Geometry: Rightstart vs. LoF vs. something else?

[4kids4me]

I purchased the geometry program from Rightstart and dd has done a few lessons...not much. They say it's a middle-school program.

 

We then went into LoF and dd's done the Fractions and Decimals one, then moved into Beginning Algebra.

 

Should I have her do the Rightstart geometry program while she's doing the LoF Algebra stuff...or should I just forget it and move into LoF geometry when she gets there?

 

She doesn't like math too much. :)

 

I'm just confused....do they need a program before they start the LoF stuff or is Rightstart teaching similar concepts.

 

I just don't know what I don't know...and what I don't know is math!!!!

 

Help!

[Heather in VA]

RightStart geometry is pretty much just constructions. LOF Geometry is a high school geometry class. We are using it. It's very good with plenty of proofs.

 

RS Geometry is nice but really not a necessary program in a math progression.

 

Heather

[Haiku]

They say it's a middle-school program.

 

When I spoke with the RS people last year, they told me that their "geometry" program (which they call intermediate math) is for fifth/sixth graders and that it is a pre-algebra course that uses geometry principles. It is NOT a "geometry" program.

 

Tara

[4kids4me]

When I spoke with the RS people last year, they told me that their "geometry" program (which they call intermediate math) is for fifth/sixth graders and that it is a pre-algebra course that uses geometry principles. It is NOT a "geometry" program.

 

Tara

 

Isn't that a little misleading? Sheesh. Guess that's my fault for not understanding everything about math.

[PeterPan]

Yeah, I've had the RS G for a couple years now, and I still don't know what the point is, lol. I just have it sitting here, thinking maybe someday it will seem right. I don't know how it can be considered pre-algebra. Originally they said it was the content of a high school geometry class without the proofs. The thinking was it would improve test scores by getting them into that material sooner. Now something to think about. Are you SURE you want to start awarding high school credits in 7th? Most colleges are going to look for whatever is done in the 4 years of high school, MAYBE sometimes (but not always) allowing credit for algebra 1 in 8th. In other words, you start getting into this rat race of how soon you do what, how far she plans to go over the long-haul, etc. You're at a good stage to start thinking through all that. I have no opinion, not having been there. I just evaluated transcripts for a year at a university and have that perspective. :)

 

Did she ENJOY the RS G? If she LIKED it, I would go back and do it. She's young, and it would kill a bit of time. I think geometry is something too quickly forgotten anyway. It's one of the most useful things in life, and because they spend so little time on it, it just goes in one eyeball and out the other. So a year on RS G and then doing it again with LoF, using proofs and from a totally different perspective, seems very good to me. That would put your LoF Geometry into 9th, helping your credit issue. Just a thought.

 

If she DIDN'T like the RS G or she is advanced and WANTS to go on or you plan on graduating her early, then feel free to skip the RS G. As Heather said, it's very non-standard and not essential. Just remember that you want enough math in the 4 years you count as her high school transcript, that's all.

[4kids4me]

I agree with you now that I think about it. The thing is, I'm not sure if I'll put her in high school or teach her. I just don't think I can teach her....really, I don't think I'll do a good enough job.

 

But the way math works here in Ontario, they spiral every subject all the way through to grade 11, then break the subject down for different choices (or something to that effect). So even if I did put her in gr. 9, and even if we did both LoF Algebra books, she'll definitely be lacking in other areas. Sigh. It just never feels like I can do enough.

 

Thanks for the answer to the RS: G program. I wish I hadn't spent money on it. She hated it....but then again, she hates all math. lol

[katilac]

When I spoke with the RS people last year, they told me that their "geometry" program (which they call intermediate math) is for fifth/sixth graders and that it is a pre-algebra course that uses geometry principles. It is NOT a "geometry" program.

 

Tara

 

Hmm, I'm sure the rep said that to you, but I don't agree with it. The level is listed as "intermediate mathematics" and the title is "A Hands-on Geometric Approach."

 

It's pre-algebra in the sense that it comes before algebra, but no, it's not what most people would consider a pre-algebra course (and I've never seen RS to claim that). I'm holding the book, and it sure looks like geometry to me! ;) Their info states: It employs a hands-on and visual approach through the use of a tool set consisting of a drawing board, T-square, triangles, compass, goniometer, and panels for 3-D constructions. The students explore angles, polygons, area, volume, ratios, Pythagorean theorem, tiling, and so forth and that's accurate.

 

It has NCTM correlations for fourth thru eighth grades, and I'd definitely consider it a middle school curriculum (it's designed to be used over multiple years alongside a standard program, not to be used alone and finished in one year). My 4th-grader would probably need a lot of handholding to get past the first 20 lessons are so. My 6th grader uses it on her own and enjoys it (for comparison, she also uses Saxon 8/7 and Singapore 6B, so she's definitely not a weak math student).

 

Looking at the later lessons, I think that a 4th or 5th grader would have to be very talented in maths to complete this book. Some of the goals for later lessons: to verify the Pythagorean theorem with Pick's theorem, to set up and solve equations using a given ratio, to solve problems with trigonometry, to calculate volume and surface areas of prisms, to learn about dual polyhedra, to solve sphere problems related to volume and surface area, to construct a truncated icosahedron, to learn about fractals . . . this is stuff that looks fairly difficult to my admittedly non-mathy self (but I did pull a B in hs geo :D).

 

It serves a great purpose when used as intended, which is NOT to replace either a pre-algebra course or a high school geometry course. Geometry is a visual discipline at its heart, and students who tackle high school geometry with little visual understanding will tend to flounder. If RS gives a student lots of practice in recognizing, constructing, and understanding the shapes and patterns that form the foundation of geometry, that's a job well done!

 

To the OP, if your dd hasn't done much in the book, then it's likely that all she has done are the lessons intended to introduce the students to the various tools and gain practice using them (b/c a certain level of accuracy/precision is important). You have to get to about lesson 20 before you get past simple drawing and measuring, and on to more detailed exercises that put information to use.

 

So, anyone who is disappointed in it might want to take a fresh look at it with its intended purpose in mind. It's annoying to get a screwdriver when you expected a hammer, but screwdrivers are pretty darn useful.

[4kids4me]

Hmm, I'm sure the rep said that to you, but I don't agree with it. The level is listed as "intermediate mathematics" and the title is "A Hands-on Geometric Approach."

 

It's pre-algebra in the sense that it comes before algebra, but no, it's not what most people would consider a pre-algebra course (and I've never seen RS to claim that). I'm holding the book, and it sure looks like geometry to me! ;) Their info states: It employs a hands-on and visual approach through the use of a tool set consisting of a drawing board, T-square, triangles, compass, goniometer, and panels for 3-D constructions. The students explore angles, polygons, area, volume, ratios, Pythagorean theorem, tiling, and so forth and that's accurate.

 

It has NCTM correlations for fourth thru eighth grades, and I'd definitely consider it a middle school curriculum (it's designed to be used over multiple years alongside a standard program, not to be used alone and finished in one year). My 4th-grader would probably need a lot of handholding to get past the first 20 lessons are so. My 6th grader uses it on her own and enjoys it (for comparison, she also uses Saxon 8/7 and Singapore 6B, so she's definitely not a weak math student).

 

Looking at the later lessons, I think that a 4th or 5th grader would have to be very talented in maths to complete this book. Some of the goals for later lessons: to verify the Pythagorean theorem with Pick's theorem, to set up and solve equations using a given ratio, to solve problems with trigonometry, to calculate volume and surface areas of prisms, to learn about dual polyhedra, to solve sphere problems related to volume and surface area, to construct a truncated icosahedron, to learn about fractals . . . this is stuff that looks fairly difficult to my admittedly non-mathy self (but I did pull a B in hs geo :D).

 

It serves a great purpose when used as intended, which is NOT to replace either a pre-algebra course or a high school geometry course. Geometry is a visual discipline at its heart, and students who tackle high school geometry with little visual understanding will tend to flounder. If RS gives a student lots of practice in recognizing, constructing, and understanding the shapes and patterns that form the foundation of geometry, that's a job well done!

 

To the OP, if your dd hasn't done much in the book, then it's likely that all she has done are the lessons intended to introduce the students to the various tools and gain practice using them (b/c a certain level of accuracy/precision is important). You have to get to about lesson 20 before you get past simple drawing and measuring, and on to more detailed exercises that put information to use.

 

So, anyone who is disappointed in it might want to take a fresh look at it with its intended purpose in mind. It's annoying to get a screwdriver when you expected a hammer, but screwdrivers are pretty darn useful.

 

I had to laugh at your last line. Thanks for your input. Everything that everyone has said has been beneficial. :)

[PeterPan]

Yeah, last time I talked with Kathleen (Dr. Cotter's dd, head honcho basically), the way she put it was that RS G was being renamed Intermediate Math and billed as a middle school math. It's not pre-algebra, mercy. Dr. Cotter's original vision had been to have 3 books you would rotate through, and in so doing you WOULD cover the topics of pre-algebra. But in its current state, with just RS G, I don't see how you could possibly hope to say that.

[siloam]

It serves a great purpose when used as intended, which is NOT to replace either a pre-algebra course or a high school geometry course. Geometry is a visual discipline at its heart, and students who tackle high school geometry with little visual understanding will tend to flounder. If RS gives a student lots of practice in recognizing, constructing, and understanding the shapes and patterns that form the foundation of geometry, that's a job well done!

 

So, anyone who is disappointed in it might want to take a fresh look at it with its intended purpose in mind. It's annoying to get a screwdriver when you expected a hammer, but screwdrivers are pretty darn useful.

 

:smilielol5::smilielol5: Love that last line!

 

My oldest wants to do RS Geometry because while she doesn't like the drawing in RS in general, she also realizes that she is a visual, hands on learner. It will probably help her get concepts that she wouldn't get by just covering them conceptually, which is what RS has done for her all along.

 

I am very glad to have it, but I agree that it is confusing to figure out what exactly it is and how to use it.

 

Heather

 

[Mom-ninja.]

So, those using RS G, what program do you use it with. I'm looking ahead here. We'll start level D in a couple months.

[Susie in CA]

So, those using RS G, what program do you use it with. I'm looking ahead here. We'll start level D in a couple months.

 

Well, my plan for 5th and 6th grade(maybe 7th) is to work through RSG, Key to books (decimals, percent, fractions etc.), Challange Math, and start adding in Videotext Algebra. I can't really tell you how it turned out as we just started this process. So far we have finished a couple Key to Books and worked on some chapters in Challange math. We are, at the same time, still finishing RS E. So far so good.

 

Susie

[siloam]

So, those using RS G, what program do you use it with. I'm looking ahead here. We'll start level D in a couple months.

 

The VideoText Algebra, that Dr. Cotter recommends.

 

Heather

 

[emmsmama]

Dd will be done RS E in a couple months and I'm debating what to do at that point. I'm pretty sure I'm going to have her start LoF Fractions and then LoF D&P, but not sure if I'm going to have her start RS G at the same time or just work through the LoF books first. I'm also considering MUS Pre-Alg at the same time as RS Geometry, or maybe the Key To books. I'm honestly quite stressed out about all this because we've been with RS for 3 yrs. almost and it's worked so well that it's really nerve-racking to figure out where to go/what to do after RS E. I know I want dd to use RS G and I was considering going to Videotext along with it, but I'm not totally keen on start VT in Gr. 6. I'm leaning more toward starting RS G and doing something else like LoF, MUS or Key To alongside it until Gr. 7 and then start VT. :confused::confused::confused::confused: