Everyday Mathmatics

[Garga]

What's wrong with Everyday Mathmatics? I have a friend who just started hsing, and her dd's school used it, so she's continuing to use it for her dd.

 

But recently I've seen a number of posts where people have briefly mentioned Everyday Math and they don't seem to like it. But they don't say why.

 

Why don't hs-ers like Everyday Math? What's wrong with it?

[Cammie]

I was just logging on to post the same question!

[Matryoshka]

You will probably find reading this thread very helpful.

[msjones]

Common concerns regarding Everyday Math:

 

~Not enough teaching of basic addition, subtraction, mult, division facts

 

~New and seemingly bizarre algorithms for addition, subtraction, multiplication, division

 

~A very wide 'spiral' schedule which allows for little review/practice of the newly taught, seemingly bizarre methods

 

~Homework pages are often difficult for parents to understand, leading to angst and misery during homework time

 

~Not enough training for/ buy-in from teachers,

 

I tutor math at a school that uses Everyday Math, so I see both sides of it. Some kids do very well with it, some really struggle. Some teachers find it revolutionary, others are dying to get out their old Addison-Wesley teacher's guide and get back to the 'good old days.' Some parents don't even know there's a new curriculum, while some are organizing to protest against it at school board meetings.

[MIch elle]

[WishboneDawn]

Honestly, I don't think the problem IS Everyday Mathematics. What I've seen of it looked really fantastic and I'd love to have some of the materials.

 

I think the problem though is that schools use it to the exclusion of drills and mastery or other components of math education. Like deciding to make a great fruitcake but only mixing up rum and flour. It can be wonderful rum and amazing flour but the fruitcake is gonna suck big time. :)

 

I also think a parent using it one-on-one would likely have a lot more success. Then they can tweak it and make sure kids are getting concepts.

[Crimson Wife]

 

Here's a thorough review of EM by a professor of mathematics.

[shirada]

My 9DD used it in her school and I am noticing math fact gaps with her because of the lack of drill which makes it hard to advance to 4th grade math yet. She is actually pretty good at math, (just hates it I think because the math facts aren't commited to memory), but the convuluted ways of approaching math problems is ridiculous. I think it was an okay curriculum for her had it been complimented with some drill. I plan to use MUS once she has memorized her math facts.

[Mom2GirlsTX]

I think Mrs. Jones post nailed it on the head. I don't even know where to begin with how badly I hate it for all the way it misses the boat.

[LibrarianMom]

I noted this review is dated 1999 while the current Everyday Mathematics textbooks (at least the ones I have access to) are dated 2003 and 2004. It is quite possible these weaknesses have been corrected. Looking through the books briefly and the accompanying games kit, I found this curriculum to be more similar to RightStart Math. It seems to emphasize lots of game playing and helping students learn the why of math versus just the facts. I see those game packs and the minute math books coming home with me in the near future. :001_smile:

[bluemongoose]

My DH is very math smart (engineer) and he looked over this program. His review of it was that it could never be a good stand alone because it doesn't teach the standard methods that we all use to complete basic math (+-*/). He considered it a program full of the fun little math tricks math teachers show you to answer problems. That it was always fun when they taught you those nifty tricks, but it was only to introduce a different way of coming to the same answer, you always went back to the standard way for doing the problems.

[Sue G in PA]

The methods EM teaches to answer problems (basic problems) is ridiculous. When my son's math teacher demonstrated a problem at Back to school night, I sat there with my jaw on the floor. My thoughts? Do they think our kids are so stupid that they can't understand the time-tested methods of figuring out this multidigit multiplication problem? The "problem" with these little "tricks" is that the WHY is not taught (no place value). WHY do we put a zero in as a "place holder" when multiplying multidigit numbers? Is it THAT hard to understand? EM assumes our kids are stupid. I detest it. My son is having a great time with it, however. Why? B/C he loves the tricks, it is easy to him and fun...but he has absolutely no comprehension of why or what he is doing. Make sense? EM will undo everything we worked so hard for last year using MUS up to Epsilon. :glare:

[dangermom]

There are some very serious problems with EM. I suspect that very math-minded teachers can deal with it and teach it well, which is why they're so enthused, but the vast majority of American school teachers are not math-minded at all. The result is a whole lot of kids who flounder and who get to algebra with no real grasp of basic mathematics.

 

The kitchen table math blog has a lot of articles on EM and the controversy around it.

[zaichiki]

I noted this review is dated 1999 while the current Everyday Mathematics textbooks (at least the ones I have access to) are dated 2003 and 2004. It is quite possible these weaknesses have been corrected. Looking through the books briefly and the accompanying games kit, I found this curriculum to be more similar to RightStart Math. It seems to emphasize lots of game playing and helping students learn the why of math versus just the facts. I see those game packs and the minute math books coming home with me in the near future. :001_smile:

 

I taught 1st, 2nd, and 3rd grade Everyday Math levels in 2000-2001. The games and minute math were included in the 1999 editions, so I don't think that's the issue. Actually, I liked the games. They were designed to review skills in a classroom situation (lots of group games/rules).

 

The problem, IMO, is the *way* math is taught with that curriculum. The first grade curriculum teaches "math vocabulary" to the exclusion of *actual* math. I didn't like that the 2nd grade curriculum expected the child to write about how they figured out the answer to a simple addition problem -- AND the instructions included in the teachers' manuals stressed giving credit even to wrong answers, as long as the child could explain how they got that answer. Ummmm... huh?!

 

I had a very difficult time completing a whole year of the E.M. curriculum, and the quick/shallow pace denied the kids the opportunity to master anything. The spiraling touched very basically on many topics, but gave no opportunity/time to master any of them. By the end of the year I truly felt that the kids hadn't really learned anything in math that year. They tickled a lot of new concepts, true, but very few were committed to long-term memory. I *wish* I had had the time to focus on actually teaching major skills until they were learned, but supervisors really pushed teachers to keep on keepin' on through the curriculum because "it will be covered again." Ugh.

[LibrarianMom]

I was mentioning the games and minute match looked fun. But the curriculum was revised since the 1999 review so my point was that it isn't valid to use that review on the newer edition. I actually get why they suggest giving credit for the journal answers even when the "wrong" mathematical answer was given. Teachers are getting the opportunity to understand the student's thought process which would help in understanding how to re-teach the concept.

 

Disclaimer: All thoughts are my own. I don't have any personal experience with this curriculum beyond the opportunity to peruse it at my work place. I look forward to checking it out and exploring more in the future.

 

I taught 1st, 2nd, and 3rd grade Everyday Math levels in 2000-2001. The games and minute math were included in the 1999 editions, so I don't think that's the issue. Actually, I liked the games. They were designed to review skills in a classroom situation (lots of group games/rules).

 

The problem, IMO, is the *way* math is taught with that curriculum. The first grade curriculum teaches "math vocabulary" to the exclusion of *actual* math. I didn't like that the 2nd grade curriculum expected the child to write about how they figured out the answer to a simple addition problem -- AND the instructions included in the teachers' manuals stressed giving credit even to wrong answers, as long as the child could explain how they got that answer. Ummmm... huh?!

 

I had a very difficult time completing a whole year of the E.M. curriculum, and the quick/shallow pace denied the kids the opportunity to master anything. The spiraling touched very basically on many topics, but gave no opportunity/time to master any of them. By the end of the year I truly felt that the kids hadn't really learned anything in math that year. They tickled a lot of new concepts, true, but very few were committed to long-term memory. I *wish* I had had the time to focus on actually teaching major skills until they were learned, but supervisors really pushed teachers to keep on keepin' on through the curriculum because "it will be covered again." Ugh.

[Sandy in Indy]

I tutored a couple of ps students who were being taught math via EM. It has to be the worst program I've ever seen. Neither student could multiply two or three digit problems without drawing some silly diagram. Or worse yet, get out the calculator that the teachers allowed them to use.

 

I wouldn't under ANY circumstances recommend EM to anyone. Yuck!

[zaichiki]

Ah, yes: the calculator use! Drives me nuts that 6 year olds should be encouraged to use a calculator to solve simple math problems. What a waste of time in "math class."

[Sue G in PA]

Ah, the calculator! My son was doing a problem the other night and asked me where the calculator was. I said I didn't know and that he could't possibly be doing such a difficult problem that he'd need a calc. Turns out the problem was finding the average of a list of about 12 numbers. He said the teacher said to use a calc. WHAT? :001_huh: Ds said she lets them use calculators in school all the time. Again, WHAT? :001_huh: I told ds in no uncertain terms that he was NOT allowed to use a calculator for that problem and that I would be speaking to his teacher. Grrrr.....we have to afterschool him in math now and he HATES doing MORE work at home, but I want him to continue getting that SOLID foundation before he encounters Alg. in 2 years.

[JudyJudyJudy]

There are some very serious problems with EM. I suspect that very math-minded teachers can deal with it and teach it well, which is why they're so enthused, but the vast majority of American school teachers are not math-minded at all. The result is a whole lot of kids who flounder and who get to algebra with no real grasp of basic mathematics.

In my experience, it's the opposite. Math-minded teachers hate it—along with TERC and Connected Mathematics. Teachers who aren't very good at math themselves think it's "fun," so they like it.