Here are some choices in no particular order: For a more pure math approach: 1. Dolciani Modern Algebra 2. Modern Algebra - A Logical Approach (I worked through this book last summer. It is hard to find, though.) Both do an excellent job with correct math language and proofs. For a more applied math approach: 1. New Elementary Math (Singapore Math) 2. Foerster's Algebra 3. Jacobs Algebra 4. Lial's 5. Chalkdust 6. Art of Problem Solving ETA: I have not seen the upper levels of Saxon nor Life Of Fred. I encourage you to put them both in the most challenging math they can handle. I think it is good preparation for college level courses. :)

I probably have those chapter 4 answers somewhere then, too. I purchased the book over a year ago. I know I emailed him probably last summer and he said the answers for the rest of the book would be up by last January. :glare: Hopefully he'll find some time to work on it this summer. So far his answer key has been very accurate. :)

Karin, I just checked and the answers are only for the first 3 chapters. My daughter went into Math 6 from PM5 SE, and she has seen much of the content (not all) before, but the book goes into more depth than singapore in some problems and has much better formal math explanations. My thought was that it would be great to have more math books from different levels besides just this one from Russia.

I agree with Karin, Mathematics 6 is a very good book. My daughter is now using it; she went into it after PM5 so I don't know how it compares to PM6. The depth of the problems and quality of the book are great. It has more of a pure math tone than singapore math, yet it is not overwhelming nor dry. The pages are not cluttered. It gives formal definitions and brief introductions to new ideas with correct mathematical usage. It has interesting math history that makes math inviting. It is very well done. The translator, Willis Harte, has posted an answer key on the Perpendicular Press website; but it does not contain a solution manual. It is also only for the first three chapters. But I talked to him last week, and he told me he'd have one for the rest of the book by the end of the summer. He promised. ;) Each problem set has an A set of problems and a B set of problems. The B problems are more challenging than the A set. I am currently writing a solution manuel for the B set of problems so that I can quickly grade the problems by the time my younger ones get to it. Be aware that it is a little extra work for the teacher. Good luck. :)

Hi Nmoira, I used Saxon 1-3 successfully with both of my gifted children. :) I cited the above article and review of Saxon to demonstrate that the Saxon K-3 curriculum in question has been reviewed and approved by mathematicians and curriculum reviewers. I stated above that the review was for a California curriculum (classroom) review. We also used the IP and some of CWP from Singapore. I love them! I much prefer Singapore for my own personal use. I am still happy that we used Saxon, though. Saxon taught the math facts automatically - and yes it taught the concept behind it.

We used Saxon Math 1-3 successfully with several of my children. We did alter it in that we worked ahead of grade level and skipped sections of the meeting book that they didn't need extra review on. Here is a study about Saxon Math and a program called Math Expressions. This study was based on an early level of Saxon - Saxon 1. http://www.allbusiness.com/education-training/curricula-math-science-education/11808641-1.html Also, Dr. Hung-Hsi Wu, a mathematician from UC Berkeley, reviewed Saxon K-3 for a California curriculum review. Here is the conclusion written by Gerald Beer and Dr. Wu about Saxon K-3. "The Saxon K-3 program is an unconventional yet effective means to meet the state standards for the early grades. There are no textbooks for the program; rather students are supplied individual lesson folders that contain handout sheets devoted to drill problems, guided class practice, and homework, even in the first grade. Occasionally, there will be some special in-class project in the folder. These handouts contain neither explanations nor definitiions; in essence, they are worksheets." "Despite the unusual format which makes it difficult for the Program to explicitly meet some of the content criteria, we are in fact recommending it enthusiastically. This program, thoughtfully written by Nancy Larsen, does an extraordinary job of guiding students, anticipating pitfalls, developing mathematical reasoning appropriate to these grades, and automatizing computational skills. The Program not only gives a balanced treatment of the strands, but frequently covers areas that should have been more explicit in the standards but weren't. The Saxon program somehow succeeds at being minimalist and at the same time humanistic; it has something for visual/kinesthethic learners and is not just mathematics for left-brainers." Dr. Wu did not like the upper levels of Saxon, though. If it is working for you, then I would not recommend switching from Saxon 1. For many people the early elementary levels of Saxon are too time consuming and teacher intensive. I did not follow Saxon exactly as prescribed (as described above) and used Singapore along side it, so take that into consideration. I think its great that you are considering adding in MEP. My 5yo has done some of the Level 1 of MEP. It is very visual and fun for him.

I did not use any teacher manual or HIG up through 4B with my daughter. I had the attitude that since my background is in math I shouldn't need it. It would sometimes take me an hour to grade because I would save all her math for the week and grade it on Friday night. This last year I decided to get the Teacher's Manuals for Standards Edition 5A and 5B (because the HIG were not yet available). Other than that there were a lot of mistakes in the answer key (likely because it was the first edition), I benefited greatly from having it. There were ideas on how to proceed and extra problems to work in the back of the book for problem solving. I think I did a better job presenting the ideas of the chapter by reading through the lesson the night before and adding in some of the ideas from the TM, so my daughter benefited as well. The answer key also saved me time when grading. It did save money by not getting the manuals, but it cost me in time.

Why not email Mr. or Mrs. Michael directly? When I emailed the school awhile back, I was told that I could enroll in only Grammar I.

I watched the Richard Rusczyk video myself, and while I agree with much of what he says, my take of it was that his talk was aimed more at the upper elementary [and up] age group rather than early elementary, and your daughter is 6 if I understand correctly. That is not to say that that early elementary students are incapable of problem solving, but that his talk was aimed more at older students. With my own daughter in 2nd grade I used Saxon 3. It solidified the basics, and she knows the math facts automatically. It taught regrouping (what many of us used to call "carrying" and "borrowing") using dollars - which are base 10. It did not hinder her, nor do I regret using it. We also used Singapore. I like both programs! We have the RS math games as well, but we don't get them out that often. I have no experience with CLE, but if it is working for you, I would not stop using it. If you want to show her a more visual way in addition to CLE, you could add in Singapore a few days a week. Singapore is very good curriculum in the way it encourages problem solving...I think because it wants the student to draw bar diagrams. I learn best visually, so I interpret this as a strength of the program. I especially like the IP books, because they are harder and force her the student to think in more depth about the topic of the chapter. There are other curriculums, like MEP, that are I think look very thorough, too, but since I have used Singapore more, I prefer to comment on what I have used the most of. My daughter [just turned 10] is now using Mathematics 6 (Russian Math), EPGY, and Singapore Math IP Book 5B. I like both the IP5B and Math 6 the most because the problems require more thought and demand more of her. In addition, I like the Russian Math because of the more formal math language in the book. It has more of a tone of the math books I used in undergraduate math classes. Two important things to consider when evaluating curriculum [that are often overlooked] include the ability of the teacher and the ability of the student. One curriculum that one person thinks is lousy may be taught in such a way by a competent teacher that the conceptual understanding is completely understood by a competent student - regardless of the curriculum! Another "great" - approved of - curriculum may be taught in such a way as to not be understood by a student. There are all sorts of gray areas, too. ;) It has to do with how you (the teacher) best learn math and communicate it to her and also how she learns best. There exists no such thing as a perfect curriculum. The trick is to identify the strengths and weaknesses of a particular program and your understanding and communicating of that curriculum and adapt or supplement appropriately. Good luck :)

For one of my children I used Singapore through 5B (along with Saxon 2-3) and she is now using Russian Math 6. I like the more formal mathematics terminology in the Russian Math book. I also like it for the sake of variety. We still use the IP5 books, but have not gotten to the CWP5 book yet. We also use EPGY this year, but I prefer to be the teacher rather than an online program. In the Fall I will combine NEM 1 and Dolciani Modern Algebra Book 1 (1960s). I like the Dolciani books because of the correct use of mathematics - axioms are introduced, proofs are explained, and students are asked to give reasons for each step in certain problems and/or proofs. She will memorize the axioms, truth table, and other important definitions and properties. This will at least get her thinking about the process of carefully demonstrating results. This is a more pure math approach. I like NEM because I find Singapore's problem solving approach to be very good with a unique depth. I am a visual learner, and I think Singapore's approach is well suited for me as a teacher. I also like the focus on pattern recognition. This is a more applied math approach. Beyond that... we'll see how this next year goes. I take it one year at a time. ;) Lately, I am intrigued with the Art of Problem Solving books and courses which may at some point replace Singapore. I'll likely stick with Dolciani through Modern Analysis. I have these books and I like the looks of them for many of the reasons stated above. Good luck. :)

Thank you. That was helpful. :)

Thank you, Kathy. That was helpful. :)

If I am understanding you, I think you are talking about proving a particular math problem is true? For something to be able to be proven, one must first have well defined definitions, theorems, etc. Before we can use theorems we must first know the axioms or postulates of math. Unfortunately correct mathematical terminology and the axioms are not taught to most elementary (and many secondary) level students. Were the axioms to be introduced to students from about age 7-10, then theorems could be constructed and developed from them. I think if more students saw this process demonstrated it would be helpful. They would see how math is built from what is known [proven or established already] and how to carefully demonstrate their results. If this deductive approach were taught in addition to what we see taught today I think it would clear up some of the conceptual misunderstanding. For the younger ones (<7) it would be good to have the correct math terms, but may be overwhelming to introduce to axioms yet.

Different strokes for different folks...

The owner of our local homeschool store's daughter is a math/computer science major in college. She told me the only curriculum they used for her daughter's math from 4th grade to senior was Saxon. The store owner still highly recommends it when people come into her store.

If they are doing well in Saxon 3, I think you could skip the last 30 lessons. Level 5/4 reviews much of level 3 at the beginning, so as long as you don't skip that beginning review you should be fine.

The best way to get proficient in the harder word problems in Singapore is to work lots of problems and study the examples given in the workbooks, textbooks, and CWP books. The IP books do not have any examples of problems in them (that I can think of at the moment). When you get to hard problems, draw pictures - first of what the problem has given you, and then label what you know. Work from there to solve the problems thinking about the bigger ideas of the chapter the particular problem is in. They are meant to be challenging and they will not necessarily all follow a particular diagram nor method. At times, the HIG and Teacher's guide will not seem to be of much help. The point is to get you thinking and uncomfortable so that you will be forced to think about the subject of the chapter at a deeper level.

My 10 y.o. works about 6 hours per day, but 1 hour of that is guided reading. In her free time she loves to write stories and illustrate them. My 7 y.o. does about 3.5 hours of work, but 30 minutes of that is guided reading. He loves to build things and hunt for interesting rocks in his free time. We are classical with the older and classical leaning with the younger.

:iagree: about the pure math approach in MEP. When I looked over the elementary levels, I found it refreshing that a math program used the correct math terminology from the start. I had not seen that before, and it was one of the things that most impressed me about MEP. I remember even commenting to my husband [also a math person] about it! Although I use Singapore as our main math program, I do think MEP appears to be a strong, thorough math program from what I have seen of it. Singapore is great in its problem solving approach in general. The better of it is in the IP and CWP books when you have to pull out every creative math idea you can think of to solve the problems. All math programs have their strengths and weakness, though. I think we try to pick and choose the best of what's available. :)

This answer is not what you asked I realize; I have not used either of the books you mention. I will share with you how we generally work through the upper level singapore primary math problems in the IP and CWP books. First we carefully go over and reflect on the given examples in the book - trying to come to the same conclusion from different angles - although as you mention - only using methods the student has already seen up to this point. Then, when we get to a harder problem not exactly like the worked examples, we consider what information the problem is giving us. I have my daughter draw a picture or try to make a picture of it in her mind of what is given. Once we have done this and drawn the picture, the she labels what she knows. Next we think about what the question is asking for. At this point and at this level I encourage her to be as creative as possible, and use every method learned up to this point to find the solution. Very importantly I don't allow her to give up. If a problem is frustrating after having worked on it for a decent amount of time, we back away from it for awhile, and come back to it later. This is often successful. The beauty of doing difficult math is not only the feeling of accomplishment when getting the solution, but also the way it forces her to go over things carefully. By doing this she learn math more deeply and thoroughly. I hope that helps. :)

I really like the K-3 levels of Saxon. My children who have used it do very well in Math. I think Saxon does a good job of teaching the concepts behind the ideas in K-3, and effectively teaches the math facts. We work ahead of grade level, and we skip sections of the book that we don't need much review on. I especially like the mental counting sections and the focus on patterns (sequences). I also combine it with Singapore to keep it varied. I prefer the Singapore Levels 3 and up but still use Saxon for review. FWIW, My husband and I both have advanced degrees in pure mathematics. Good luck. :)

Here are my plans for this fall for my second child, and the previous plans I did for my eldest. I adapt as needed. 3rd Grade (Fall 2010): Math: Singapore Level 3 - TB, WB, IP, & CWP (Saxon 5/4 for review if necessary) Reading: 1 hr "guided reading" where he reads on his own from books his father chooses. Language Arts: Rod & Staff 3, SWR, WWE2/3 or Writing Tales 1 Latin: CLAA Science: RS4Kids Chemistry & Paid Science Teacher classes History: History Odyssey Hebrew: Shalom Uvrahah For my previous 3rd Grader (Completed Fall 2008 - Spring 2009): Reading: 1 hr "guided reading" where she reads on her own from books her father chose. English: Rod & Staff 3, SWR, Aesop CW & Writing Strands 3 Latin: Prima Latina Science: Kolbe Science Gr 4 Harcourt Science History: Ancient Greece History Links Math: Singapore Level 4 (and beginning of Level 5)- TB, WB, IP, CWP (We used Saxon as review for her as well)

Congratulations! She is a beautiful!

Congratulations! Thanks for sharing the happy news! :)

We used them last year and did not have any issues - for 1st and 3rd grades. I never sent the materials in to be recorded or graded because of the ages of my children, and the fact that I supplemented quite a bit. I liked the lesson plans for the most part. They also send tests with answer keys which I didn't always use but appreciated having. They were quick in responding to my requests via email, also. The math/science advisor was helpful. I did hear that they grew quickly in size, and that it was difficult for them to keep up with their requests, but our experience with them was good.