Bringing this back up to ask for advice: my current 3rd grader is finishing Singapore 5A this week. We’ll move on to 5B and likely get through all (or most) before we break for summer. So next year.....6A primary or 6A Dimensions? I went from 5A to 6A Dimensions with his older brother (currently in 5th grade and almost done with Dimensions 6A, planning on working through so we can start 7A next year). Older child has a good attention span and can work and rework problems with (little) frustration. Younger has intuitive grasp of math—he’s still doing 90% of 5A in his head (correctly) and we’re taking things a bit slower bc he doesn’t have attention span to work as long. As I’m typing this I am in a hour of working through a ton of end of ch practice problems with older son. Younger would have pitched a fit 30+ min ago. Would going to 6 Primary and then going through 6 Dimensions at a faster clip to get used to more mature style be a reasonable plan? Or overkill? Mathy no2 desperately wants to catch up w no1 (and hates the idea of “repeating “ 6), but I don’t think the maturity is there to handle the workload. Also thinking (way) ahead, this would put them both in Calculus in 11th grade, even with taking a full year for Geometry after Dimensions, which seems more doable than no2 going straight on through to Calc as a 10th grader. (Adding that both kids are working Rod & Staff to get drill/review independently. We’re going to start a Mindset Math class with some friends (did one book on our own and enjoyed it), and we do the challenging word problems type books at night with dad, so I am not enamored of the idea of taking a year “off” to do another program or explore different topics, since we’re already doing some of that).

Next year (6th) we will move into note taking (for science first. after doing all the outlining exercises in WWS1, I think we can give this a try together), but for now (3rd and 5th) we are using the MP guides for Literature and Science. I wrote them off as boring workbooks for years, but I am appreciating them as scaffolding for later years—they help students pick out the main points/ideas they need to get out of the selection and write it succinctly for later use in studying. With two younger ones still needing lots of mom time to learn to read/write, the big kids can work independently and just go over them with me later.

After dabbling in far too many math curricula as supplements to my main curriculum (Singapore)—Miquon, Beast Academy, Math Mammoth, Life of Fred, Math Facts that Stick, Rod & Staff, and some even more short lived one I cannot recall—I have finally one to the stunning realization that 1) there is no perfect curriculum that does all the things (fun/enjoyable/engaging, hits math facts, deep on concepts) for all the students and 2) the best one is one I will stick with consistently. That being said, I see that you are concerned about mastery, basic math facts, a program that does not feel scattershot, one that is gentle and likely to help your daughter build confidence, and is teachable by a non math teacher. While Singapore is my main program, I would suggest considering Rod & Staff—a far less “cool” but totally solid program. Easy to teach, gives pretty scripted lessons for instructor, inexpensive, and math facts will absolutely be mastered. It is mastery, but there is constant review. I mean, constant review, but as the instructor you can incorporate as much or as little of that as you need. Everything moves forward in a logical progression and each step is totally drilled down before moving on. Things start slow, but in about 4th grade they pick up and you’re covering most of the same topics you would with a faster moving curriculum (I cross referenced R&S 4 to Singapore 4, and R&S5 to Singapore 5, they hit most of the same topics but often in a different order). I also like how they introduce concepts very concretely (skip counting with coins, fractions by using a ruler). Last year we had a math hiccup with my eldest (then 4th) where he had forgotten some things and was feeling discouraged in Singapore (he was a year ahead, so I think doing 5A). He hated math and thought he was terrible at it. So we took a break and did the last half of R&S 4. It felt easy for him, and after a month or two we returned to Singapore and he was a new child. Confident, flying through the rest of Sing5 with ease. So now I have all my kids do R&S as independent work and Singapore with me, so the extra review and drill actually happens (I had been slacking on that, and Singapore expects it).

Just chiming in looking for a 6th grade recommendation as well! I am considering Novare’s charter school versions for 7th/8th (https://centripetalpress.com/). They recommend life science for 6th, but they don’t offer one. Anyone have a life science they liked? I’m treating 6th as middle school, and I’m ready to start introducing more actual science (as opposed to reading on scientific topics).

I have no experience with BJU, but I use both Singapore and R&S. We use Singapore together, with me teaching and going through lesson together, and Singapore as (mostly) independent work/review. I love Singapore, but it does lack a bit with drill and review, so when my 4th grader drew a blank on adding unlike fractions after spending all our time multiplying them and doing other things in Singapore 5, we added R& S and that had two great benefits—constant review and different explanations and examples (for when Singapore didn’t click). If we get ahead of ourselves with Singapore and hit a wall we can slow down there and keep up R&S, and that usually gives the confidence boost we need to keep going. I now have a 5th grader in Singapore Dimensions 6A with me and finishing up R&S 5, a 3rd grader finishing up Singapore 5A with me and doing R&S 4 on his own, and a 1st grader in Singapore 2B and doing R&S 2 and multiplication from R&S 3 on his own. I use R&S as the worksheets I never actually remember to print out and extra practice/review and Singapore as our main conceptual program. Singapore actually assumes you will do drill and review, but it took me 5 books to realize that.

I would stay the course. Level 2 is where I saw exponential improvement in fluency and level 3 is where they were able to start picking up almost any shorter chapter book and read with ease. We’ve always gone through level 4 and then the library is their oyster. I like to spend the time now and solidify—they really don’t need much, if any, phonics or reading instruction after that.

I also had that problem—then I found them in the back of the student textbook! Not where I would have expected them.