Jump to content

Menu

Kennic

Members
  • Posts

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kennic

  1. It is my understanding, from living overseas when I was growing up and going to local schools, teaching for a year overseas, and other things I read, that textbooks are meant for student to buy, to own, and to review what they learned in class. They had to be thin an inexpensive but thorough enough to recall important information, along with some practice. That students would and did use them to study for tests and exams, to remind themselves or supplement what they are taught. That they were valued, not something to write in and throw away. And not meant to be the starting point for learning, but rather a continuing point after being taught. Other books, similar to the workbook, Intensive Practice, and so on, are for practice, the more the better. Not really for teaching. To prepare for important exams. The more you practice, the faster and better you get, the more likely you will get the higher scores and in the better schools, to which you applied after elementary school. The philosophy here in the US seems to be much different. Everything should be in one place, all there, everyone learning the same thing with the same amount of instruction and practice. And all instruction in the textbooks. Which young children are supposed to read and understand, and so has to be limited and not expand too much. And the textbooks are now supposed to be the starting point of learning - leave out the teacher, except perhaps as moderator. Kids need to learn on their own, be independent, not need a teacher, just be able to read and understand and follow. I liked the different books for the Primary Mathematics. It was one of the redeeming qualities, I thought. I could teach, use the textbook for ideas on teaching, it had enough for me to see the complexities, I could make the leaps of logic and guide my student, I learned a lot from them, math was cool again, and fun, so fun to teach, not this boring read this and do that, and there was enough there for me to be sure my child understood; if he did not make the leap we talked about it, I could see his mind whirring, so to speak. And then, since he did need to practice, there was such a choice. Sometimes, mostly, the workbook, as a start. But we would us parts of the other books, as needed or wanted. Sometimes the word problems in CWP got to be too much, so we did not do them for a while. The challengers in IP were fun, but did need a lot of discussion. And one of my sons needed more of that, and the other needed more of the workbook and the first part of the IP chapters, depending on the topic. This choice was what I liked about the Primary Mathematics. I could tailor the math to my kids, not fit the kids to the math. I think they learned a lot more that way, and to have me teach them, not a book teach them. It did take me too much time to look through the different books and decide what to assign based on my kids' abilities, though. And I had to study the material ahead of time, know it well myself. Funny thing, it rekindled an interest in math in me, which I think also helped my kids. I can imagine how I would write it all in one book, textbook and workbook material, and just hand it to my kid, on days I did not have time, but it would have been different for one child than for the other, and nothing I came up with would have fit all of my kids well. Now, English, wish I could have found something I could just hand my kids for that... Didn't work for that, unfortunately.
  2. Factors is in US edition 4A as well. It is kind of important to know at this point.
  3. We used manipulatives a lot with my son. Which is what I think the HIG said to do. We used the MUS blocks I had. I showed all the steps with the blocks first. Put hundreds into groups, rename the remainder and so on. We did that for a while. Then I showed how what he did with the blocks related to the written problem (which I also remember was in the HIG, I think). I never made him worry about writing all the stuff under the dividend if he did not need it; that is all sort of notes to be sure you get the right remainder. He was always free to pull out the blocks and do the problem that way when he did the workbook, and he did do that quite a bit at first. Then he started not using them. He had very little problem with division after that, though initially he used the blocks a lot and worked out the problems that way. I think doing the problems concretely really helped him understand it in a basic way that he never forgot. Not just memorizing steps.
  4. Oops, sorry, no personal criticism intended. That is a problem sometimes with forums. I was not just replying to a post but to other things as well. I have to watch that. I had seen something recently on YouTube where they were teaching what they called Singapore Math to kids in schools and it seemed that was what they were trying to do with the word problems and telling them to do this step first then the next step, which wasn't how my kids learned it, and then there was your post. And then there was this NYT article someone linked to that said something about how slow the program was, which did not seem like what we did.
  5. Isn't that the point of the bar models? To get students to start thinking algebraically with pictures before they have to do it with just x and y?
  6. I found these types of problems a good way to develop problem solving skills. I think my kids would not have learned such skills so well had they always been told exactly how to think and approach every problem. If they could not answer one, we would come back to it later. I wanted them to think of ways to solve them, not have directions always say do this and do that. And also to know that every problem is not always going to be solvable instantly. I think that is one of the good things about this book. They have the concepts, they can solve it, if they just think about it. Of course, you can boil everything down to telling the student exactly what to do and how to think. Do this, do that, you don't really have to come up with any ideas on your own. I liked the "logical leaps". And I think they benefitted my kids to actually learn to apply logic and solve problems, not just practice what they already knew, which was so boring and possibly is a reason why some kids don't like math. Though I suppose kids would rather sometimes do their thinking with other things, at least this math does give them opportunities to leap logically.
  7. Of course he does not have to do all the problems in the practices in his head just because room is not given to work out the answer. This is the textbook, and wasn't meant to be written in. He can just work out the answers on another paper or whiteboard. After all, the lesson is teaching him how to work out the problem with paper and pencil. Some reviews do have problems he can do mentally, and he should do the ones he can mentally, and use "paper and pencil" for the rest.
  8. Reading through the comments, one commenter , 102 Amelia, got one thing totally wrong. It was not after adoption of My Pals are Here that scores skyrocketed, it was after Primary Mathematics. My Pals are Here came later, and after its adoption scores went down slightly, and there has not been much time yet to see the affect of its changes from Primary Mathematics on scores.
  9. Sounds pretty Americanized. Kind of like the organization you have in any American textbook. My impression of Asian texts is that they are more like books - always moving forward. I think they are more something a student can use to remind them of a lesson than be the lesson. I actually like teaching my kids, and never do follow a textbook just the way it is so prefer having all the background in a guide. Maybe showing more steps and how to do it in the textbook means the kids don't have to think quite so hard. I like talking about math and watching them figure things out on their own. I tried all kinds of US texts with all their equal-length daily lessons and here is how to do it so then practice it, and evertything all spelled out and this is what you just learned which we never looked at. They were boring. Here is how to do it, go forth and practice the same thing and here are the steps again just to make sure you are doing it one way. The Primary Math was fun and a relief. I liked the third editions that I used with my older kids that are not available any more. Here are some basic concepts, now figure out the next step for yourself. I am not sure I would want to go to something that seemed just like what we were doing. Sounds like Singapore Math is getting more and more American math in its presentation.
  10. I am looking at the 1A HIG for Standards edition, and it talks about the meaning of subtraction (missing part or part taken away), then writing the equation, then the next chapter on methods of subtraction explicitly relates it to number bonds, to addition, and has counting back, counting back, and the fourth lesson is counting on. So it seems to cover those ideas, but maybe not as explicitly. It does do other strategies than counting on and back if the number ir difference is greater than 3, because it is easy to keep track of 3 in your head, but to count on or back more than 3 you have to use fingers or something. It does give a lot more information than is in the textbooks, with the textbook just being part of the lesson. I saw some examples of MIF and it did seem more tied to just what is in the textbook.
  11. Sometimes I wonder if we ask too much of our kids when we get upset that they have forgotten something that they may not have used for a while. I have to look up things that I have learned in the past. Not simple math, like addition and subtraction, that I have used for a long time. But I certainly could not remember all the trigonometric identities weeks later without some review unless I had been using them all along. But all I would need was a refresher, looking through them again. I would have considered it unfair to have all of a sudden been asked a month after not using that stuff to pass a test on it. What trig functions might be to me now, it is just an example, solving equations or whatever your kids had to do might be to them at their age. Actually, I would not want to have to drive to some place I drove to several years ago, say, without looking up the route again, but I am getting old. Maybe that is all your kids need - they have not really forgotten since they did learn them before.
  12. I liked the HIG's because they helped me understand the math well enough to really let my kids explore methods and approaches to a problem so that they did not rely on a set of steps. My son would come up with other approaches than I did and we would talk about the differences and his approach sometimes was better and more efficient and in advance of the level he was learning. I think it made him really learn to think mathematically than if he had been shown steps in some example problem and then given problem where he just follows those steps. But I really liked teaching him math, and I, personally, think really learning math needs a knowledgeable person to talk about ideas or get help from, not just examples in a math book (or even some talking head on a DVD or worked out examples on the computer which we tried once) and also one who has some idea of where it is all heading, not just what is at that particular level. When we used math books that gave well laid out examples followed by practice on those examples there was no incentive to explore. Of course, my son was pretty good at math to begin with and he did not really like math when things were all laid out for him, it was just boring.
  13. The Home Instructor's Guide give somewhat of a daily schedule, but the idea is that you can adjust it it fit your needs. No guide or curriculum can tell exactly what your kid needs to know, at least that is what I have found, and when it says something like work on the number bonds, you have to decide how much and for how long and in what way depending on your child. I found it easier to wait until the addition and subtraction section, because it had counting back and on for smaller ones, which made fewer to memorize at first. I could never get mine to fit anything structured day by day, it never worked. One was good at some things, the other needed more time on something else, and usually the structured stuff was way too slow. I gave up trying to fit my kids to any such thing and they learned more with less frustration. But I had to be aware of them and what they need and work with them to do best. We just moved forward, slowly or fast, as needed.
  14. The Home Instructor's Guide do offer detailed lesson plans, along with ideas for games and other things for math fact memorization. The textbooks are not totally self-explanatory to everyone.
  15. I never tried Math Mammoth, but I think the HIG for the Primary Mathematics is mostly meant to teach you so you can explain it in your own words. If you know enough to explain it in your own words, then you can deal with issues or problems in comprehension more than letting someone else explain it. I never did go back and forth from guide to textbook, just made sure I understood it and used the textbook as a resource while teaching. maybe using some of the ideas. I never liked any program that left it up to someone else to explain something because that person was never right in front of my child and interacting with him. I never could turn math over to someone else to teach. Also, a major philosophy of the Primary Mathematics is to start with the concrete. It sometimes can clear up a lot of misunderstanding that comes up later. Plus, I really like teaching math and interacting closely when doing so. It let me really understand how my child was thinking and be able to clear up misconceptions early, which did not always show up when doing the exercise for that lesson. And I liked spending more time with the challenging material in the supplements than just lots of review at the same level. But it is important to have a curriculum you are happy with, and if letting someone else explain it is better, then that may work just fine.
  16. I paid for it, but ended up not using it much. Maybe OK for younger students. The activities were pretty basic and simple. I liked teaching my kids, so by the time they got to any computer activities they knew the material and were bored. I think it might work well if it is carefully used to introduce a topic. Seems to me it is for kids who are not getting it and need more teaching, or something "fun" to do. Some of the games were kind of fun, and some of the activities pretty good, but I did not see a lot of depth. I guess depth is not easy to do on computer programs.
  17. There is more review in 2A up than 1A and 1B. 2A up for standards edition has review every unit in both workbook and textbook. The math fact practice is something you are supposed to add in. There are suggestions in the Home Instructor's Guides. Some kids might like the games, some might like the drill sheets, some might like something else. My child hated both drill sheets, games were tolerable but I did not like them. So you can do what fits your child (and you).
  18. It's mostly by making a ten, since that concept is very important, in the textbook. The Home Instructor's Guide does include a lesson on doubles and doubles + 1 as an alternative method for quick recall. More than one method is given on lots of things.
  19. All the products never go past 40. They solve by repeated adding. They are supposed to know how to add a 1 digit number to a 2-digit number mentally by now, though, so repeated adding should not be such a chore, and they should be practicing the mental math addition. No still using manipulatives and number lines.
  20. I think grade 1 and maybe 2 is too soon for bar models. They have stickers in those books because kids in grade 1 and 2 can't draw the bars well enough. They are not taught in the Primary Mathematics at that level, maybe for a reason. Kids should focus on determining whether the problem is asking for a whole or a part, and maybe fill in a number bond, not drawing bar models or following elaborate procedures for simple problems. Maybe the stickers make it fun, but the focus ends up being on the drawing, not understanding the basic information in the simple problems and looking at whether the problem is asking for a whole and so on. The bar models are more useful for more complex problems that they get later, and can draw more easily in 3, and they are developed out of the understanding of part-whole, which comes before using them.
  21. It is in 3A. In unit 3. Starts with the idea of remainders, then division of 2-digit numbers like 73 by 2, then of 3-digit numbers by 2, 3, 4, and 5 in last chapter of unit 3, using manipulatives, like place-value discs, a lot. No just memorizing steps in a procedure, got to really understand what you are doing. Then practice it all through learning math facts for 6, 7, 8, 9 in unit 4. By 4A they have been doing it a long time and keep practicing. in 5A they do division by 2-digit number.
  22. With the Singaporemath.com forums, you can even post in the general information section without registering.
  23. I know that at the Singaporemath.com forums there is no check on whether you are a "customer" since anyone who has bought the books anywhere or never yet bought the books can join. Registering is just meant to limit the amount of spam, and people joining for general math help (the Math Help section provides specific solutions to problems). There is no cost to join, as with Sonlight. And you do not have to register to browse or post in the general information section. Most forum, such as this one, make you register to post at all. So you can ask questions there without even registering.
  24. The error is that it is supposed to say how many eggs were used. Not were left. Somehow apparently the sentence got changed between US edition and standards edition, it does say "used" in the US edition. There is an errata here: http://www.singaporemaths.com/errata/
  25. If I remember correctly, the HIG's do emphasize using the base-10 blocks when learning the division steps. When my son did this section, we has the MUS blocks which were the same thing. He would get the out whenever he needed them, and go through the steps, making groups of hundreds first, replacing the remaining ones with tens, making groups of tens and so on. For quite a while. You could do it with the place-value discs instead, but the hundreds flat is easier to visualize as being hundreds than a disc with 100 on it. Then you can relate the physical steps with the physical hundreds, tens, and ones with the written steps. The written steps are only a way to record what is happening with the concrete steps. Eventually, then, he did not need the concrete, and understood what each of the steps in the algorithm meant, much better than memorizing some mnemonic for the steps or something that some people do. The concrete step is a very important one in the Primary Mathematics - the lessons and concepts are all supposed to be concrete to pictorial to abstract, and you don't have to get to the abstract necessarily in one lesson. The concrete are the base-10 type of manipulative, the pictorial are the pictures of the place-value discs, and the student can imagine them moving around, but maybe only if they have first been done concretely, and then, at the end, that is related to writing down the steps.
×
×
  • Create New...