:  "Donald used fifteen watermelon seeds to make a picture of a rabbit, but it didn't look right, so he took off seven seeds.  How many seeds were left?".  

 

  At a similar point in Math Mammoth, they have an entire page of word problems, and it begins by asking the students:  "Solve the word problems. Think: Are you asked for the total? (2 + 4 = ?) OR Are you asked how many more? (2 + ? = 4) OR Are you asked how many are left? (4 - 2 = ?)".  The problem set then includes a mixture of all three types of problems so that the student must really apply thinking as well as math skills.  One problem in that set is: "Jill has two eggs. She needs eight eggs to make some cakes. How many more eggs does Jill need? Her neighbor has three eggs. If the neighbor gives Jill the three eggs she has, how many more does Jill still need?", which is obviously a much more advanced problem than the one in CLE.

 

Wendy

 

 

[Insertcreativenamehere]

We've used CLE math for several years and I attempted MM with all three of my children this year. It fell flat. While I know the teaching and content of MM is top-notch, the format wasn't a good fit for us. It was far too busy and the look and feel overwhelmed my kids. 

 

I'm thinking of moving away from CLE even though it was a good fit in the early elementary years. As the concepts get more difficult, my kids need more direct teaching and more practice on a concept before moving on than CLE provides. 

[jmjs4]

We've used CLE math for several years and I attempted MM with all three of my children this year. It fell flat. While I know the teaching and content of MM is top-notch, the format wasn't a good fit for us. It was far too busy and the look and feel overwhelmed my kids.

 

I'm thinking of moving away from CLE even though it was a good fit in the early elementary years. As the concepts get more difficult, my kids need more direct teaching and more practice on a concept before moving on than CLE provides.

What do you think you will switch to?

[Insertcreativenamehere]

I'm looking at BJU right now, and possibly Right Start for the youngest.

 

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

[OneStepAtATime]

I think they are both good programs, but I think they have some major differences:

 

- CLE is pretty heavily religious.  Math Mammoth is completely secular.

 

I have used both.  MM is secular but I don't find CLE heavily religious as in they push a heavily religious agenda on students.  I don't think it is surprising that there would be some religious reference since CLE stands for Christian Light Education.  Perhaps that is not what you are referring to, though.  OP, I don't know if religious references would be a problem or not but there are periodic references to things like someone being a missionary.  References are very light compared to their other subjects.  Lots of people who prefer secular material have successfully used CLE.  It is easy to modify as needed.  References that do appear are pretty generic, so there is no specific denomination or religious philosophy strongly represented.

 

- CLE requires teacher's guides that contain the actual instruction.  Math Mammoth does not have teacher's guides - the instruction is written directly to the student, though, obviously, young students still need a parent to go over the instructions with them.

 

Actually, the explanations are in the Light Units the students use.  The TMs have additional information and they have the Light Unit pages included, along with full solutions, so it is easy to grade and see where disconnects are but the explanations are not exclusively in the TM.  I find the TM helpful but many use this program without the info in the TMs since the lessons are written to the student, including clearly laid out example problems.

 

- CLE is more expensive; each year looks to be ~$35 for student books and ~$14 for teacher's guides.  The full Math Mammoth curriculum (grades 1-7/prealgebra) is frequently available in ebook form from Homeschool Buyers Coop for ~$80 total - for the price of printing, I will be able to use it for all four of my kids.  If you don't want to print (or work directly from a tablet or computer), you can also buy it from Rainbow Resource for less than CLE even if you want it in color.

 

Yes.  MM is cheaper.  If MM is a good fit then MM would be cheaper to use.  Absolutely.

 

- CLE is a super tight spiral - each lesson consists of a few problems each from a multitude of topics.  One lesson in first grade might have problems about counting money, single digit addition, subtraction, horizontal vs. vertical lines, writing monetary amounts, 2 and 3 digit addition, converting meters to centimeters, fractions and geometric shapes.  Math Mammoth is pretty much mastery, with only a very loose spiral.  A typical first grade lesson would focus primarily on one topic.  Skills are built upon lesson to lesson and grade to grade, and there are cumulative reviews at the end of each chapter, but each day's lesson does not include review of many past topics.

 

Here is where learning styles really come into play.  Some kids will do well with a mastery based program like MM.  They don't need a lot of review of previous topics and in fact a lot of review gets boring.  Also, they do better with a lot of in depth long term study of one topic before moving on to another.  MM does this quite well.

 

Others, once they have learned something, really need to review it on a regular basis for quite a while for it to not just be learned but mastered and internalized.  CLE introduces a new concept gently but also reviews old concepts so that material is internalized.  If a student doesn't need all the review it is easy to cut out some of that review.  

 

 

- Math Mammoth has WAY more problems than most students needs, plus online worksheet generators and optional tests.  It can be customized to fit the needs of students who require a lot or a little review and parents who want to implement their own type of spiral.  CLE appears to be one size fits all.

 

I did not find this to be true at all.  CLE was easy for me to customize.  No one size fits all.  I adjusted the material to meet the needs of my individual children.

 

- Math Mammoth is more conceptual, and CLE is a bit more procedural.  Math Mammoth spends a lot more time teaching kids how to manipulate the numbers rather than just get the right answer.  Kids are explicitly taught mental math strategies, problem solving strategies, different models of mathematical operations, etc.

 

Agreed.  MM does have a more conceptual approach.  CLE does cover conceptual math but not to the depth of MM.  The weakness with CLE is in some of the word problems, which is why many supplement a bit in that area.

 

  For example, a typical word problem in the middle of CLE 1 is:  "Donald used fifteen watermelon seeds to make a picture of a rabbit, but it didn't look right, so he took off seven seeds.  How many seeds were left?".  

 

  At a similar point in Math Mammoth, they have an entire page of word problems, and it begins by asking the students:  "Solve the word problems. Think: Are you asked for the total? (2 + 4 = ?) OR Are you asked how many more? (2 + ? = 4) OR Are you asked how many are left? (4 - 2 = ?)".  The problem set then includes a mixture of all three types of problems so that the student must really apply thinking as well as math skills.  One problem in that set is: "Jill has two eggs. She needs eight eggs to make some cakes. How many more eggs does Jill need? Her neighbor has three eggs. If the neighbor gives Jill the three eggs she has, how many more does Jill still need?", which is obviously a much more advanced problem than the one in CLE.

 

Wendy

 

 

I love MM.  I want to make that clear.  I think it is very well done.

 

We tried it because it really is a great program and it is soooo affordable.  However, it was a terrible fit for my kids.  For one thing, the presentation on the pages was hard for them (and for me).  It was cluttered and caused eye strain.  That is not true for everyone.  Many people use MM without this issue.  The other issue we had with MM was that my kids (and me) need a lot of review.  We do better with mastery AND spiral.  I modified CLE so we did more in depth review of a new topic (more mastery based) then they still did the review problems so that older concepts were not lost from disuse.  I cut out some of the review in areas that were truly mastered and internalized.  MM just wasn't a good fit here as a spine (but I did still sometimes use it as a supplement).  CLE was a huge positive change for us.

 

Again, OP, the challenge will be determining what your particular child will do best with.  

 

Both MM and CLE are really good programs and many times many have used one or the other with great success.  You may need to try out one to see if it will be a good fit.  MM is not very expensive.  If you try it out and it doesn't work as a spine, it can still be a great supplement.  For CLE, you could just buy a couple of light units and see how those work.  Keep in mind that the first light unit of each level is a review of previous levels so it isn't a good representation of the program as a whole.  Not necessary to get the TM right away, especially at that age.  I will say that the CLE system for review math facts is awesome.  If you decide to go with CLE, get the CLE flash cards.  They will be set up to use specifically with the CLE review system.  Really truly awesome system.  I normally don't like flash cards much but I love this system.

[wendyroo]

Actually, the explanations are in the Light Units the students use.  The TMs have additional information and they have the Light Unit pages included, along with full solutions, so it is easy to grade and see where disconnects are but the explanations are not exclusively in the TM.  I find the TM helpful but many use this program without the info in the TMs since the lessons are written to the student, including clearly laid out example problems.

 

This I don't understand.

 

Here is a sample of lessons 166 (among others).

 

Here is the teacher's guide for those lesson.

 

In 166, the teacher's guide says that horizontal and vertical are new concepts, but there is no explanation about them in the student book at all.  That new teaching is only in the teacher's guide.

 

Right after that, the student is supposed to write numbers in dollar and cents that their teacher reads to them...from the teacher's guide.  It wouldn't work very well if you did not have the teacher's guide.  If you only had the student book, you would not even know what types of numbers the students were supposed to be writing.  This type of listening exercise seems to be repeated in many lessons.

 

CLE seems to have so little conceptual teaching to start with, and I think eliminating the teacher's guide gets rid of even more.  For example, in the teacher's guide for lesson 169, they actually hint at the idea of a circle having infinite sides.  They have the students count the sides of a triangle, square, pentagon, hexagon, heptagon and then octagon.  It then challenges the students to envision what shape would emerge if you continued to add more and more sides.  That deep mathematical thinking would be skipped entirely without the teacher's guide.

 

Wendy

[Misha]

Both are such different programs. MM is mastery based, more conceptual, and teaches to the child. CLE is spiral, less conceptual, and requires much more teacher attention. 

When we started doing math, we tried MM. The mastery style did not work for my children, at all. MM quickly led to tears in our house and I tried a lot of different curriculum before landing on CLE. I hadn't originally wanted to use CLE (due to its religious content) but I couldn't find anything similar that seemed like it would work for my children.

 

I would buy a couple of light units and see how your child does with them, as well as download some of the free printables from MM. 

 

Both are great programs; but for us CLE worked (and still works) better. 

[wendyroo]

Just to muddy the waters a bit more, is there a reason you are limiting it to MM or CLE?

 

There are lots of other great math curricula.  If you wanted suggestions for other options to look into, you could tell us a little bit about what are you looking for in a math program.

 

Wendy

[OneStepAtATime]

This I don't understand.

 

Here is a sample of lessons 166 (among others).

 

Here is the teacher's guide for those lesson.

 

In 166, the teacher's guide says that horizontal and vertical are new concepts, but there is no explanation about them in the student book at all.  That new teaching is only in the teacher's guide.

 

Right after that, the student is supposed to write numbers in dollar and cents that their teacher reads to them...from the teacher's guide.  It wouldn't work very well if you did not have the teacher's guide.  If you only had the student book, you would not even know what types of numbers the students were supposed to be writing.  This type of listening exercise seems to be repeated in many lessons.

 

CLE seems to have so little conceptual teaching to start with, and I think eliminating the teacher's guide gets rid of even more.  For example, in the teacher's guide for lesson 169, they actually hint at the idea of a circle having infinite sides.  They have the students count the sides of a triangle, square, pentagon, hexagon, heptagon and then octagon.  It then challenges the students to envision what shape would emerge if you continued to add more and more sides.  That deep mathematical thinking would be skipped entirely without the teacher's guide.

 

Wendy

I see where our disconnect is.  :)  I never used the CLE 100 series.  

 

We started with the 200s, but I did most of it on a dry erase board and we moved through the material quickly because the kids were doing it as review before starting the 300s.  I honestly don't remember how much instruction was written to the student.  I apologize.  I know that later light unit levels get more and more independent with each level, with instruction written directly to the student.  The TM still includes lessons to teach the kids.  Not everyone finds a need for those, though, because apparently quite a few kids pick up the material with just or mostly the light unit instruction itself. (Full disclosure, I did not do it that way for most lessons, but I have seen others post on WTM that their kids did fine mostly on their own with later light units, and I know that DS frequently needed very little beyond the explanation in the light unit to grasp what they were teaching).  

 

It looks like the 100s expect a teacher to teach the material exclusively or mostly, with very little if any explanation in the light unit.  Which makes sense.  At that age lots of kids need a teacher for new concepts and many are not reading independently enough to read instructions and comprehend them on their own.  Not all, though.

[OneStepAtATime]

Just to muddy the waters a bit more, is there a reason you are limiting it to MM or CLE?

 

There are lots of other great math curricula.  If you wanted suggestions for other options to look into, you could tell us a little bit about what are you looking for in a math program.

 

Wendy

Yes.  Wendy has an excellent point.

 

There are a LOT of good programs out there.  Was there a reason you were looking at MM and CLE specifically?

[jmjs4]

I have been researching a lot of math programs recently.  I thought I had narrowed it down to these two, but I am open to other suggestions.

Edited May 7, 2017 by jmjs4

[wendyroo]

I have been researching a lot of math programs recently.  I thought I had narrowed it down to these two, but I am open to other suggestions.

 

My oldest did Singapore Primary Math for first, and I loved it.  It is very conceptual like Math Mammoth, but it has more pictures and less problems on the page.  However, to fully utilize the program I felt like we needed to juggle 4 or 5 books (workbook/intensive practice, word problem book, process skills book, math facts book, and perhaps the home educators guide).  As I had more and more kids, I just couldn't figure out how I could stay on top of that.

 

At the time I did not know about Singapore Math In Focus; if I had, I might have switched to that instead of Math Mammoth.  Math In Focus is Singapore style math, but all of the various books have been consolidated.  There is just a textbook (which can normally be found used very reasonably priced) and a workbook.

 

Wendy 

[strawberryjam]

We love CLE. I've tried pretty much every major math curriculum and CLE ended up being the perfect fit. We don't do the word problems though, we use RedBird online math for the word problems and extra math projects. You could just use Singapore for word problems too if you wanted to, they have the "Challenging Word Problems" book that could be done one grade lower.

 

CLE is advanced, thorough, incremental, and so easy to implement. I'm not a huge fan of the 100 series though. You could do something different for grade 1 (I did a mix of Miquon and Singapore) and move through 100 and 200 at an accelerated pace later (we start it in Grade 2). I love that it's written to the student, I have to do practically no teaching at all for my fifth grader. Both my kids get close to 100% on their math at all times. I really love that it starts topics early and spoon feeds them the instruction slowly over long periods of time and reviews them often. So they *really* get it and never forget it. 

 

 

Edited May 8, 2017 by strawberryjam

[Another Lynn]

If you can look at the busyness of the page of MM without getting nauseous, then go for it.  Pretty much, one look told me there was no way we could use that program.  

 

CLE has generally worked with different kinds of students here.  I think the key is to establish the habit early that math takes time and we do every problem.  (Not saying it's wrong to cross some out, but for me it opened the door to negotiation which was a pain.  In hind sight, it would have been easier to do them all and get the extra practice than worry I had crossed out too much.)  Agreeing with One Step - level 100 is the only one where the teacher's guide is required.  All other levels have teaching in the student work text.  If you're concerned about how conceptual it is, add in a quality word problem book once a week.  The only other suggestion I have is check to see how well your student is understanding fractions in level 400 - I have heard of a handful of students struggling there.  Add in manipulatives or Key-to Fractions or something else, if needed.  

[Fardo]

All things being equal MM is the better maths programme in my experience - unlike with CLE you wouldn't need to be adding extras from outside sources. But for the many reasons highlights above, CLE can come out on top for some parents and children.

 

 

From what I remember, the MM website had a lot of free worksheets and generous sample pages, so I would print out a couple of pages and see how your daughter responds. If the page is too cluttered for her, strike MM from your list. If she gets on well try buying part A of 1st Grade and see how she gets on for the first half of the year. 

Edited May 8, 2017 by Fardo

[KeriJ]

If you can look at the busyness of the page of MM without getting nauseous, then go for it. Pretty much, one look told me there was no way we could use that program.

 

CLE has generally worked with different kinds of students here. I think the key is to establish the habit early that math takes time and we do every problem. (Not saying it's wrong to cross some out, but for me it opened the door to negotiation which was a pain. In hind sight, it would have been easier to do them all and get the extra practice than worry I had crossed out too much.) Agreeing with One Step - level 100 is the only one where the teacher's guide is required. All other levels have teaching in the student work text. If you're concerned about how conceptual it is, add in a quality word problem book once a week. The only other suggestion I have is check to see how well your student is understanding fractions in level 400 - I have heard of a handful of students struggling there. Add in manipulatives or Key-to Fractions or something else, if needed.

I agree with all of this.

[tdbates78]

I'm eagerly following this because we currently use MM (book 1) and I'm waiting for CLE 200-205 to come in the mail so I can look it over. My girls are both struggling with MM. It may be mastery, but I don't feel like they are mastering anything! The just he very frustrated with the sheer volume of problems per page (despite my crossing some out) and when a review from a previous lesson pops up they have no clue how to do it because it hadn't come up in awhile and they forgot. We are forging through the end of this book but I am definitely not planning on using it next year. Hopefully CLE will be a better fit.

[tdbates78]

I'm eagerly following this because we currently use MM (book 1) and I'm waiting for CLE 200-205 to come in the mail so I can look it over. My girls are both struggling with MM. It may be mastery, but I don't feel like they are mastering anything! They just get very frustrated with the sheer volume of problems per page (despite my crossing some out) and when a review from a previous lesson pops up they have no clue how to do it because it hadn't come up in awhile and they forgot. I'm so not a mathy person and I'm finding tha I could use more help with introducing new material than what MM gives. We are forging through the end of this book but I am definitely not planning on using it next year. Hopefully CLE will be a better fit.

Edited May 8, 2017 by tdbates78

[Jyhwkmama]

I am a secular engineer.

 

I puffy heart LOVE CLE math.

 

Yes, it is more procedural than conceptual. Even though it is not required, I often show my son a proof of what he is learning (if it is the type of lesson where one exists) just to give him more conceptual background. 

 

The tight spiral and small incremental steps of CLE make learning math easy. Some kids may do better with mastery, but my kid and my brain both like a spiral.

 

I have used a sharpie on a few religious things. Most of the religion is more like a story problem about missionaries which does not bother me. What I did find bothersome were a few evangelical blurbs thrown in in the 500 series. I just sharpied them out. We also skip all lessons about "bible math" (using old testament units, getting numbers from the Bible, converting to modern units). The have been a handful of those this year (700 series). We also skipped the story about missionaries before the math starts at the beginning of each book. I am slightly bothered by the traditional gender stereotyping, but my kid does not seem to notice. He is autistic, so social roles don't really resonate with him.

 

The instruction is all in the student materials after Level 100 (or maybe 200). CLE teaches to the student once the student has been taught to read by CLE Reading (which we have never used). I never buy the TGs for the upper levels.

 

We will be moving to other math at the end of this year (end of 700s) as CLE sunrise editions end at Algebra 1 and I want to start with a new publisher for traditional high school math topics. I have heard that CLE 800 is great and your kid can go straight to Algebra 1 with almost any publisher afterwards. We are just on a specific timeline because of my son's needs and my timeline for returning him to public school.

 

I do supplement some word problems. I pull some out of one of these books: http://www.rainbowresource.com/prodlist.php?subject=Mathematics/10&category=Core+Skills%3A+Math+2014/11521. 

[jer2911mom]

I've used both, and I prefer BJU for elementary.  To me, BJU is more straightforward than MM, and more conceptual than CLE.  It's kind of the best of both worlds.  BJU also offers daily review, chapter reviews, and cumulative reviews, and if you print the facts sheets from the CD, you can have daily facts practice as well.  BJU was also better than MM visually for us.  My older dd came back to CLE for 6th grade this year, and we added the FAN Math Process Skills in Problem Solving and Math Express books (which we also add to BJU for my younger dd).

 

Hope this helps,

Kathy