CSMP

[SeekingSimplicity]

Has anyone used this math program? I saw it in another link and now I'm curious about it. I've been looking at the materials, but I'm not sure I understand it.

[heart'sjoy]

My kids like the stories for math concepts. The Decimal book that explain all the numbers getting new decimal names was priceless.

 

I looked at the worksheets/ lessons and didn't want to add their number computers concepts in. The number computers reminded be of working in a different number base.

 

I might add CSMP later if I have a child working ahead in 4th or 5th grade and I don't think they have the maturity for algebra.

[SeekingSimplicity]

Yeah, the mini computer was what was blowing my mind. If it's not essential, we could skip it, then I might could figure the rest out.

My kids are just about finished with MEP Y2. They've worked really hard and are doing great with it. I'm very proud of them :) But I think it's time we step back from that for a few weeks before going on to Y3, and do something else to give them a little break. Something different is nice sometimes.

[Amber in AUS]

I know Spycar was having great fun playing with the mini computer. I did take a look and we did a few tangrams and other things, but it is not something i regularly go to.

[Spy Car]

I know Spycar was having great fun playing with the mini computer. I did take a look and we did a few tangrams and other things, but it is not something i regularly go to.

 

Yea, my son loves the minicomputer. It sure causes puzzled looks when he breaks it out to show unsuspecting oldsters :D

 

For us, I look at CSMP as a bit of a diversion from other math diversions, but I realize we've actually done quite a bit from CSMP. I like that it's another program that gets young children to "think" and it is certainly different that anything else we're using.

 

Bill

[Tracy]

Check out this blog post for a nice overview of the program. http://puzzler.multiply.com/journal/item/12/Show_and_Tell_3_CSMP You could send a message to the blog author, as he has taught the complete program from beginning to end once and is almost done with it with a second child.

 

I think the reason that the program was not widely adopted was because it is sooooo different and requires a lot of learning/training for the teacher. I am surprised to see people using it as a supplement or going back and forth between programs, because it seems a like lot of work for me to get up to speed if I am not going to fully adopt the program.

[SeekingSimplicity]

Is there a scope and sequence for the material? Trying to figure where to start with this. Or would it be easiest start with the 3rd grade introductory material?

[lovemykids]

We just started at grade level; it goes pretty fast from there. I would say start at the third grade introductory level orally, depending on the age of your child.

[forty-two]

Is there a scope and sequence for the material? Trying to figure where to start with this. Or would it be easiest start with the 3rd grade introductory material?

 

Just in case you hadn't noticed, there is a Primary Entry Supplement (pdf) for kids starting in third grade.

[SeekingSimplicity]

Just in case you hadn't noticed, there is a Primary Entry Supplement (pdf) for kids starting in third grade.

 

 

Yeah, that's what I meant by introductory material. I wasn't looking at it and couldn't remember off the top of my head what it was called.

They are finishing up their times/division tables.Will be done with them next week. I want to review with them so they wont forget until we get back to doing MEP. Will the supplemental material be a good place to start?

[Poke Salad Annie]

Just in case you hadn't noticed, there is a Primary Entry Supplement (pdf) for kids starting in third grade.

 

Yes, this is what I had posted a question about the other day, so I'm glad to hear that someone else is interested in it also.

 

I am currently using MEP and we do Strayer-Upton a few pages at night after supper to help with math facts. The thing I see in the CSMP that gets my interest is that the arrows lessons seem to blend in well with MEP. I don't want to get overwhelmed with too much math, but on the other hand, I don't want to miss out on something that might help turn a light on with my little guy. MEP has definitely done that, and I think I could see the same thing happening with CSMP.

[Poke Salad Annie]

Yeah, that's what I meant by introductory material. I wasn't looking at it and couldn't remember off the top of my head what it was called.

They are finishing up their times/division tables.Will be done with them next week. I want to review with them so they wont forget until we get back to doing MEP. Will the supplemental material be a good place to start?

 

The only thing that gives me a bit of pause is that I looked through it the other night, and it looks like it would take close to 300 or more pages to get the whole thing printed out. There is also the same type of introductory thing in pdf for starting with a 4th grade student. I don't mind the printing, and I'm thinking it might not hurt to work through this on a 3X/week basis if possible, just to introduce more logic or a different way of looking at things.

[forty-two]

Yeah, that's what I meant by introductory material. I wasn't looking at it and couldn't remember off the top of my head what it was called.

They are finishing up their times/division tables.Will be done with them next week. I want to review with them so they wont forget until we get back to doing MEP. Will the supplemental material be a good place to start?

Hmmm. Kinda depends how much you want to use CSMP, specifically, versus just wanting some thinking math to work on. From a quick overview, I would say the supplement is focused on bringing kids up to speed on CSMP's unique features. This is clearly necessary info if you want to use CSMP materials, and is also a new, fun (to me, math geek, anyway :tongue_smilie:) way to look at familiar concepts. So it's a good place to start CSMP.

 

But if that is all the CSMP you are likely to do, ever, I'm not sure whether it would be the best use of time. If all you want is thinking math, rather than CSMP's particular type of thinking math, a book of good word problems - Zaccaro's Challenge Math, a math competition practice book - is probably easier. And I doubt it will, by itself, help you keep your dc's times tables fresh (though you could certainly put together fun, thinking reviews using CSMP's unique features; the beginning of most of the CSMP teacher's guides include a section of math fact review ideas).

 

Now I love CSMP - I plan to use it, along with MEP, as our main math program. But that's b/c I value the specific types of thinking CSMP is teaching - they fit into my overall goals for math. Also, I think it is grand fun :D. At any rate, if your kids are mathy, they should have no trouble picking up the CSMP way of doing things, and then you can pick and choose activities from across the curriculum for as long (or as short) a time as you want to use it. But if they have problems figuring out the CSMP methods, then, unless you plan to do a fair bit of CSMP, I'm not sure it would be worth putting in a lot of time learning them only to then drop CSMP for good.

 

HTH

[Poke Salad Annie]

Now I love CSMP - I plan to use it, along with MEP, as our main math program. But that's b/c I value the specific types of thinking CSMP is teaching - they fit into my overall goals for math. Also, I think it is grand fun :D. At any rate, if your kids are mathy, they should have no trouble picking up the CSMP way of doing things, and then you can pick and choose activities from across the curriculum for as long (or as short) a time as you want to use it. But if they have problems figuring out the CSMP methods, then, unless you plan to do a fair bit of CSMP, I'm not sure it would be worth putting in a lot of time learning them only to then drop CSMP for good.

 

HTH

 

Are you using MEP and CSMP in full together, or is that how you plan to? Or are you pulling some fun things from the lessons and just doing those?

[forty-two]

Are you using MEP and CSMP in full together, or is that how you plan to? Or are you pulling some fun things from the lessons and just doing those?

Still in planning stages, but my current thoughts are something along the line of using both MEP and CSMP more or less in full, while using the abacus and cuisenaire rods to demonstrate the concepts presented in the primary programs. I have Activities for the AL Abacus, Miquon, and Mathematics Made Meaningful (another Cuisenaire rod-based discovery program). Basically I plan to apply the ideas contained within those programs to our primary work in MEP/CSMP, rather than actually do those programs separately. This is subject to change, though. And I want to add lots of word problems - I have a complete set of CWP already on the shelves :tongue_smilie:. As you can tell, I really like math :D.

 

What I'm actually doing, right now, is mostly free play with Cuisenaire rods and the abacus. But I am reading through the beginning bits of all my many math programs:tongue_smilie:, and taking notes (mostly mental, but I need to start writing things down) about the main concepts and the main activities - how they all fit together and what the necessary pre-recs are - and thinking about how I can include them in our day. So far I have done CSMP-inspired sorting games, the first few activities in MMM, and some RS-suggested practice on learning to see quantities as a whole. We also do lots of counting - I taught my dd the RS counting method - and work on one-to-one correspondence. I need to read through MEP reception and look through CSMP K again, to get more ideas. It's all very informal at the moment - I plan to ramp things up veeerrrryyyy slowly over time.

 

HTH

[BBG580]

I did a search on CSMP here because I have very mixed feelings about the program personally. I was labeled "gifted" in math in public school in the 80s and was routed into the CSMP program with a group of kids to trial it in our county. I was in CSMP from 2nd-6th grade and frankly, it was a disaster for me to transition into higher math. I suffered my way through Algebra I and II and Geometry to meet minimum graduation requirements but I completely avoided math (and math heavy sciences like physics and chemistry) after that.

 

I just looked at the PDFs that are available on the linked site and memories of the program are all flooding back to me. I did like CSMP as a child, I thought it was fun. But I also remember my terror sitting in a preAlgebra class in 7th grade and realizing I had very little idea of what my teacher was talking about and realizing that she had very little patience in trying to get those of us CSMP students up to speed in traditional math algorithms and language. Arrow pictures, string pictures and Eli the Elephant and so on had no place in her classroom. This is probably not an issue for homeschooling families, though, being that a parent can ease the transition or supplement along the way.

 

Anyway, I thought I'd post my own past experience. I am sure some of the kids that I was in CSMP with for those 5 years transitioned well to higher maths, obviously my experience is anecdotal, but I thought I'd throw it out there anyway as food for thought for those choosing to use this program.

Edited November 21, 2010 by BBG580
spelling

[AngelBee]

Are you using MEP and CSMP in full together, or is that how you plan to? Or are you pulling some fun things from the lessons and just doing those?

Can someone link the two? My preggo brain is confusing me! :D

[Rosie_0801]

http://ceure.buffalostate.edu/~csmp/

 

http://www.cimt.plymouth.ac.uk/projects/mep/default.htm

 

 

:)

Rosie

[Poke Salad Annie]

I did a search on CSMP here because I have very mixed feelings about the program personally. I was labeled "gifted" in math in public school in the 80s and was routed into the CSMP program with a group of kids to trial it in our county. I was in CSMP from 2nd-6th grade and frankly, it was a disaster for me to transition into higher math. I suffered my way through Algebra I and II and Geometry to meet minimum graduation requirements but I completely avoided math (and math heavy sciences like physics and chemistry) after that.

 

I just looked at the PDFs that are available on the linked site and memories of the program are all flooding back to me. I did like CSMP as a child, I thought it was fun. But I also remember my terror sitting in a preAlgebra class in 7th grade and realizing I had very little idea of what my teacher was talking about and realizing that she had very little patience in trying to get those of us CSMP students up to speed in traditional math algorithms and language. Arrow pictures, string pictures and Eli the Elephant and so on had no place in her classroom. This is probably not an issue for homeschooling families, though, being that a parent can ease the transition or supplement along the way.

 

Anyway, I thought I'd post my own past experience. I am sure some of the kids that I was in CSMP with for those 5 years transitioned well to higher maths, obviously my experience is anecdotal, but I thought I'd throw it out there anyway as food for thought for those choosing to use this program.

 

I am very curious about this, and I hate to dredge up old posts...

 

I just wonder about this, as we have been using CSMP in addition to MEP. I see many ways they are alike and how some lessons play off each other. This post gives me pause, though, and I would like to hear more.

[forty-two]

I am very curious about this, and I hate to dredge up old posts...

 

I just wonder about this, as we have been using CSMP in addition to MEP. I see many ways they are alike and how some lessons play off each other. This post gives me pause, though, and I would like to hear more.

When I first found CSMP, I did a lot of googling for reviews, and I found some from people who'd went through the program and *hated* it, with the flaming passion of a thousand fiery suns, for much the same reasons as outlined above - that CSMP was just *so* different, that either they never got it in the first place, or they had a wretched transition to "regular" math b/c they just couldn't see how what they learned in CSMP applied at all. And, as those were some of the *big* criticisms of New Math in general, it didn't surprise me much. I never saw anything that said that CSMP taught false stuff, just that it taught things so *differently* that often teachers couldn't make nor tails of how it related to "real math" any more than the students, which inevitably led to badness. In general with New Math, people either loved it or hated it, based largely on whether it made sense to them or not - with a large part of that being whether it made sense within the larger picture of math. CSMP is even more out there than most, so it doesn't surprise me that it had some pretty spectacular failures, especially along those lines. All that to say, so long as *you* see how the CSMP stuff applies to more traditionally presented arithmetic, you can make sure that your dd does as well, and this won't be a problem for you.

[Poke Salad Annie]

When I first found CSMP, I did a lot of googling for reviews, and I found some from people who'd went through the program and *hated* it, with the flaming passion of a thousand fiery suns, for much the same reasons as outlined above - that CSMP was just *so* different, that either they never got it in the first place, or they had a wretched transition to "regular" math b/c they just couldn't see how what they learned in CSMP applied at all. And, as those were some of the *big* criticisms of New Math in general, it didn't surprise me much.

 

I did the same before printing off the first page of the Primary Entry book for 3rd grade. It is indeed so different, but that is what makes it so interesting and intriguing. I can see lots of light bulbs coming on when we work with those lessons, so I am hesitant to give it up. Also, since I see some correlations with the MEP lessons, I think there is hope for our math work. I just want to be on the "safe" side---KWIM?

[stripe]

Just don't spend all your time doing venn diagrams!

 

By the way, in Howtoons (comic book), there is a neat thing in there on binary numbers, using your hand, up to 32.

 

http://www.instructables.com/id/Binary-Counting/

http://www.howtoons.com/?page_id=1310

Edited December 22, 2010 by stripe

[Dana]

I didn't use the CSMP program, but I did use the EM program (Elements of Mathematics) in jr high. The CSMP work looks like it was written by the same group - and Eli the Elephant is in the mapping book.

 

We did things that I didn't see again until I was past the calculus sequence of my undergrad math degree! (Fields and rings in particular.) The logic books were WONDERFUL. The mapping material lends itself so well to a good understanding of functions. I understood slope backwards and forwards.

 

There may need to be some additional supplementation and explanation. I got the EM books to use with my son after we finish Singapore. Unfortunately, there's no way to get testing materials or answer keys, so it's a lot of work to prep now to use later. I'm also very grateful for my degrees when working with it! But I see the same issues with the Singapore bar models. I teach at a cc and I know if a student had used a bar model, they'd have also had to explain it to me!

 

Long story short (too late!), I'd absolutely use the CSMP program, but I probably would supplement with another one - or be sure to relate to the traditional work. (I really think the program I used prepared me well for higher math.)

[Tracy]

I am very curious about this, and I hate to dredge up old posts...

 

I just wonder about this, as we have been using CSMP in addition to MEP. I see many ways they are alike and how some lessons play off each other. This post gives me pause, though, and I would like to hear more.

 

I was actually wondering the same thing, so I am glad that you dredged this one up. I just started dd5 with the 1st grade level of CSMP, and it is such a hit! I am just dying thinking that it might not be as good a program as it seems on its face. At the first grade level, I don't see it missing very much from the traditional math. We are still using math sentences, along with all the other fun stuff that we are doing.

 

I wonder if you can be more specific about what traditional math CSMP is missing.

 

There may need to be some additional supplementation and explanation. But I see the same issues with the Singapore bar models. I teach at a cc and I know if a student had used a bar model, they'd have also had to explain it to me!

 

Long story short (too late!), I'd absolutely use the CSMP program, but I probably would supplement with another one - or be sure to relate to the traditional work. (I really think the program I used prepared me well for higher math.)

 

Can anyone recommend a program that would be a good supplement to CSMP?

[Poke Salad Annie]

I didn't use the CSMP program, but I did use the EM program (Elements of Mathematics) in jr high. The CSMP work looks like it was written by the same group - and Eli the Elephant is in the mapping book.

 

Long story short (too late!), I'd absolutely use the CSMP program, but I probably would supplement with another one - or be sure to relate to the traditional work. (I really think the program I used prepared me well for higher math.)

 

Dana, thank you for this review. It is such a great help, and I very much appreciate your time in posting. :)

 

Can anyone recommend a program that would be a good supplement to CSMP?

 

Tracy, I am using MEP and an old Strayer-Upton text. Unless you want to invest in anything else, I would suggest looking at the MEP lessons--which you can see through all the levels online---and maybe some of the vintage math texts at googlebooks.com.

 

I want to make sure that my little guy has plenty of *tools* in his toolbox, and that's why I wanted to add in the CSMP in the first place. I became worried when I read the review posted on this thread, and wanted to find out more. As for myself, I feel that seeing things from many angles only helps provide more strategies for later problem solving. At least I hope that's how it will work out in the future. I know the CSMP lessons surely give *me* something to think about, and they are fun to boot!

[BBG580]

I am very curious about this, and I hate to dredge up old posts...

 

I just wonder about this, as we have been using CSMP in addition to MEP. I see many ways they are alike and how some lessons play off each other. This post gives me pause, though, and I would like to hear more.

 

I think that most people who teach higher maths have no clue about CSMP or how the method introduces math to young children. Probably a lot of the failing of the program for me (and many students I was in the program with for years) was that of the teachers and not us. Not that I like to pin every single child failing in a subject area on the teacher but in this case I think the teacher training had to be fairly intense to get the teachers up to speed to teach CSMP at its fullest capacity and I'm sure as the program in my county was a pilot program that I had some decent elementary math teachers who utilized the program well and also some who didn't.

 

The biggest problem was that there was ZERO integration for the CSMP group into traditional math when we reached that point in 7th grade. And those teachers had no time or tolerance to go back and teach us the typically used algorithms for multiplication, long division and so on. I was labeled as gifted in math as a child and yet as an adult I am still paralyzed with fear at the thought of doing almost anything that requires more complex math skills.

 

My oldest child is currently in public K and our school district uses Terc's Investigations as its math curriculum for the elementary years. My own experience with CSMP (even though I believe it is a far superior program to the Terc curriculum) and her being stuck with Terc for the next several years which will not adequately prepare her for higher math was one of the motivating factors that led me to look into homeschooling initially. Not being able to handle traditional math in a higher form is crippling for longterm education. I do not know if my child(ren) will choose to go to college but if they want to, I certainly want to make sure they are able to handle the course work in mathematics once they get there.

 

If I were to choose to use CSMP (and I wouldn't based on my own poor experience) with my children I would most certainly use a traditional math program as the base and use CSMP as a fun supplement.

 

ETA: I should have made it more clear that I think the CSMP instruction that I was given was largely missing context in the grand scheme of mathematics so while it was fun and I do remember enjoying CSMP the fact that I couldn't naturally translate what I learned via CSMP techniques into traditional math once I landed there made it a poor choice for *me*. I do think there must have been some flack from the teachers who were forced to teach the CSMP curriculum and who probably didn't want to (this was public school, a pilot program) probably also didn't help. I think the failing of the program and its eventual disuse was multi-faceted but because I feel like it was such a massive failure for me personally I am very anti-New Math of any kind. I can accept that it does have value and its place when utilized to its fullest potential. I just think it takes the right teacher and right student to really make the program soar and be a success and frankly, I don't really want to take the risk with my own kids. I think the string pictures and Eli the Elephant and so on could be an interesting supplement but I'd never use CSMP as my core mathematics program. JMO!

Edited December 23, 2010 by BBG580

[Tracy]

The biggest problem was that there was ZERO integration for the CSMP group into traditional math when we reached that point in 7th grade. And those teachers had no time or tolerance to go back and teach us the typically used algorithms for multiplication, long division and so on.

 

I wonder if you could elaborate a little about how CSMP does not teach traditional algorithms, perhaps share an example? We are just doing the 1st grade program, and I am not seeing anything missing there. I am just trying to wrap my brain around what I should expect in the higher grades and what I might need to supplement with.

[Poke Salad Annie]

If I were to choose to use CSMP (and I wouldn't based on my own poor experience) with my children I would most certainly use a traditional math program as the base and use CSMP as a fun supplement.

 

I'd never use CSMP as my core mathematics program. JMO!

 

I'm still very intrigued by this. I guess what I don't understand is how the teachers at that time had such difficulty teaching it, as it is a very nicely scripted program---easy to follow, good instructions, and the videos on the website make such perfect sense. I have to say that I haven't had any issue with the program since we started using it, though I was initially a bit put off by all those *strings* and *arrows*.

 

I appreciate very much your willingness to share your experience with this program, and it is especially helpful to hear from someone who has used it first hand in a student capacity. I will admit that MEP (the other math program we use) is a bit odd, and my dh has made a few comments about how strange the worksheets look at times. But it is such a *thinking box* math that I don't want to give it up and wonder if I missed out on something which would have been golden---and that's how I feel about CSMP. The minicomputer demonstrates decimals so well, actually much better than any other way I've seen before. While watching the video demonstration, I had an *aha* moment---and it made so much sense that I felt this is good stuff!

 

Anyway, I want to say again that I do appreciate your time in posting your thoughts about this program. I feel that we are all pioneers here, heading out on the trail, and blazing the way. I am certainly learning something new every day.

[BBG580]

I wonder if you could elaborate a little about how CSMP does not teach traditional algorithms, perhaps share an example? We are just doing the 1st grade program, and I am not seeing anything missing there. I am just trying to wrap my brain around what I should expect in the higher grades and what I might need to supplement with.

 

For sure, long division (and perhaps double digit multiplication) is taught differently in CSMP and I didn't figure out the traditional algorithms until middle school when I sat down with a textbook and figured it out myself. I think the big difference here is that CSMP is concept focused rather than giving a child a strong base of quick use algorithms and mathematical procedures which can require some catch up later on.

 

Honestly, this thread has really made me reconsider my own gut reaction to my memory of CSMP. If I am really honest programs like Miquon and Right Start are intriguing to me as a parent who is planning to homeschool and I do think that being able to apply procedures when conceptually thinking about math is the way to go. The problem with New Math vs. Traditional is that both (in my limited research) are so focused on one or the other that they both suffer for it. I do think an integrated program is best. I have to admit that there are interesting parts of CSMP - the mini computer actually probably did help me quite a bit.

 

Obviously some of the kids I was in the program with did not struggle so much to transition to traditional math, I did say my experience was anecdotal. I do think the program is so different and the lack of exposure to anything other than CSMP was detrimental for *me*. But I do remember it being fun, fun, fun while I was doing it! We had full color work books with string pictures, mini computers, Venn diagrams, arrow pictures and so on. And a lot of my reaction is based on memory - I was a little kid of 7-11 using CSMP and frankly, that was a pretty long time ago in the mid 80s. :)

 

When I mentioned teachers and their struggle or disinterest in teaching using CSMP, well, that was a real problem. You as a homeschooling parent are choosing to use CSMP because you like it and think it is an interesting math program for your child. You are motivated to teach it well and you are probably using the lessons to provide integrated math instruction. No one is demanding that you use the curriculum even if you would prefer to teach math a different way. Do you see my point now? I think implementation was a huge issue and the uneven instruction was detrimental.

[Poke Salad Annie]

When I mentioned teachers and their struggle or disinterest in teaching using CSMP, well, that was a real problem. You as a homeschooling parent are choosing to use CSMP because you like it and think it is an interesting math program for your child. You are motivated to teach it well and you are probably using the lessons to provide integrated math instruction. No one is demanding that you use the curriculum even if you would prefer to teach math a different way. Do you see my point now? I think implementation was a huge issue and the uneven instruction was detrimental.

 

Got it. And I really don't mean to badger you with questions or even question your memory of the program. I am trying to *pick your brain* as you seem to be the only poster here on the boards who has real-life experience with the program. That in itself is fascinating to me.

 

I thank you again for all you are sharing with us here. It has been very helpful to me. I do use CSMP with another program (or two ;)), so I feel we are getting a well-rounded view of how math *works*, as well as some nifty ideas and strategies to use for later on down the road. As this program is provided free online, I felt it was worth exploring.

[BBG580]

Got it. And I really don't mean to badger you with questions or even question your memory of the program. I am trying to *pick your brain* as you seem to be the only poster here on the boards who has real-life experience with the program. That in itself is fascinating to me.

 

 

I didn't feel badgered!

 

I think what I was trying to understand even for myself is why looking back I have such negative feelings about CSMP and I think a lot of it has to do with how unconfident I felt in math in later middle and high school. I had only exposure to CSMP and then was routed into math classes with teachers who had never taught using CSMP, were not interested in CSMP and were not willing to (or had the time) to go back and help us (me) learn some basic procedures that I needed to move through the material they were teaching as quickly as they required. Up through 6th grade math was a colorful, image heavy subject for me that was quite interactive with small groups and teacher presence and then all of a sudden it wasn't any longer. And there were a couple years in elementary school (4th and 5th) in which I can hardly remember much math instruction at all, it was more small group work with the workbooks, which is what made me make my comments about some teachers not utilizing the program well.

 

Any experience in a mainstream school is going to be different than one at home simply because a parent can slow down, reinforce concepts and procedures that are not clear for their child while in a class - especially in high school - it is very much sink or swim. At least it was for me. And I sunk in math quickly and never regained my confidence. I have always blamed the CSMP curriculum but after really thinking about it via this thread I think it was a multi-faceted failure.

Edited December 23, 2010 by BBG580

[Poke Salad Annie]

 

I think what I was trying to understand even for myself is why looking back I have such negative feelings about CSMP and I think a lot of it has to do with how unconfident I felt in math in later middle and high school.

 

I felt the same way when I was taking algebra I in jr. high school, and I never even knew about CSMP. I can remember crying at night over algebra I homework (we used the famous Dolciani text from the late 60's), because it was like a foreign language to me. I had no idea what was going on, nor why I couldn't make sense of the numbers on the pages and how I was supposed to arrive at answers when I couldn't even set a up a problem. Horrible!

 

But.....I did have a next-door neighbor (an engineer) who kindly explained this *Greek-looking* way of working problems. Soon I was able to whiz through my homework, and even helped others in the classroom, as the teacher required it of those who could understand the problems. It became a challenge when I saw word problems, and once I learned how to plug in numbers to an equation and work it out step-by-step, I was fine. Those *odd-looking* problems weren't anything to be feared.

 

I'm just saying all this because I want you to see that maybe it wasn't just the CSMP. Maybe it's that way for all of us at some point in time, with anything that's new and different. And FWIW, I am learning so many things from just looking over the lessons in CSMP---things I wish I would have known when I was in elementary school.

 

I'm sorry that you had such a difficult time with the transition in math. I think that's what has all of us kind of scratching our heads collectively and thinking, "Hmmmm, maybe we'd better re-think this whole CSMP idea." KWIM? No one here wants to tie up time and effort with something that could possibly lead us down the wrong road, so that's what made me even wonder once I read your review. Again, I think it comes down to adding in other *looks* with math. Let them see how a problem works from many angles. Maybe one day they can pull something out of that math toolbox that they are accumulating from working with these concept-based programs. I'd like to think so, anyway. :)

[BBG580]

I felt the same way when I was taking algebra I in jr. high school, and I never even knew about CSMP. I can remember crying at night over algebra I homework (we used the famous Dolciani text from the late 60's), because it was like a foreign language to me. I had no idea what was going on, nor why I couldn't make sense of the numbers on the pages and how I was supposed to arrive at answers when I couldn't even set a up a problem. Horrible!

 

 

 

Yes, but that is exactly my point. CSMP, or how it was utilized in the five years I was taught with the curriculum, did NOT prepare me for higher math. :)

 

As I've said before I think think there were lots of factors in my failure in higher math but I still think there has to be some integration with traditional math to make relational connections between the concepts CSMP is trying to teach and basic procedures in traditional math.