So, who feels that LOF is a COMPLETE program,

[StaceyinLA]

and uses it as such??

[Guest Katia]

I'm just wondering why you would think it wasn't a complete program? As long as you use the Home Companion, yes, it is a complete program and yes, my dd is using it as such.

[Harriet Vane]

Not nearly enough practice, IMHO. I think it's a fabulous supplement, and gladly use it, but do not consider it a good stand-alone.

[Murphy101]

I think whether anything is a stand alone or a suppliment depends on teh student, not neccessarily the materials.

 

LOF is a complete program.

 

However, if a student needs more practice, then they need more practice. I don't neccessarily blame the program for that.

 

Saxon or Singapore for example are in theory complete programs, but many here suppliment them or use them as suppliments.

[bettyandbob]

for it to be a stand alone, you must use the Home Companion and the student must review all the notes, not just the regular text. Some important points are made next to an asterix at the bottom of the page.

 

I don't use it as a stand alone, but I don't rely on one text for any class. My students have always been burdened with at least 2 texts for each subject that I have meshed together. (I like to be thorough and sometimes that is a fault!)

[StaceyinLA]

what is a good source for the extra work?

[Murphy101]

what is a good source for the extra work?

 

Key to series is great.

[TravelingChris]

It is a complete program for my math gifted child. I have had to reminder that she has to actually read the answers and the footnotes, though. SHe gets math very easily and doesn't need hardly any practice. Some kids don't. Many kids do need more practice.

[Bev in B'ville]

I think there are a couple of considerations here.

 

First, what does the author/publisher think about the program? If they think it's a complete program on its own, do they have numbers (such as students who have used their program exclusively and then taken a standardized test such as the ACT or SAT) to back up their claim?

 

Some programs are complete programs, but intended for students not considering degrees in engineering or physics (just to name a couple) or other math heavy degrees. If the publisher/author does not have numbers to back up claims of a complete program, then I would seriously look at my dc and what degree or area of interest they're considering in college. If you're going to err on the side of caution with a high schooler who's looking at a math heavy degree, I would probably consider a more "rigorous" program (i.e. one with lots and lots of practice problems and the types of problem presentation they will encounter in a college level math class).

 

As always, just my $.02.

[G5052]

I've been very impressed with his presentation and depth, but as others have said here, high school math is so critical that I'm following LOF with the appropriate "Key to..." books as a review. In our house, math, reading, and foreign languages are year-round subjects with summer studies being primarily review.

[merylvdm]

I have emailed the author of LOF quite a few times as I keep getting nervous because the books are so much shorter than others out there. He is great and responds within hours, and every time he put my mind at ease. I think the last time I asked him was about Statistics and he told me it covered 2 college semesters of Statistics. I had asked him if it would be adequate prep for AP Statistics.

 

I do agree with previous posters - if a student needs more practice, they need more practice. Not every student is the same. Mine haven't needed more so far - and they aren't 'gifted'. My 11th grader was telling me last week that there is no way he can forget the stuff he is learning in Trig as he says LOF explains it in a way that makes it impossible to forget. He has just switched from TT (did both their Algebras and Geometry). At first he wasn't into the 'story' part of LOF and just wanted to cut to the problems. Now he is realizing how the 'story' gets that math into his head.

 

Meryl

[Bev in B'ville]

For me, the proof is in the puddin'. Until parents who use LOF exclusively start reporting on SAT or ACT results, the jury is still out on whether it's a complete program or not. I'm a bottom line kind of person (I had 10 graduate level stats courses in pursuit of my Ph.D.) so I have to have proof.

 

If the author thinks his stats book is worth two college semesters, then the students who use his book for that would do well to sit for the AP stats exam. I would definitely like to hear back from those who pursue this further.

[HeidiD]

I think it depends on the definition of a "complete program". It appears to have the same scope as more traditional programs such as Saxon, so in that regard it's complete. It's a more streamlined approach, though, and maybe that's why it might appear to be less complete than other programs. I have the LoF calculus book, as well as Saxon's and James Stewart's, and skimming through the books, LoF appears to contain the fewest practice problems. It's so clever and appealing - definitely great for a supplement, and even for a complete course, as long as the information "sticks" and can be transferred to a more traditional approach in college.

[StaceyinLA]

how are you doing that? I mean, say I'm using LOF Algebra. How do I use the Key To Algebra to supplement it when I know the Key To Algebra doesn't go as far in their scope and sequence??

[Cedarmom]

As a self learner, I'm using it as a stand alone. I struggle with memorizing things, and math is definitely not my strength. However, I find it has enough review. The questions are varied and he comes at the problems from differant angles, so I feel like by the time I finish the cities, I know the material. I am using the Companion book that is made to go along with it.