Moving from AOPS to Jacob's / Foerster / Lial -- ugh!

[Tardis Girl]

I hate to even post but I've read so many math posts on here and am still feeling frustrated and confused. I just want to stick to a math plan for upper level maths...is that too much to ask?? lol  I want to challenge her without her just "tolerating" math. I'm sure many people feel that way! 

 

My 13yo finished the better part of AOPS Pre-Algebra (first time with AOPS)...it's an interesting approach and she has done better with it than I thought, often coming up with creative approaches to solving problems that I don't expect. But she is not a big fan of this approach and tolerates math as a necessary requirement -- I think she would love to switch to something a little more direct. ;)  I have been looking (and looking!) at where to go from here, not just for Algebra but in the bigger scheme of a few years: specifically, Jacob's (Dr Cal?), Foerster's (MWB?), and Lial's, and also at Chakerian for geometry. 

 

I'm thinking it would be best to stick with one tract where possible, but are there benefits to switching between courses? For example:

Jacob's Elementary Algebra

Chakerian Geometry

Foerster's Algebra 2

 

I don't want to revisit math every year, lol.  I regret not having a good, consistent program with my older kids and am committed to staying more aware and involved with the younger ones' math progression, as well as being more available for discussion and explanation as needed. She will watch a video if needed, but I think would prefer to not have that be an integral part, rather preferring to rely on the explanation in the text and discussing it with me. At least that's how it went with AOPS. (I think she probably doesn't want to spend the time on math videos which can get rather long at times.)

 

- Are any of these better suited to minimal video usage?

- I absolutely want a good answer key and preferably written out explanations of answers, because even though I *could* just work stuff out on my own to check it for her, I need whatever time-saving tools there are.

 

I know that AOPS is quite different in approach, but do you think she'd be fine moving forward with Algebra 1, despite not completing the AOPS Pre-Algebra?  

 

My head is swimming from all the old posts I've read. Is there anywhere where there is a simple list of pros/cons or a flowchart or something guiding the decision process?? Kidding...kind of. I'd love to find that if it exists. 

 

Many thanks for any guidance!

Edited July 11, 2017 by Tardis Girl

[Monica_in_Switzerland]

Here's a couple questions I'd ask you:

 

- Has her attitude to math CHANGED because of AOPS?  That is, did she used to love it, but now only tolerates it, or has math always been a subject she simply wants to get through and move on?  

 

- Do you want to move her to relying solely on a textbook or do you want to switch back to teaching a lesson and then assigning problems?

 

If her attitude to math has not changed with AOPS, then I would stick with AOPS.  However, if she has gone from loving math to not loving math, I'd go back to the approach she preferred, which I assume was direct instruction then assigned problems.  

 

If your goal is to have her be independent for math, I would also consider sticking with AOPS.  The other texts you mentioned were designed for classroom use and so the examples in the text are not always enough.  

 

My understanding is that the first few chapters of AOPS Algebra are a review of PA, so you could probably move directly into the Alg text.  

 

There are some really great reviews of textbooks on the Math Mammoth page.  You might want to check those out.  It might help you narrow things down.

 

I haven't seen all the texts you are considering, I've just spent loooooots of time researching them.  lol.

[Roadrunner]

Foesrster's is considered an excellent text. You can use that for all of Algebea.

You can also go with Derek Owen for math.

[lisabees]

After AoPS, we went into Jacobs Algebra for the first half of the book - to cover prealgebra again.  Then, we started DO Algebra.  That has worked wonderfully, yet I still wish she had a teacher who could personally ask/answer questions and stayed on top of her.  Yes, I do all of that, but with dd's personality, she would be more receptive (and more successful) if she had someone else.

[JoJosMom]

If she dislikes a video approach, then Derek Owens is NOT a good option (much though I love his classes.)

[Tardis Girl]

Thank you all so much for sharing your thoughts and experiences! This has been such a weight on me. I wrote a lengthy reply and it all was deleted because apparently I was logged out by the system. :(  Trying again....

 

Monica -- you ask some good questions. Can I ask why you recommend specifically staying with AOPS if her attitude on math has not changed?

 

Just to clarify, her previous math consisted of these:

- Math Mammoth for elementary (written to the student so she worked pretty independently and I would check over her work; if there was ever a struggle to understand something, I would directly explain it and guide her to figure it out...although I don't specifically remember ever doing that with her)

- Life of Fred elementary and intermediate for fun alongside MM, then to LOF decimals/percents, and a brief stint with LOF Pre-Algebra 0 (Physics)

- AOPS Pre-Algebra this past year, although she still has a decent chunk left of the book

 

I talked with my daughter more after thinking through some of Monica's questions. Here's what I came away with:

- she says she's never really liked math much

- she liked Life of Fred most of all, pretty much because the story component made it interesting, at least for the elementary / intermediate series. But she found LOF Pre-Algebra Physics more frustrating, which she thinks may be attributed to being introduced to both new physics and math concepts simultaneously. She did not finish that book, nor did she continue with the LOF series.

- I had forgotten, but apparently after LOF, I had her try some of the very beginning of Lial's Algebra (because I had a copy around and wanted to see how she would handle the style, knowing that the very beginning was something she could handle in terms of content). She remembers that she did not like all the straight computation.

- This unexpected info on Lial's has me rethinking everything. Perhaps that is not fair to introduce this variable into the equation at this point (ha! math humor!) since it was such brief exposure, but if she didn't like all the straight computation, what does that mean for the possibility of Lial's / Jacob's / Foerster??

- her thoughts on AOPS: it was ok, she just doesn't really care for math she says

- I will just say too that she does have a good mind for math -- even when she was younger I saw evidence of that as just something innate. She solves problems and finds answers in ways that I would not expect... and once in a while I even have a hard time understanding it when she explains it, but it works. But she also is easily distracted, avoids work, etc. Just not a highly-motivated person or someone who acts on her own initiative even when she has talents in certain areas.

 

 

I'll be honest, and it's painful to say this, but one of my concerns with AOPS is that it is very time consuming. Maybe it's my perception, but it feels like the approach of this series of book will necessitate her spending more time on math to cover the same main subjects (Alg 1, Alg 2, etc) OR she will just not get through as much math if she sticks with AOPS. It has always been my intention that all of my kids get through Pre-Calc by the time... but is that just silly? maybe I shouldn't get hung up on that? 

 

I want to ask more questions of you lovely ladies, but don't even know what to ask. Please continue to share your thoughts if you are so inclined. Thank you so much!

[8filltheheart]

Your posts about your Dd pretty much echo my experience with my college freshman when it comes to math. She is a very strong math student (every bit as strong as her chemE and physics/math majoring brothers.) She, however, has never really enjoyed math. She is a language/literature loving girl who tolerated math.

 

She completed Foerster's alg in 1/2 a yr in 7th grade, and her brother and I encouraged her to try AoPS. She signed up for their spring semester alg course. She did not struggle with AoPS, but she found it time consuming and absolutely not an approach she enjoyed. She did not want to commit that much of her day to math. I knew from her older brothers' experiences that 1:I love AoPS, but it is very time consuming (it is what her physics/math majoring brother used in high school) and 2-I love AoPS, but it is not vital for strong math background mastery (her chemE brother didn't use AoPS and has a solid math background.)

 

Fwiw, my Dd used Foerster's for alg 1and 2. Chalkdust's geometry (by Daniel Alexander and Geralyn Koeberlein), pre-cal with DO (but she just used the videos. She worked through the Sullivan textbook (I think that was the recommended textbook) and we graded on our own. (If we couldn't figure something out, we would call her brother) Then she did Thinkwell for cal. (She scored very high on the cal CLEP exam, so her mastery was excellent.).

 

Anyway, she took that approach bc I am not any help beyond alg 2 and DO and Thinkwell lectures helped with explanations. Foerster's explanations in alg 1&2 are great. He tosses in humor in his word problems. I didn't find the pre-cal book's explanations as good and it was harder to work through without assistance (my oldest ds did it. My oldest Dd went through the book with a math tutor. Switching to DO's videos was a good compromise since we Dd didn't want to devote time to teaching herself and we didn't have access to a tutor.)

 

Fwiw, she discovered last yr that she really enjoys econ and stats. :)

[lisabees]

Thank you all so much for sharing your thoughts and experiences! This has been such a weight on me. I wrote a lengthy reply and it all was deleted because apparently I was logged out by the system. :(  Trying again....

 

Monica -- you ask some good questions. Can I ask why you recommend specifically staying with AOPS if her attitude on math has not changed?

 

Just to clarify, her previous math consisted of these:

- Math Mammoth for elementary (written to the student so she worked pretty independently and I would check over her work; if there was ever a struggle to understand something, I would directly explain it and guide her to figure it out...although I don't specifically remember ever doing that with her)

- Life of Fred elementary and intermediate for fun alongside MM, then to LOF decimals/percents, and a brief stint with LOF Pre-Algebra 0 (Physics)

- AOPS Pre-Algebra this past year, although she still has a decent chunk left of the book

 

I talked with my daughter more after thinking through some of Monica's questions. Here's what I came away with:

- she says she's never really liked math much

- she liked Life of Fred most of all, pretty much because the story component made it interesting, at least for the elementary / intermediate series. But she found LOF Pre-Algebra Physics more frustrating, which she thinks may be attributed to being introduced to both new physics and math concepts simultaneously. She did not finish that book, nor did she continue with the LOF series.

- I had forgotten, but apparently after LOF, I had her try some of the very beginning of Lial's Algebra (because I had a copy around and wanted to see how she would handle the style, knowing that the very beginning was something she could handle in terms of content). She remembers that she did not like all the straight computation.

- This unexpected info on Lial's has me rethinking everything. Perhaps that is not fair to introduce this variable into the equation at this point (ha! math humor!) since it was such brief exposure, but if she didn't like all the straight computation, what does that mean for the possibility of Lial's / Jacob's / Foerster??

- her thoughts on AOPS: it was ok, she just doesn't really care for math she says

- I will just say too that she does have a good mind for math -- even when she was younger I saw evidence of that as just something innate. She solves problems and finds answers in ways that I would not expect... and once in a while I even have a hard time understanding it when she explains it, but it works. But she also is easily distracted, avoids work, etc. Just not a highly-motivated person or someone who acts on her own initiative even when she has talents in certain areas.

 

 

I'll be honest, and it's painful to say this, but one of my concerns with AOPS is that it is very time consuming. Maybe it's my perception, but it feels like the approach of this series of book will necessitate her spending more time on math to cover the same main subjects (Alg 1, Alg 2, etc) OR she will just not get through as much math if she sticks with AOPS. It has always been my intention that all of my kids get through Pre-Calc by the time... but is that just silly? maybe I shouldn't get hung up on that? 

 

I want to ask more questions of you lovely ladies, but don't even know what to ask. Please continue to share your thoughts if you are so inclined. Thank you so much!

 

This resonates with me, as my dd is very similar.  She is an out of the box thinker and appreciates humor and stories in her learning.  She liked AoPS enough, but with her personality, the retention was just not there.  My boys could see something once and remember it always. DD just doesn't care enough.

 

So - what works best for her - really in all areas - is more systematic learning.  Step by step with specific output expectations.  This is why DO isn't the perfect thing for her.  I would love a teacher to be asking dd questions, telling her to do her work, nagging her.

 

DD really likes DO.  It is systematic on the input, but not the output (at least for dd).  DD tends to slack with time management.  For a chapter or two, she gets it and speeds ahead and other chapters, she slows waaay down, doesn't send in her homework before she takes tests, etc.  It is an ongoing battle; this year, she will follow DO's schedule, unless I sign her up for a live class.

 

I would love for DD to take WTMA's AoPS Algebra, but she would have to spend the entire year doing algebra again.  I don't know what to do.

 

OP - I feel your pain!  Best of luck in what you decide.

[Monica_in_Switzerland]

The reason to consider staying with AOPS is because the book is self-teaching in design.  For your particular situation, this would be the main Pro of AOPS.  

Cons are as listed- time commitment, lack of review, more challenging than truly necessary for someone who is not interested in pursuing math...

 

Are you comfortable enough with math that if she were using a standard text you could answer questions on the fly?  That is, she could attempt self-teaching with Forrester's, or similar, but you could step in when necessary?  That might be a good option.  

 

 

 

[8filltheheart]

Are you comfortable enough with math that if she were using a standard text you could answer questions on the fly? That is, she could attempt self-teaching with Forrester's, or similar, but you could step in when necessary? That might be a good option.

I am not good enough in upper level math to answer on the fly, but googling videos and examples is often enough for my kids and me to figure out what we didn't initially understand. When that doesn't work, posting questions here usually does.:) So, don't forget the knowledgeable, helpful women here!

[Monica_in_Switzerland]

I am not good enough in upper level math to answer on the fly, but googling videos and examples is often enough for my kids and me to figure out what we didn't initially understand. When that doesn't work, posting questions here usually does.:) So, don't forget the knowledgeable, helpful women here!

True! But I think OP mentioned her DD didn't like learning from videos.

[lisabees]

The reason to consider staying with AOPS is because the book is self-teaching in design.  For your particular situation, this would be the main Pro of AOPS.  

Cons are as listed- time commitment, lack of review, more challenging than truly necessary for someone who is not interested in pursuing math...

 

Are you comfortable enough with math that if she were using a standard text you could answer questions on the fly?  That is, she could attempt self-teaching with Forrester's, or similar, but you could step in when necessary?  That might be a good option.  

 

 

I am not good enough in upper level math to answer on the fly, but googling videos and examples is often enough for my kids and me to figure out what we didn't initially understand. When that doesn't work, posting questions here usually does. :) So, don't forget the knowledgeable, helpful women here!

 

My only concern would be - for a kid who is easily distracted and not too motivated - there is plenty of opportunity for wasted time when self-teaching.  I am just speaking from my own experience.  I'd hate to see the OP switch again.  I highly recommend something with more accountability.  I still haven't found the perfect fit.  

 

OP - Lial's is not the most inspiring of books.  There are tons of practice problems and, if I recall correctly, the print was small and there was a lot to a page.  DS21 used it in 7th grade.

Edited July 14, 2017 by lisabees

[jewellsmommy]

Thank you all so much for sharing your thoughts and experiences! This has been such a weight on me. I wrote a lengthy reply and it all was deleted because apparently I was logged out by the system. :(  Trying again....

 

Monica -- you ask some good questions. Can I ask why you recommend specifically staying with AOPS if her attitude on math has not changed?

 

Just to clarify, her previous math consisted of these:

- Math Mammoth for elementary (written to the student so she worked pretty independently and I would check over her work; if there was ever a struggle to understand something, I would directly explain it and guide her to figure it out...although I don't specifically remember ever doing that with her)

- Life of Fred elementary and intermediate for fun alongside MM, then to LOF decimals/percents, and a brief stint with LOF Pre-Algebra 0 (Physics)

- AOPS Pre-Algebra this past year, although she still has a decent chunk left of the book

 

I talked with my daughter more after thinking through some of Monica's questions. Here's what I came away with:

- she says she's never really liked math much

- she liked Life of Fred most of all, pretty much because the story component made it interesting, at least for the elementary / intermediate series. But she found LOF Pre-Algebra Physics more frustrating, which she thinks may be attributed to being introduced to both new physics and math concepts simultaneously. She did not finish that book, nor did she continue with the LOF series.

- I had forgotten, but apparently after LOF, I had her try some of the very beginning of Lial's Algebra (because I had a copy around and wanted to see how she would handle the style, knowing that the very beginning was something she could handle in terms of content). She remembers that she did not like all the straight computation.

- This unexpected info on Lial's has me rethinking everything. Perhaps that is not fair to introduce this variable into the equation at this point (ha! math humor!) since it was such brief exposure, but if she didn't like all the straight computation, what does that mean for the possibility of Lial's / Jacob's / Foerster??

- her thoughts on AOPS: it was ok, she just doesn't really care for math she says

- I will just say too that she does have a good mind for math -- even when she was younger I saw evidence of that as just something innate. She solves problems and finds answers in ways that I would not expect... and once in a while I even have a hard time understanding it when she explains it, but it works. But she also is easily distracted, avoids work, etc. Just not a highly-motivated person or someone who acts on her own initiative even when she has talents in certain areas.

 

 

I'll be honest, and it's painful to say this, but one of my concerns with AOPS is that it is very time consuming. Maybe it's my perception, but it feels like the approach of this series of book will necessitate her spending more time on math to cover the same main subjects (Alg 1, Alg 2, etc) OR she will just not get through as much math if she sticks with AOPS. It has always been my intention that all of my kids get through Pre-Calc by the time... but is that just silly? maybe I shouldn't get hung up on that? 

 

I want to ask more questions of you lovely ladies, but don't even know what to ask. Please continue to share your thoughts if you are so inclined. Thank you so much!

 

 

Dd did Singapore, switched to Math Mammoth in 3rd and finished out the course

For pre-alg, we did LOF and Critical Thinking Co.

Algebra - Jacob's -just straight textbook, no videos. Dd does not care for videos. She liked Jacob's a lot and wanted to stick with it for Geometry too.

 

I pick and choose a few questions from the section 1 problems (review) and then section 2 (new stuff) and then we try section 4 for fun (challenging, word problem, similar to a brain teaser type thing). 

 

Have her look over the Jacob's on-line samples to see what she thinks.

 

 

ETA: Now, I have no clue what we are doing for Alg. 2  :lol:

Edited July 14, 2017 by jewellsmommy

[lisabees]

True! But I think OP mentioned her DD didn't like learning from videos.

 

Hmmm.  There are two kinds of videos - one with teacher standing in front and one which uses a blackboard of sorts.  DO uses the blackboard approach.  And the videos are short.

 

Foerster's has videos, if necessary, doesn't it?  Math without Borders? Are those videos accessible online at any time?  Or are they only available through a download via flashdrive?

Edited July 14, 2017 by lisabees

[JoJosMom]

I would not stick with AoPS unless the student is committed to it.  It is a time suck (and DD uses and loves it.)

 

I think Foerster is worth a look, OP.  It is much more lively than Lials (which I think is an excellent option for some students.)  While it may not be designed for self-study, I think that it is written clearly enough for a bright student to manage well (it was our back-up should AoPS not have worked for us.)  I would just recommend that you also purchase the Math Without Borders flashdrive lessons; she may not want to use videos all the time, but it would provide back-up in case of difficulties.  Good luck!

[Alice]

I would not stick with AoPS unless the student is committed to it.  It is a time suck (and DD uses and loves it.)

 

 

 

Yes, I agree. My oldest uses it and loves it and it's a great fit for him. But Math is his thing and he's happy to spend hours on it. I wouldn't use it for a kid who is good in Math but doesn't really enjoy it. 

[Tardis Girl]

You ladies are so great! I can't tell you how much it helps just to get me thinking and feel a little less stuck. :)

 

@Monica -- I do feel comfortable enough to answer stuff on the fly at this point...at least through Algebra 2, I would think, maybe beyond. 

 

Are there decent samples anywhere of Foerster's? I think I am leaning that way now... although I wouldn't mind seeing Jacob's as well. I saw a sample at Rainbow Resource for Foerster, but it was really just the table of contents and only one page of the actual text. 

 

On a side note, I'm thinking through how much time one spends on math. My daughter has basically spent 30 minutes a day on AOPS Pre-Algebra. Maybe I should start another topic for this, because I'm wondering if that's just too little? But I really can't see pushing math time beyond, say, 45 minutes a day. Even that seems too much -- I'd rather she stay focused for a shorter time than get more distracted with the longer time. 

[Gratia271]

Your posts about your Dd pretty much echo my experience with my college freshman when it comes to math. She is a very strong math student (every bit as strong as her chemE and physics/math majoring brothers.) She, however, has never really enjoyed math. She is a language/literature loving girl who tolerated math.

 

She completed Foerster's alg in 1/2 a yr in 7th grade, and her brother and I encouraged her to try AoPS. She signed up for their spring semester alg course. She did not struggle with AoPS, but she found it time consuming and absolutely not an approach she enjoyed. She did not want to commit that much of her day to math. I knew from her older brothers' experiences that 1:I love AoPS, but it is very time consuming (it is what her physics/math majoring brother used in high school) and 2-I love AoPS, but it is not vital for strong math background mastery (her chemE brother didn't use AoPS and has a solid math background.)

 

Fwiw, my Dd used Foerster's for alg 1and 2. Chalkdust's geometry (by Daniel Alexander and Geralyn Koeberlein), pre-cal with DO (but she just used the videos. She worked through the Sullivan textbook (I think that was the recommended textbook) and we graded on our own. (If we couldn't figure something out, we would call her brother) Then she did Thinkwell for cal. (She scored very high on the cal CLEP exam, so her mastery was excellent.).

 

Anyway, she took that approach bc I am not any help beyond alg 2 and DO and Thinkwell lectures helped with explanations. Foerster's explanations in alg 1&2 are great. He tosses in humor in his word problems. I didn't find the pre-cal book's explanations as good and it was harder to work through without assistance (my oldest ds did it. My oldest Dd went through the book with a math tutor. Switching to DO's videos was a good compromise since we Dd didn't want to devote time to teaching herself and we didn't have access to a tutor.)

 

Fwiw, she discovered last yr that she really enjoys econ and stats. :)

 

This mirrors my experience with DD18.  Highly talented with math but absolutely did not like AOPS.  We followed Foerster up to College Calc and College Stats.  DS15 is similar.  He did Calc in 8th grade but does not like math either.  Derek Owens was a great fit for him with Precalc and DD15 will take that this fall prior to AP work. DO is great, and we love Foerster materials too.  My DC also love econ and stats.  Too funny!

 

[EKS]

I am a huge Jacobs fan.  The way it works is that there is minimal teaching in the text and then the student works a carefully constructed problem set that takes her from what she knows through what is being taught in the lesson.  It is an incredibly powerful approach, but it is important that she has someone available who can help if necessary.  I've not used the Dr. Callahan videos, so I don't know how helpful they are (or if they're *too* helpful, if that makes sense).

 

I have also taught from the Lial's Introductory Algebra book.  It is a solid choice, but not as inspired as Jacobs, IMO, and it is not overly kid-friendly in its presentation.  I do not think that Lial's Intermediate Algebra (which I have also taught from) is a solid choice for Algebra II though.  

 

People have mentioned Derek Owens here too.  If she doesn't like videos, she probably won't like DO--unfortunately, because I think his courses are very well done.  We have gotten around the not liking watching videos thing here by having *me* watch the videos and then present the information to my son in a one-on-one lesson format.  It has worked well, but you have to be willing to spend the time watching the videos and taking notes (and in my case learning the material as well).

[Tardis Girl]

That's interesting how you describe Jacob's, because I feel like AOPS has elements of that and she doesn't seem to mind that. Hmm....

 

It was "Beginning Algebra" for Lial's that she used -- would that be the introductory algebra book you used?

 

I do not mind sitting with her while she does math, being available to explain as needed. At least at this point in our relationship, that has actually made math more tolerable for her (having me sitting nearby) and been a relative positive - and until that changes, I'm ok with putting in the time in that way. I don't honestly see myself watching a video every day on my own and then relaying that info to her at a later time. But if I feel comfortable with the material and have access to the book, maybe that's less of a need?

 

So does anyone know how Jacob's and Foerster's compare in the actual teaching / explaining of new material in a lesson? And are review problems built in pretty equally? I don't think of AOPS as specifically having review, although certainly concepts build on previous concepts, so there's that. Would AOPS users agree? This AOPS pre-algebra has been my only exposure. 

[lisabees]

You ladies are so great! I can't tell you how much it helps just to get me thinking and feel a little less stuck. :)

 

@Monica -- I do feel comfortable enough to answer stuff on the fly at this point...at least through Algebra 2, I would think, maybe beyond. 

 

Are there decent samples anywhere of Foerster's? I think I am leaning that way now... although I wouldn't mind seeing Jacob's as well. I saw a sample at Rainbow Resource for Foerster, but it was really just the table of contents and only one page of the actual text. 

 

On a side note, I'm thinking through how much time one spends on math. My daughter has basically spent 30 minutes a day on AOPS Pre-Algebra. Maybe I should start another topic for this, because I'm wondering if that's just too little? But I really can't see pushing math time beyond, say, 45 minutes a day. Even that seems too much -- I'd rather she stay focused for a shorter time than get more distracted with the longer time. 

 

Oh boy.  DD spends at least an hour and a half, sometimes two hours, on math.  Many times, she asks to keep going.  

 

For those who use DO, do you follow his schedule?  Or do your students just work for a certain amount of time each day and then it's on to the next day?  DD went through it very quickly at first; much quicker than his schedule.  Ooops - don't mean to derail.  I should post this elsewhere!

[Tardis Girl]

:lol:  :lol:  I cannot even imagine my kids spending that long on math. EVER!  :lol:  :lol:

 

But seriously, that's really cool -- I love it!!

[DocMom]

This has been a GREAT read. Thanks you for sharing your perspectives. My DS LOVES AOPS. Singapore/Saxon were just boring. My concern is that sheer amount of time that AOPS takes. He loves math, but he will not major in math in college. He will major in some kind of basic or computer science, is my best guess. So if I could find AOPS that is less time intensive, I think he would benefit. He does great with videos, but as he gets higher in AOPS, it seems that there are fewer and fewer videos. Would anyone suggest switching to Jacobs?

[Mike in SA]

For cosci, the ONLY good math program I've seen that is aimed at kids is AoPS.  In particular, the counting & probability series and number theory series are fantastic for the cosci track. 

 

That doesn't preclude using Dolciani or Jacobs for "main track" math.  They can pair up well, but may take longer to complete overall.

[DocMom]

For cosci, the ONLY good math program I've seen that is aimed at kids is AoPS.  In particular, the counting & probability series and number theory series are fantastic for the cosci track. 

 

That doesn't preclude using Dolciani or Jacobs for "main track" math.  They can pair up well, but may take longer to complete overall.

 

Googled Cosci without luck. What does this mean?

[8filltheheart]

Googled Cosci without luck. What does this mean?

Computer science?

[Mike in SA]

Googled Cosci without luck. What does this mean?

 

COmputer SCIence.  Sorry, I assumed it was common slang, but slang never is, is it?

[lisabees]

COmputer SCIence.  Sorry, I assumed it was common slang, but slang never is, is it?

 

Ha.  DS18 will be majoring in math and computer science; I guess I should know that!

 

FWIW, he used all of AoPS. 

[Tardis Girl]

For cosci, the ONLY good math program I've seen that is aimed at kids is AoPS.  In particular, the counting & probability series and number theory series are fantastic for the cosci track. 

 

That doesn't preclude using Dolciani or Jacobs for "main track" math.  They can pair up well, but may take longer to complete overall.

 

Do you think it would be of value for a student interested in cosci who has completed a more traditional (non-AOPS) math series to come back to AOPS counting & prob and/or number theory after some other maths?

Edited July 17, 2017 by Tardis Girl

[Tardis Girl]

When I hear about other's talking about kids spending an hour (or HOURS) on math regularly, or wanting to do more, etc., I realize how different that is from my own. IDK if AOPS can really even be done if your student is only going to spend maybe 30-45 minutes a day on math. I'm thinking you won't get very far in the AOPS sequence if you do that -- any thoughts on that?

 

Or for that matter, can one successfully complete a math sequence (meaning through some Trig or Pre-Calc) with other programs on that kind of time? Let's assume they are starting Algebra 1 in 8th or 9th grade. I know that clocking sheer minutes isn't going to get the job done -- after all, a student who spends an hour daily on math but a good chunk of that time is spent trying to avoid the work or daydreaming isn't necessarily getting any more done than a student who spends 30 minutes of focused attention on the subject. But what do you think? I'm starting to feel like AOPS won't be sustainable here based on time alone -- and forcing a student who doesn't love it to spend so much more time on math daily would seems likely to cultivate negativity toward the subject.

[Lawyer&Mom]

I think AOPS is absolutely brilliant, mind-stretching etc. I did the first few chapters of Pre-A as an adult and thought it was great. But I stopped. Why? Because I'd rather spend my self-study time working on French. I think it's totally possible to be mathy enough to benefit from AOPS and just not want to make the investment. It's okay to save your deep-dive for the subjects that really speak to you. And AOPS is a deep dive!

[Loesje22000]

When I hear about other's talking about kids spending an hour (or HOURS) on math regularly, or wanting to do more, etc., I realize how different that is from my own. IDK if AOPS can really even be done if your student is only going to spend maybe 30-45 minutes a day on math. I'm thinking you won't get very far in the AOPS sequence if you do that -- any thoughts on that?

 

Or for that matter, can one successfully complete a math sequence (meaning through some Trig or Pre-Calc) with other programs on that kind of time? Let's assume they are starting Algebra 1 in 8th or 9th grade. I know that clocking sheer minutes isn't going to get the job done -- after all, a student who spends an hour daily on math but a good chunk of that time is spent trying to avoid the work or daydreaming isn't necessarily getting any more done than a student who spends 30 minutes of focused attention on the subject. But what do you think? I'm starting to feel like AOPS won't be sustainable here based on time alone -- and forcing a student who doesn't love it to spend so much more time on math daily would seems likely to cultivate negativity toward the subject.

Dd is a 'don't like math but like AoPS' type.

She did AoPs Pre A during grade 7/8 (+ Understanding Geometry to pass our requirements.

And did the first half of Intro to Algebra grade 8/9 with some additional trig to keepup with our sequence.

Dd worked 30-45 min. A day on math, 5 days a week, but skipped the star problems and the challenging problems unless she wanted one to do.

 

If we would have sticked to AoPS we would have continued Intro to AoPS and after that only doing the topics of AoPS we need to pass the exit exams.

Dd is on a 3-4 hour math track, not on the 6-8 hour math track.

 

We got stucked last year in the second half of intro to Algebra, partly because we relied heavily on the Video's and they were no longer available.

 

We did several things last year for math, and plan to use a standard belgic public school math text coming year.

[JoJosMom]

When I hear about other's talking about kids spending an hour (or HOURS) on math regularly, or wanting to do more, etc., I realize how different that is from my own. IDK if AOPS can really even be done if your student is only going to spend maybe 30-45 minutes a day on math. I'm thinking you won't get very far in the AOPS sequence if you do that -- any thoughts on that?

 

Or for that matter, can one successfully complete a math sequence (meaning through some Trig or Pre-Calc) with other programs on that kind of time? Let's assume they are starting Algebra 1 in 8th or 9th grade. I know that clocking sheer minutes isn't going to get the job done -- after all, a student who spends an hour daily on math but a good chunk of that time is spent trying to avoid the work or daydreaming isn't necessarily getting any more done than a student who spends 30 minutes of focused attention on the subject. But what do you think? I'm starting to feel like AOPS won't be sustainable here based on time alone -- and forcing a student who doesn't love it to spend so much more time on math daily would seems likely to cultivate negativity toward the subject.

 

From the perspective of the parent of a very bright but not profoundly gifted student (i.e., she'll be doing Int. Algebra in 10th vs. 7th or 8th like some here):  No.Freaking.Way.  Math is scheduled for 2 hours a day MINIMUM (sometimes the writing problems go long-really, really long).  Which is fine because she loves it, but if the student isn't in love with math, no.  Just no.

[Mike in SA]

Do you think it would be of value for a student interested in cosci who has completed a more traditional (non-AOPS) math series to come back to AOPS counting & prob and/or number theory after some other maths?

Absolutely. For most students, I believe that this is the best way to use AoPS. It's just a bit tough to schedule.

 

In the upper grades, students can probably jump into college discrete math texts and do well, but the presentation of "counting" concepts in AoPS is exceptional.

 

Number theory is not quite as interesting (or tough!) but still helps with binary, octal, and hexadecimal processing.