Is TT Math a cop-out?

[tdeveson]

My ds is doing well with TT. He's doing TT5, two lessons per day, and we hope to complete TT6 by the end of fifth grade.

 

Is he going to get all the material he needs, or should I scrap this and go back to Singapore Math? The reason I switched is because he was becoming bored of workbooks and asked for something he could do at his computer.

 

Should we be supplementing?

 

I'd appreciate any comments, advise or opinions.

 

Thanks.

[Lovedtodeath]

I know nothing... but isn't Chalkdust also available on the computer and thought to be more rigorous?

[lovemykids]

Short answer: no, not at all. It depends on your math philosophy. I do not think it is rigorous enough on its own, it needs supplementation. But as long as you use it one to two levels ahead, and provide extra material, I don’t see anything wrong with it.

 

Kids love TT, we want our children to love math, right? DD is making excellent grades, and can still take tests and complete various other materials and do very well, so I say it works. ;)

 

:bigear:

[specialmama]

....making excellent grades, and can still take tests and complete various other materials and do very well, so I say it works. ;)

 

:bigear:

 

There's a great point there! In WTM, it is strongly recommended that with any program (but especially a new one like TT, imo) you should (from time to time) take out a different program and have your dc do that. There are so many sample pages of currics out there, that if you don't have a second math on hand, it should still be no problem. We use TT, but I have taken SWB's advice, and we have "different math Fridays" where I'll pull out LOF, R&S, or just print out worksheets from the generator on the MUS website. I actually like math this way, to mix things up. Don't feel guilty for using what is working (we love TT too!) but do throw some other stuff in there, perhaps once a week. :grouphug:

[sunshine]

I know nothing... but isn't Chalkdust also available on the computer and thought to be more rigorous?

 

ChalkDust is awesome. It is one of the premier programs IMHO. I used it for 4 years with my ds18. He did very well on the SATs. Whereas a few of the local homeschoolers didn't do so well after 2 or 3 years with TT. But I am using it with my dd9 until 6th grade when we will switch to chalkdust Basic Math. I am using the 5th grade for her while she is in 4th because after a year of Horizon she was advanced. She just didn't like textbooks and she is an audio/visual learner and needed the explanations in audio. It is working for her. but we definitely switch to ChalkDust.

[lovemykids]

ChalkDust is awesome. It is one of the premier programs IMHO. I used it for 4 years with my ds18. He did very well on the SATs. Whereas a few of the local homeschoolers didn't do so well after 2 or 3 years with TT. But I am using it with my dd9 until 6th grade when we will switch to chalkdust Basic Math. I am using the 5th grade for her while she is in 4th because after a year of Horizon she was advanced. She just didn't like textbooks and she is an audio/visual learner and needed the explanations in audio. It is working for her. but we definitely switch to ChalkDust.

 

So tell me more about “the local homeschoolersâ€, were they using TT on grade level? Did they supplement? I could see that happening if they were using it as it is, because it pales in comparison with other math programs at the same grade level. It also needs more review, and is missing a few components in each level that would actually make it a complete program. Other than that, “ahemâ€, and that’s quite a bit; I can see it being a good program.

 

:bigear:

[Shawneinfl]

after using Singapore, mainly because I needed ds to have something to do independently. He likes it and math is getting done every day. I think it is a little on the "easy" side. We are supplementing with Singapore extra practice books - trying to add in a page a day. He's still young so we have a few years to decide if it's working or not. We may switch to Chalkdust later but I'd like to stay with TT if possible.

[calandalsmom]

TT was designed by Harvard and Princeton grads to be homeschool friendly. Friendly is good. Enjoyable is good.

 

Kids who want more of a challenge can pursue TT at a faster speed.

 

There is nothing wrong with TT maths. If you want more info on its supposed lack of rigor perhaps you could join the yahoo group. Apparently there is a discussion about the supposed lack of rigor there and the TT people were happy to give their thoughts on this ridiculous notion.

[sweetbaby]

TT was designed by Harvard and Princeton grads to be homeschool friendly. Friendly is good. Enjoyable is good.

 

Kids who want more of a challenge can pursue TT at a faster speed.

 

There is nothing wrong with TT maths. If you want more info on its supposed lack of rigor perhaps you could join the yahoo group. Apparently there is a discussion about the supposed lack of rigor there and the TT people were happy to give their thoughts on this ridiculous notion.

 

Thanks!:)

[johnandtinagilbert]

OP, I wouldn't use co-out at all, but I would advise supplementing as another poster said (Friday different math, etc.) I appreciate a good DVD help, especially in higher maths.

 

TT was designed by Harvard and Princeton grads to be homeschool friendly. Friendly is good. Enjoyable is good.

 

Kids who want more of a challenge can pursue TT at a faster speed.

 

There is nothing wrong with TT maths. If you want more info on its supposed lack of rigor perhaps you could join the yahoo group. Apparently there is a discussion about the supposed lack of rigor there and the TT people were happy to give their thoughts on this ridiculous notion.

 

I can appreciate the above perspective as a person who has loved and enjoyed other curriculum that others didn't, but I would agree with others who have posted about adding to this curricula. Ever person I know IRL (except one) who used TT switched to something else after getting evaluated,or within at least 2 years of using this program. Someone I know who used the Algebra and received A+ in the program was not able to pass the Algebra entrance exam for the local CC. Another person had 2 children actually score at a lower grade level after using the program. Other people were loving the program, going through 2 programs in a year, and still tested poorly, which they had not done previously (using Saxon and Singapore).

 

I know different strokes for different folks, but I'd be cautious to rely on TT as our sole math program. I, just me, couldn't take the chance. Getting behind in math hurts sciences come high school, and I can't put dc in that position. Just my 2cents.

[calandalsmom]

OP, I wouldn't use co-out at all, but I would advise supplementing as another poster said (Friday different math, etc.) I appreciate a good DVD help, especially in higher maths.

 

 

 

I can appreciate the above perspective as a person who has loved and enjoyed other curriculum that others didn't, but I would agree with others who have posted about adding to this curricula. Ever person I know IRL (except one) who used TT switched to something else after getting evaluated,or within at least 2 years of using this program. Someone I know who used the Algebra and received A+ in the program was not able to pass the Algebra entrance exam for the local CC. Another person had 2 children actually score at a lower grade level after using the program. Other people were loving the program, going through 2 programs in a year, and still tested poorly, which they had not done previously (using Saxon and Singapore).

 

I know different strokes for different folks, but I'd be cautious to rely on TT as our sole math program. I, just me, couldn't take the chance. Getting behind in math hurts sciences come high school, and I can't put dc in that position. Just my 2cents.

 

 

TT will not make your children behind. If you are using the level which is appropriate for YOUR child then the child can not be behind. Everyone I know IRL who has used TT has had no trouble transitioning into another program- including a child who went to public school. I have seen plenty of posts on many forums which state that children who have used TT exclusively have gotten exceptional test scores.

 

The continuous bashing of TT on this forum is nothing more than snobbery and it does users and prospective of TT no favors. If you want real info about TT I encourage you to look elsewhere than this forum- perhaps Cathy Duffy's review would be helpful, or Sonlight's review.

Edited October 13, 2009 by calandalsmom

[lovemykids]

There's a great point there! In WTM, it is strongly recommended that with any program (but especially a new one like TT, imo) you should (from time to time) take out a different program and have your dc do that. There are so many sample pages of currics out there, that if you don't have a second math on hand, it should still be no problem. We use TT, but I have taken SWB's advice, and we have "different math Fridays" where I'll pull out LOF, R&S, or just print out worksheets from the generator on the MUS website. I actually like math this way, to mix things up. Don't feel guilty for using what is working (we love TT too!) but do throw some other stuff in there, perhaps once a week. :grouphug:

I agree!

ChalkDust is awesome. It is one of the premier programs IMHO. I used it for 4 years with my ds18. He did very well on the SATs. Whereas a few of the local homeschoolers didn't do so well after 2 or 3 years with TT. But I am using it with my dd9 until 6th grade when we will switch to chalkdust Basic Math. I am using the 5th grade for her while she is in 4th because after a year of Horizon she was advanced. She just didn't like textbooks and she is an audio/visual learner and needed the explanations in audio. It is working for her. but we definitely switch to ChalkDust.

 

TT was designed by Harvard and Princeton grads to be homeschool friendly. Friendly is good. Enjoyable is good.

 

Kids who want more of a challenge can pursue TT at a faster speed.

 

 

OP, I wouldn't use co-out at all, but I would advise supplementing as another poster said (Friday different math, etc.) I appreciate a good DVD help, especially in higher maths.

 

, but I would agree with others who have posted about adding to this curricula. Ever person I know IRL (except one) who used TT switched to something else after getting evaluated,or within at least 2 years of using this program. Someone I know who used the Algebra and received A+ in the program was not able to pass the Algebra entrance exam for the local CC. Another person had 2 children actually score at a lower grade level after using the program. Other people were loving the program, going through 2 programs in a year, and still tested poorly, which they had not done previously (using Saxon and Singapore).

 

I know different strokes for different folks, but I'd be cautious to rely on TT as our sole math program. I, just me, couldn't take the chance. Getting behind in math hurts sciences come high school, and I can't put dc in that position. Just my 2cents.

 

I also agree that Chalkdust is considered to be more of a solid program. I have had my eye on it since dd was in K! But now that TT is here, she loves it and begs me not to switch. Anytime we have a new program we need to be cautious and weigh the results. The fact is that TT is not as detailed or advanced as other programs; it’s lagging one to two years behind others, so the fact that a child couldn’t pass an Algrebra exam after taking Algebra 1 doesn’t surprise me at all. Could that same child have supplemented and worked up to Pre-Calculus, and then passed the exam? I’m sure that could be the case.

I am considering using some of Saxon alongside TT next year; Saxon has enough review, (um, too much!) so using it as a second program will be tolerated by me and my dd. I think it should be less expensive than Chalkdust and hopefully just as effective.

[bethben]

My ds is doing TT 6 because that's where he placed. I was a diehard Singapore math fan until life happened and I realized I just did not have the time to teach Singapore every day. TT seems to cover a lot of the same topics as in singapore without the great word problems. We will be starting to add just the word problems on Fridays. Otherwise, math gets done and ds doesn't complain. He does it and it frees me up.

Beth

[johnandtinagilbert]

 

The continuous bashing of TT on this forum is nothing more than snobbery and it does users and prospective of TT no favors. If you want real info about TT I encourage you to look elsewhere than this forum- perhaps Cathy Duffy's review would be helpful, or Sonlight's review.

 

Looking elsewhere is a good suggestion for the OP, however, the name calling :001_huh: is not necessary. My post has not intention of snobbery, but in fact is an encouragement to the OP based on my personal experience, as well as the insight I have gathered on this forum.

 

I've made poor choices before and catching up and filling in gaps is no joke. It's hard work and very discouraging. If TT works for you, or those on the yahoo group, then please enjoy the program, I wish you success. Your disagreement does not make me or others snobs, improve the results I have witnessed, nor open the door for name calling. I am simply cautioning someone who is using the program so they will not experience the same results that I have witnessed. If your mileage has varied, then kudos to you for making a good decision for your child.

 

OP, I encourage you to look for people on this forum that tend to follow a similar path as yours, then see what they think. It is very easy to find a variety of opinions here, but it has been helpful during my tenure to figure out who is like minded in educational philosophy. I tend to gather more success from those folks and what has worked for them, often works for us as well. Best wishes for a successful math journey, regardless of what you use.

[tdeveson]

These are all amazing replies and I appreciate all the insight.

 

My worry stems mainly from the fact that I consider math and science equally as important as language and history -- I want it to be rigorous without completely turning him off. It's a fine line we have to walk. ;)

 

I'd love to hear more points of view. Thanks!

[Storm Bay]

My ds is doing well with TT. He's doing TT5, two lessons per day, and we hope to complete TT6 by the end of fifth grade.

 

Is he going to get all the material he needs, or should I scrap this and go back to Singapore Math? The reason I switched is because he was becoming bored of workbooks and asked for something he could do at his computer.

 

Should we be supplementing?

 

I'd appreciate any comments, advise or opinions.

 

Thanks.

 

If you're going to do TT, I strongly recommend that you keep up with the Singapore Math. I've used both, and SM is so much stronger heuristically. I think TT can be good in some situations, of course, but if you only switched due to boredom with workbooks, I'd either go back to SM or do both.

 

The next part is partly in response to at least one other poster. I bought TT fully intending to like it and for dd to like it. I happen to use MUS with SM, and I wouldn't call MUS rigourous, either, but there are certain things about it I really like and I think there are times when it is the perfect program for some. One of the reasons I homeschool is to give my dc the best program I can for their various aptitudes, etc. If any of my dc struggled with in general (not just one or two concepts or in something like memorizing all the steps to long division) I would have to approach math differently and might not be able to use SM, etc, but it wouldn't be inferior if it was the best curriculum for my dc (meaning TT or MUS, etc). But for me to use MUS or TT alone for my very mathy 14 yo would be wrong, IMO (plus, she found them too easy and boring.) The same goes for my other two who are also mathy, although they have had their times where things were harder to learn, thus the 2 programs help a lot.

Edited October 13, 2009 by Karin

[Sandy in Indy]

Just our experience...my ds taught himself math from 7th grade to pre-calculus. Used TT for Alg 1 &2 and pre-calc. Did Chalkdust geometry (cause that's what I had access to). Tested into calculus at the local community college and aced the class (with one of the highest grades in the class). Obviously, we're perfectly happy with TT at our house.

 

Note: at the time, the lower levels of TT were not available. DS did Singapore 4-6 and then went into TT Alg. 1. Because that was successful, I plan for my younger ds to complete the Singapore series rather than using TT for elementary.

[Storm Bay]

Just our experience...my ds taught himself math from 7th grade to pre-calculus. Used TT for Alg 1 &2 and pre-calc. Did Chalkdust geometry (cause that's what I had access to). Tested into calculus at the local community college and aced the class (with one of the highest grades in the class). Obviously, we're perfectly happy with TT at our house.

 

Note: at the time, the lower levels of TT were not available. DS did Singapore 4-6 and then went into TT Alg. 1. Because that was successful, I plan for my younger ds to complete the Singapore series rather than using TT for elementary.

 

 

This is good to know. Where I see limits is when someone sticks with only one curricula from K-12, because then you're not sure. All that mathematical thinking learned in SM obviously stuck around, and that's what homeschooling is about; finding what works. But, also, some kids will ace math no matter what they use because they're mathy. Not everyone will ace Calculus, even with the most rigourous prep ahead of time, either. I'm not opposed to TT, just to using only one method all the way through because there's no way to test how well you're doing. There are some dc who've done TT and had the opposite result, but that doesn't make TT a bad program, necessarily.

[Samiam]

OMG, this TT argument is old. It happens once a month here.

 

TT is an excellent program, although you might have to move up a year. It makes me laugh when people say it's not HARD enough, as if it takes a math program that makes a child cry, or frustrated, or hate math, in order for it to be a good program. So because it's a program that the child enjoys, it's not good enough?? Because they understand what is taught, and it's easy, it's not good enough?

 

What I would like to hear from is people who have used TT in their own house, and have test results that drastically DROPPED from one year to the next, then tell me that TT fails as a good progam. Tell me your mathy child did poorly after using TT, when he had previously done well. Tell me your non-mathy child couldn't get TT, so failed. Don't tell me about these supposed "people you know"....because you probably didn't know the whole math story at their house, but just one piece.

 

As far as gaps, ANY TIME you change from one math to another, you will most likely have some sort of gap. Either something you have not covered, or something you already covered, etc etc.

 

There's haters and lovers for EVERY math program. Use them yourself before you give your opinion. I tried Saxon. hated it. Tons of people love Saxon. Because I hated it doesn't mean it's a BAD program. Same with TT.

 

Here's my story.

My math child has always scored in the high 90 percentiles in his annual testing. He did TT7 last year, and again scored in the high 90's. This summer he worked on LOF, just as a extra activity. He will be starting TT PreAlgebra this month.

 

K

[calandalsmom]

OMG, this TT argument is old. It happens once a month here.

 

TT is an excellent program, although you might have to move up a year. It makes me laugh when people say it's not HARD enough, as if it takes a math program that makes a child cry, or frustrated, or hate math, in order for it to be a good program. So because it's a program that the child enjoys, it's not good enough?? Because they understand what is taught, and it's easy, it's not good enough?

 

What I would like to hear from is people who have used TT in their own house, and have test results that drastically DROPPED from one year to the next, then tell me that TT fails as a good progam. Tell me your mathy child did poorly after using TT, when he had previously done well. Tell me your non-mathy child couldn't get TT, so failed. Don't tell me about these supposed "people you know"....because you probably didn't know the whole math story at their house, but just one piece.

 

As far as gaps, ANY TIME you change from one math to another, you will most likely have some sort of gap. Either something you have not covered, or something you already covered, etc etc.

 

There's haters and lovers for EVERY math program. Use them yourself before you give your opinion. I tried Saxon. hated it. Tons of people love Saxon. Because I hated it doesn't mean it's a BAD program. Same with TT.

 

Here's my story.

My math child has always scored in the high 90 percentiles in his annual testing. He did TT7 last year, and again scored in the high 90's. This summer he worked on LOF, just as a extra activity. He will be starting TT PreAlgebra this month.

 

K

 

 

applause here.

 

 

Continuous bashing of TT as a program is an ongoing issue here on this forum.

[HollyDay]

I used TT for 2 years: TT 7 and TT Pre-Algebra. We did these programs in 6th and 7th grades. I supplemented with LOF Fractions, Decimals, and Percents. Dd was prepared for Algebra 1 this year, but we are using MUS.

 

Why did I switch? Frankly, after speaking with TT reps, I was concerned about the need to do the entire high school program. There is "overlap". From what I understand after speaking with reps and speaking to local IRL folks, we would need to do Algebra 1, Algebra 2 and Advanced Math to get a "complete" algebra program. Again, my understanding (limited as it may be) is based on their scope and sequence that some creates overlap in those levels. Of course, we would also need geometry. Looking at the expense of this program, I decided not to use it for high school. Okay, that is a personal opinion based on finances and personal learning/teaching style.

 

Is TT a good program? Probably. It is a different scope and sequence. So is MUS, and that program is held in high regard (from what I can tell anyway). Saxon recently changed their high school program to include a separate geometry. Does that change the scope and sequence? Probably.

 

Bottom line, does the program do what you want it to do? Is your dc progressing at his/her ability? Is the price something your budget will allow? Do you feel comfortable supplementing? Do you feel supplementation is necessary? If so, what do you want to use and how will that affect your budget? Does TT work with your dc's learning style?

 

Remember, what works great for one might fail for another. This program is also quite new. THere is not 10 years of data to prove how successful it is overall.

[calandalsmom]

This is what has been shown to me regarding the "easiness of TT"

 

"Our books are fully-comprehensive. They cover all the standard topics and all the terminology that's mentioned on the SAT and ACT. Some students do have an easier time with our books than others, but we think that's because we provide so much more explanation than the typical school text. In other words, "easy to understand" shouldn't be mistaken for "easy."

 

Actually, the notion that we are less rigorous sometimes makes us chuckle because our algebra books were originally developed for gifted and talented students. In fact, one of the very first users of a TT actually scored the highest score in history on the math placement test that Dartmouth gives all of its entering freshman. That same student recently graduated from Dartmouth as the top math major. It's also worth noting that our books were written by Shawn Sabouri, a Swarthmore College graduate, and his brother Greg, a Harvard graduate and Harvard math tutor. We could never support doing a product that wasn't strong academically and didn't fully prepare kids for whatever they choose to become."

 

 

I was wrong about Harvard and Princeton- its Swarthmore instead. Swarthmore was my back up school.:)

[iammommy]

It sounds fine, honestly. Don't obsess with "supplementing". TT is a fine program. Use it at the appropriate level (either right on grade level, behind or ahead) and it's as rigorous as anything else. Another poster mentioned the snobbery factor, and I agree. TT does NOT cause gaps or math failure. You need to place appropriately and stick with it. If your child is good at math he will succeed in which ever program he/she is using. My ds is an average math student. He did not do well with Horizons, he did well with Saxon, and now he's doing well with TT. I have no worries he's missing things. If he doesnt learn something this year, he will next year with TT.

 

Nan

[Jann in TX]

Please do not slam me for my personal opinion and observations--no hate PM or e-mail please (yes I get these every time I comment on TT)...

 

TT is not a standardized program--it is an independent program. The authors are scholars but not math majors and NOT education majors... they are gifted in explaining lessons in easy to understand language--something that made them excellent tutors. Being an independent program it is free to set its own scope and sequence--and to call the levels any name/grade desired--again not following any written standards. They openly compare the scope of their high school materials to the ACT and SAT tests.

 

I have several students who have used TT in the past. Those who completed TT's Algebra 1 had a GOOD grasp of the concepts presented in the TT book--lacking only a few 'standard' (US state standard) concepts. Those who completed TT's Algebra 2 program again had a GOOD grasp of presented concepts--but were at least ONE SEMESTER behind their peers in concepts taught and needed to be remediated before entering a (US state standard) Pre-Calc program.

 

TT's Pre-Calc program contains 95 lessons. In the 95 lessons it claims to complete the second semester of Algebra 2 and teach a full Pre-Calc course...

 

I have seen students who used TT's Pre-Calc who tested into College Calc and did well, who tested into College Calc and had to drop and who tested into Intermediate Algebra (Algebra 2)... it really depends on the math-ability of the student. Calculus used to be taught right after Algebra 2.... so a student strong in Algebra 2 has a chance at testing into Calc 1...

 

The reason we have a separate Pre-Calc class today is because the MAJORITY of students were not ready for the advanced thinking required for Calc 1. Pre-Calc is more than a review of Algebra ---it teaches advanced thinking/concepts and challenges students. A good Pre-Calc program takes at least 2 semesters--if not 3 to complete. TT's Pre-Calc is more of an introductory program...and it might be enough for math-strong (natural math students) but it is not enough for the majority....

 

Again the above comments are my personal opinion. The former TT students I mentioned are my clients--and I will not say their names--but their parent(s) are active members of this board. I'm a certified math teacher with 25 years of teaching experience.

 

I have respect for the TT authors--they have filled a void in the homeschool market with much needed material... but I do agree with the other poster--parents who use this program need to be AWARE of its strengths and weaknesses--just like ANY OTHER PROGRAM in any other subject area...this is not bashing--it is the simple truth.

[sweetbaby]

This is a very interesting thread. I agree with placing your child in the correct level of TT. I also believe that constantly switching math curricula can be just as detrimental to a child's achievement test scores than the math program itself. Gaps can surely develop. (speaking from experience here)

 

I take hear say with a grain of salt in regards to "people I know who have used this program" which is why I never give my opinion about something that I haven't personally used. Someday, I would love to hear about a child who has completed TT from start to finish, from the early years to the high school years. Most of the stories that I've heard so far is hear say or someone who used TT a year or less than a year then switched to something else. I would think that test scores would certainly be affected by that. But again, this is a very interesting thread.

[mycalling]

Those who completed TT's Algebra 2 program again had a GOOD grasp of presented concepts--but were at least ONE SEMESTER behind their peers in concepts taught and needed to be remediated before entering a (US state standard) Pre-Calc program.

 

TT's Pre-Calc program contains 95 lessons. In the 95 lessons it claims to complete the second semester of Algebra 2 and teach a full Pre-Calc course...

Everything I've read on the TT-bashing threads talk of this point...so the problem seems to be that Pre-Calc gap. I see it as a great program through TT Pre-Calc, if that's considered through Adv Algebra. Would you agree that it covers concepts through Adv Algebra if TT is completed through Pre-Calc?

 

As for TT being a year behind...isn't that what placement tests are for?? This seems like a no-brainer to me...if your child tests into TT6 at 9yo...get him it and not TT4 just because he's a 4th grader. Maybe TT could give the levels letters instead of grades and people would use the placement tests as they're supposed to. That said, I have my 11yo and 8yo doing TT5 right now and TT7 to follow.

 

Having used MotL and had my then-7yo jump from Singapore 1B to forth grade math in a few months of one-on-one concept instruction...I really don't understand this equation of more work equaling better understanding. TT presents concepts clearly and once understanding is achieved, why do we think our children will gain more by pages in workbooks?

[lovemykids]

Honestly, because TT sometimes randomly gives students more chances to get the problem right. I like to see my dd getting workbook pages right the first time, then I know she has achieved mastery.

[Jann in TX]

Pre-Calc is a college credit level course. TT's Pre-Calc text does not cover anything near what a college level Pre-Calc course would (or the text that our local PS uses in there non-honor's level Pre-Calc. It would not meet the written requirements for a Pre-Calc text in any state. It is a great introductory text--and may be enough for a student who will not go on to more Calc in college.

 

The trouble comes when you give high-school level credit for a class that is conceptually BELOW that courses 'standard'. Math is one subject area that is VERY STANDARDIZED in the US-- textbook publishers who wish to sell to public schools (and universities) must adhear to those written standards). Of course there will always be a FEW bad teachers who get away with teaching less than they should--but the majority cover the standards.

[Jann in TX]

p

Edited October 14, 2009 by Jann in TX
duplicate

[HSMom2One]

There's a great point there! In WTM, it is strongly recommended that with any program (but especially a new one like TT, imo) you should (from time to time) take out a different program and have your dc do that. There are so many sample pages of currics out there, that if you don't have a second math on hand, it should still be no problem. We use TT, but I have taken SWB's advice, and we have "different math Fridays" where I'll pull out LOF, R&S, or just print out worksheets from the generator on the MUS website. I actually like math this way, to mix things up. Don't feel guilty for using what is working (we love TT too!) but do throw some other stuff in there, perhaps once a week. :grouphug:

 

I am so glad you posted this! I needed to read because I think it will make a huge difference to my dd. She is a 5th grader using TT6, and is doing very well with it so far. I like your idea about going to the MUS website for worksheets just to mix things up a bit. I know that in the world of art it is considered to be good to have more than one teacher. The idea is that it gives you many ideas and points of view. Math is also a creative persuit, so it seems to me that the same reasoning would apply. Great idea!!

 

Blessings,

Lucinda

Edited October 14, 2009 by HSMom2One

[mycalling]

Pre-Calc is a college credit level course. TT's Pre-Calc text does not cover anything near what a college level Pre-Calc course would (or the text that our local PS uses in there non-honor's level Pre-Calc.

If you consider it completing Advanced Algebra, this wouldn't be a problem.

 

I plan on having TT Alg I, II, and Pre-Calc count for Algebra and Adv Algebra. This seems to be the concensus of what is covered in these three TTs. I will also be adding in LoF, but that's just hit things from a literary angle my DD would benefit from. I plan on only supplementing specific concepts my DS doesn't grasp from TT alone, with LoF being optional.

A good Pre-Calc program takes at least 2 semesters--if not 3 to complete.

In my HS, we took 1 semester of Trig with one of Pre-Calc. Pre-Calc wasn't even a full year let alone 3 semesters. I've found Swokowski's Calculus, which includes extensive review of lower maths before starting into Calculus. 1400 pages. It's a 3-semester curriculum that right now is looking like it'll fill TT Pre-Calc's shortcomings. Are you familiar with this text? Do you think it would work?

[calandalsmom]

Pre-Calc is a college credit level course. TT's Pre-Calc text does not cover anything near what a college level Pre-Calc course would (or the text that our local PS uses in there non-honor's level Pre-Calc. It would not meet the written requirements for a Pre-Calc text in any state. It is a great introductory text--and may be enough for a student who will not go on to more Calc in college.

 

The trouble comes when you give high-school level credit for a class that is conceptually BELOW that courses 'standard'. Math is one subject area that is VERY STANDARDIZED in the US-- textbook publishers who wish to sell to public schools (and universities) must adhear to those written standards). Of course there will always be a FEW bad teachers who get away with teaching less than they should--but the majority cover the standards.

 

 

Im not sure why precalc needs to be a college level course. This is merely a semantic game. Textbooks are standardized to suit as many school districts as possible all over this vast country. They contain more info than is ever taught in any once course.

 

I took college algebra my first yr in college. At William and Mary. As an english major. So Im not sure why we even need to discuss whether or not TT is appropriate for "college level" pre calc. AFAIK precalc isnt even a requirement for college, esp for a child not pursuing a maths degree.

 

Are you worried about placement in college based on TT course names? One would think SAT subject specific exams would sort that out along with college placement tests.

 

 

The fact is that TT is a perfectly legitimate program for maths for many kids. And any bashing here is often done by people who have NOT used it or who have dabbled in it.

 

Im using it and have friends IRL who have been well pleased with it. And I have SL's word that its a worthwhile product backed by Cathy Duffy's esteemed reviews. So pish posh with all this not college level nonsense. Im not rearing a math genius. If that's an issue than obviously its a child with special needs but that experience is not typical.

[Storm Bay]

OMG, this TT argument is old. It happens once a month here.

 

TT is an excellent program, although you might have to move up a year. It makes me laugh when people say it's not HARD enough, as if it takes a math program that makes a child cry, or frustrated, or hate math, in order for it to be a good program. So because it's a program that the child enjoys, it's not good enough?? Because they understand what is taught, and it's easy, it's not good enough?

 

 

K

 

 

I'm not sure which post you're referring to, but it was my dd who thought it was too easy for her. I went through 5 different Algebra 1 programs working on a good fit for her learning style, etc. I totally agree that no child should have to use a program which makes a child cry or hate math. Of, course, I should add that my dd hated all math until Algebra regardless of program, when it became more tolerable, and didn't admit that she liked it until she got to Geometry. But since she's mathy, she didn't cry, she just hated it. She still hates arithmetic. But I am not going to recommend it to everyone or say that I like it as much as ones I happen to prefer based on our experience at our house, which is obviously limited and won't apply to everyone. But I wouldn't recommend it to a child who is strong in math who plans on a scientific or mathematical career anymore than I plan to have my eldest dd do a rigouous literature program or read a long list of great books in high school even if I read of others who strongly recommend such things (nor do I take offense if they criticise the type of literary/great book approach I'm going to do with my dd; it's just not her forte and she will be in tears if I force her to do it.)

 

Please do not slam me for my personal opinion and observations--no hate PM or e-mail please (yes I get these every time I comment on TT)...

 

TT is not a standardized program--it is an independent program. The authors are scholars but not math majors and NOT education majors... they are gifted in explaining lessons in easy to understand language--something that made them excellent tutors. Being an independent program it is free to set its own scope and sequence--and to call the levels any name/grade desired--again not following any written standards. They openly compare the scope of their high school materials to the ACT and SAT tests.

 

II have respect for the TT authors--they have filled a void in the homeschool market with much needed material... but I do agree with the other poster--parents who use this program need to be AWARE of its strengths and weaknesses--just like ANY OTHER PROGRAM in any other subject area...this is not bashing--it is the simple truth.

 

 

Thanks for this entire post, it was well done. I like a number of things about TT even though it was not what we needed. I still have the Algebra 1 book in case it can help my others if they have trouble with anything covered in it.

Edited October 15, 2009 by Karin