Opinions on Rightstart D...

[Homemama2]

I've used RS for levels B and C and am liking it, except for all the drawing (I guess I just don't see the point of it at this age :tongue_smilie:). My ds is really strong in mental math and loves the games.

 

I am wondering how people like level D because I've noticed that people seem to quit RS before the end and I'm not sure why. Is it too time intensive when you add in other children? (I'll be adding my youngest next year) Or is it something about the program itself? If people like/dislike level D (and E as well) I'd love to know why, and what you switched to. I have thought about looking at Singapore or Bob Jones but am not sure if I should stick w/ RS. :001_huh: I'm already frying my brain trying to plan for next year...:lol:

[PeterPan]

We jumped out after D and went to BJU math, but the writing had been on the wall for us. I personally think you're nuts to contemplate switching, or even open yourself up to that, when it's WORKING. When it's not working, you'll know. :)

[Crimson Wife]

I loved, loved, loved RS B. Level C was just okay. I took a look at D and E and it just seemed like there was too much review and not enough new material. Between the 2 levels, I felt like there was really only 1 year's worth of material. Singapore seems like it would be easier to get the appropriate challenge level. Also, my DD has matured a lot since we began RS in her K5 year. Back then, she preferred hands-on work with the manipulatives to pencil & paper work; now it's the opposite. Finally, I now feel much more confident about teaching math & am not intimidated by Singapore the way I was my first year of HS.

[prairiegirl]

I agree with OhElizabeth. If it is working do not switch. We didn't switch until Level E. I loved D. I thought it did the job well. I did the drawing lessons with my dd but I am doing D again with my ds and we are skipping the drawing lessons. I don't see the point in them at this time.

 

We got to lesson 40 in Level E with my dd and I decided to switch. My reasons being that they shove alot into one book (percents, decimals, fractions) without alot of practise. Long division was covered in only a few lessons. I knew that my dd needed more coverage on these topics so we switched. I am not doing Level E with my ds, we will switch when he is done with D.

 

I switched to MUS for my dd, and it is working out very well. I am not sure what we are going to switch to for my ds. It's a toss up between MUS and BJU. I'm still on the fence with this one.

 

I love RS. I think it is an exellent program. If it is working for you stick with it. Only switch if you come upon some bumps.

[Greta]

We loved RightStart for A and B, were okay with C, but ditched it about two-thirds of the way through D. There was one very simple reason for this: dd and I both hated the way it taught division. After only a very brief introduction of the concept using part-whole circle sets, it moved into division with remainders. She was so frustrated and confused. I really felt it was a mistake to introduce remainders so soon, when she had not yet even cemented in her mind the idea that division is like multiplication in "reverse".

 

We had started using MEP lightly alongside RightStart because I had heard such good things about it here. I loved the way it introduced division. They used problems like:

 

7 x ? = 56

 

? x 9 = 81

 

Things like that, which really helped her "get" the idea that since she knew how to multiply, she knew how to divide as well. Then after a fair amount of practice with division problems, THEN they introduced problems with remainders. It has gone so much better, so we're now using the full MEP lesson plans, and I really really like it. It's a good, challenging, but clear and effective program.

[Karie]

I went all the way through E with my older son and we are finishing up E with my younger son. I've never had a problem with D and E at all. It has worked for us like a charm. I will have to say that with E, I added in Singapore 4A and 4B for them to do also to get extra practice in. 4A and 4B work together with E and fit like a glove! It's a great combo! I also am not a fan of all the drawing-I don't see a point to it. Both boys did/are doing E in 3rd grade, and there fine motor skills that are needed to hold several tools at once and draw at the same time weren't that developed, so I ended up helping with all of it. Finally in E, I dropped all the drawing at the end of the book because older son couldn't stand it. We are almost at this point with my younger son, except he LOVES the drawing part, so I'll have to work through that with him.

 

RS E prepared us for transition to Singapore 5 the following year, so I've had NO complaints with it and have recommended it to others. My older son will be starting pre-algebra in 6th grade.

[Haiku]

:lurk5:

[msjones]

I went all the way through E with my older son and we are finishing up E with my younger son. I've never had a problem with D and E at all. It has worked for us like a charm. I will have to say that with E, I added in Singapore 4A and 4B for them to do also to get extra practice in. 4A and 4B work together with E and fit like a glove! It's a great combo! I also am not a fan of all the drawing-I don't see a point to it. Both boys did/are doing E in 3rd grade, and there fine motor skills that are needed to hold several tools at once and draw at the same time weren't that developed, so I ended up helping with all of it. Finally in E, I dropped all the drawing at the end of the book because older son couldn't stand it. We are almost at this point with my younger son, except he LOVES the drawing part, so I'll have to work through that with him.

 

RS E prepared us for transition to Singapore 5 the following year, so I've had NO complaints with it and have recommended it to others. My older son will be starting pre-algebra in 6th grade.

 

This is almost exactly what we did. I wanted more of what Singapore offers, so I added it in with book E.

[Capt_Uhura]

We've done RS A-E. My 4th grader is finishing up E soon and my 1st grader will be finishing RS C around June. I like how RS teaches. I don't think RS E was meant to solidify division and fractions. I think RS E was an introduction. Dr. Cotter had intended to write RS Algebraic Approach, where I think those topics would have been solidified. Plus, with many starting RS B in 1st grade, RS C in 2nd grade, RS D in 3rd and RS E in 4th grade, that leaves plenty of time for a pre-algebra year or two such as SM 5A-6B. We will finish RS E in March and will finish out the year w/ SM5A/5B and CWPs.

 

The other day my 4th grader showed my 1st grader how to divide by 10s and drop the zero. Of course, my 1st grader couldn't explain WHY that works. My 4th grader could explain why it works but I emphasized to him that I want his brother to discover how it works on his own before learning an algorithm b/c algorithms are easily forgotten, but real understanding is not. That's why I like RS. Not that you don't get that from all the other math curricula out there but RS worked well enough for us, and gave the whys that I saw no reason to switch from something that was working.

[siloam]

I went all the way through E with my older son and we are finishing up E with my younger son. I've never had a problem with D and E at all. It has worked for us like a charm.

 

Same here, and I adore how RS covers percents with fractions in level E. My 2nd dd is in D and neither her nor my oldest had a problem with the division.

 

Heather

 

[Crimson Wife]

I don't think RS E was meant to solidify division and fractions. I think RS E was an introduction.

 

But shouldn't a level designed for 4th grade thoroughly cover division & fractions? This is what I was getting at when I said that I thought D & E really only have 1 year's worth of material spread over 2 years. To my mind, 3rd grade should cover multi-digit multiplication & "short" division. 4th grade should cover long division & fractions.

 

Maybe that's why the Singapore scope & sequence appeal to me?

[siloam]

But shouldn't a level designed for 4th grade thoroughly cover division & fractions? This is what I was getting at when I said that I thought D & E really only have 1 year's worth of material spread over 2 years. To my mind, 3rd grade should cover multi-digit multiplication & "short" division. 4th grade should cover long division & fractions.

 

Maybe that's why the Singapore scope & sequence appeal to me?

 

Yes, I do think this goes back to the non-traditional scope and sequence that is often a problem for people in level B. I think RS is delaying it because it is a difficult concept for most kids. The added maturity helps, IMO.

 

I also noticed that there was a big thread on kids doing Singapore alone struggling. Both older girls have just "got" fractions. Given my kids are not mathy I am very happy about that, and I give RS the credit. :)

 

In the mean time RS does cover a lot of new concepts, some before traditional "grade levels" like percents.

 

In D you cover:

 

Measurements (including simplifying quantities, perimeter, area and metric measurements)

Division

Fractions (Adding, of money, of time)

Multiple step problems

 

I would say the focus is measurements, and I love the way it shows the child how perimeter and area formulas really do work but it takes a lot of lessons to lay that foundation for not just ft and in, but metric measurements and volume. Singapore did not do as good a job of that. With division and fractions the focus is more of an introduction. They keep it simple. There is a lot of review in D as well but it usually also takes the concept one step farther. I see a lot of effort to make sure past knowledge is not lost but at the same time to apply it in a new way. A lot of time is spent showing the relationship between division and multiplication too.

 

In E you cover:

 

Fractions (in measurements, simplifying)

Percents

Decimals

Expands Area work

Rounding

Averages

Graphs

Long Division

Multiplication of fractions

Mean, Median, Mode

Probability

Measuring Angles

 

To date this level seems to be solidifying the fractions introduced in the last level, and later the division. It is also introducing several new concepts now that the child has learned the 4 base operations.

 

What I see happening, whether I am right or not is arguable, is she introduces a topic in simple terms, usually at the end of a level. Then the next year she spends a lot of time adding depth to that base concept, first by showing its relationship to other areas of math, then showing how it works in time, money, with shapes, then by moving into the traditional equations.

 

Heather

 

[Debbie in OR]

We didn't switch until Level E. I loved D.

 

We got to lesson 40 in Level E with my dd and I decided to switch. My reasons being that they shove alot into one book (percents, decimals, fractions) without alot of practise. Long division was covered in only a few lessons. I knew that my dd needed more coverage on these topics so we switched. I am not doing Level E with my ds, we will switch when he is done with D.

 

I switched to MUS for my dd, and it is working out very well.

 

I love RS. I think it is an exellent program. If it is working for you stick with it. Only switch if you come upon some bumps.

 

I could have written this. I think we even got to lesson 40 in E! And we switched for the exact same reasons. I personally liked (well, maybe not liked but saw the benefit of) all the teacher involvement and my dc learned a lot. But I have finally discovered that, especially my ds, needs a mastery approach to math. I liked the way RS taught but it's more of a spiral approach and we needed more practice, so we made the switch to MUS. I was so reluctant to let go of RS but MUS has been great for ds and my dd as well. We still use so many of the tools we learned in RS but the repetition in MUS is what's making it stick.

Edited January 31, 2010 by Debbie in OR

[Homemama2]

Thanks for the replies! I guess I've just been feeling rather frustrated bc we've been doing LOTS of drawing lessons all in a row. Like someone else mentioned, my son has trouble holding all the rulers and triangles and then drawing too, so I have to help him with all the worksheets....and I don't feel the drawing is necessary. Maybe that's just me. I've felt like the warm-ups and practice sheets have been great--but these drawings are driving me up the wall!!! Maybe I just need to get a supplement so that we can skip some of the drawings, I don't know. Sigh.

 

Then maybe I just have the 'grass is greener' syndrome. It always seems to hit me at this time of year. I will definitly look at both D and E before purchasing so that I can check out what people have mentioned about the percents and fractions.

[samba]

We finished D and then switched to BJU. I liked D and it went over well w/ dd. Conceptually, I liked E also...BUT I really disliked the sequencing of the skills. It seemed all over the place to me and I was ready for a traditional scope and sequence. I had planned to use the teaching concepts of E when we got to them in BJU and it just didn't work out that way. I won't be using RS again but I wish they would simply rearrange they way they introduce the lessons. Division was covered so late in the year...it just was no longer practical or ideal :confused:.

 

Carolyn

[Oak Knoll Mom]

But shouldn't a level designed for 4th grade thoroughly cover division & fractions? This is what I was getting at when I said that I thought D & E really only have 1 year's worth of material spread over 2 years. To my mind, 3rd grade should cover multi-digit multiplication & "short" division. 4th grade should cover long division & fractions.

 

Maybe that's why the Singapore scope & sequence appeal to me?

 

I see where you're coming from. Personally, though, I don't mind a non-traditional scope & sequence as long as the kids end up at the same place and are ready for pre-algebra in 7th grade. I'm more interested in a deep and solid base upon which to build higher level math skills.

[buddhabelly]

Well, if it is at all reassuring to you, my son went from finishing RS Level E straight into Singapore 5 seamlessly. It was quite lovely how well they fit together. The only hiccup we've had is that while we LOVE the "Right Start Math" way of subtracting, it is difficult to use that method when you have a situation like 3,000,000 minus 37,843. Or, for that matter, 5.000004 minus 1.8765. When we began LOF Fractions, this little gap in skill became evident and we stopped to work on it. It comes up again in LOF Decimals, obviously. I don't really know how Singapore teaches subtraction with regrouping -- I mean once the child gets the concept with manipulatives, that is.

 

The only slightly frustrating part of RS E is that they really spend a long time on the whole concept of multiplying fractions. Because face it, we have no IDEA what it means to multiply 7/8 by 3/5. But the RS student does (eventually). It just really takes a long time to solidify, and not many parents have the patience for that. I admit that I taught my son the algorithm way before Dr. Cotter laid it out in the curriculum! But I think it is valuable that the child learns it conceptually first. And then it comes in handy with those Singapore word problems because the whole idea that the multiplication symbol means "of" is very solid. So if John had 7/8 as much money as Fred, then spent 3/5 of that on a new book......the student has the understanding to change that into mathematical symbols and figure it out.

 

(I don't believe RS ever does teach the algorithm. She obviously planned to write one more book on Fractions and Decimals that just didn't happen. I just tried to write out the RS way of multiplying fractions -- with the cross-hatching -- and couldn't remember it exactly.)

 

Best wishes,

 

Julie

Edited January 31, 2010 by buddhabelly

[buddhabelly]

But shouldn't a level designed for 4th grade thoroughly cover division & fractions?

...

 

Maybe that's why the Singapore scope & sequence appeal to me?

 

But Singapore does not finish with these subjects with Singapore 4. Not by any means. If you look at Singapore 5 and 6 (which, by the way, are pretty darn advanced to be considered a "5th grade" and "6th grade), they continue to teach fractions. Some of the things that come up in LOF Fractions are not taught until Singapore 6. Long division is, in my mind, thoroughly covered in RS E. It is also taught in Singapore 5A (with higher numbers), and by the end of Singapore 5A, the child is learning to divide fractions. Hope that helps a little.

 

I apologize in advance if I'm wrong about RS E -- it is put away somewhere. But I seem to recall lots of practice with long division, and different kinds of remainders.

 

Julie

[Oak Knoll Mom]

The only hiccup we've had is that while we LOVE the "Right Start Math" way of subtracting, it is difficult to use that method when you have a situation like 3,000,000 minus 37,843. Or, for that matter, 5.000004 minus 1.8765. When we began LOF Fractions, this little gap in skill became evident and we stopped to work on it.

 

I'm a little confused. I just did both of these problems the RightStart way and had no problems and actually found them easier to do than the standard algorithm. What am I missing? We learned the RS way a few months ago and I'm wondering if we need to go back and "fill in". Thanks!

[Karie]

My older son who finished E almost 2 years ago and is about to finish Singapore 6 has never learned to subtract any other way except the RS way and that hasn't been an issue. *I* don't subtract the RS way very well, but both my boys do it well because that's how they were taught and that's all they know. I might confuse them if I taught them my way :-)

[buddhabelly]

To Oak Knoll Mom:

 

I'm glad you're here! Let me see if I can remember our difficulty. But if it's okay, I'm going to use a different problem: 100,000 minus 58. So we underline the zero in the tens place (because we can't subtract eight from zero in the ones), but then what? There is no reason to underline the zero in the hundreds place, because there is nothing to subtract from it. And so there is no way to continue the underlining process all the way over to the "1" in "100,000."

 

There was probably a RS lesson about this, but I couldn't find it. Let me know if you need me to clarify my question.

 

Julie

[Oak Knoll Mom]

To Oak Knoll Mom:

 

I'm glad you're here! Let me see if I can remember our difficulty. But if it's okay, I'm going to use a different problem: 100,000 minus 58. So we underline the zero in the tens place (because we can't subtract eight from zero in the ones), but then what? There is no reason to underline the zero in the hundreds place, because there is nothing to subtract from it. And so there is no way to continue the underlining process all the way over to the "1" in "100,000."

 

There was probably a RS lesson about this, but I couldn't find it. Let me know if you need me to clarify my question.

 

Julie

 

Hmm...I can see that being a problem. I might go ask this question on the RS message board. I was having a problem understanding part of their subtraction method when we first started learning it and got a really great and clear answer from someone there.