Does anyone here NOT like CLE Math?

[Reya]

...2 say:

Just as some ppl are good at art and shucks, wouldn't we all like to know how to draw even; some ppl are going to be the high-level scientists or math theorists.

It's nice to imagine that all kids would be this way, like "all kids can learn to read at age 4, barring organic brain damage". Well, if my kid can't, it's ok. Maybe he's never gonna read well. Maybe. Makes me shudder---I made my math-TEACHER-mom want a valium when she would try to help me at math. (but then again, by age 10, she asked *me* to clarify spelling of words occasionally lol)

So while I love the standards the classical method sets, I know they're not always realistic. I don't throw the baby out w/the bathwater, I just adjust the temp if necessary. :)

 

Virtually every child can be taught to draft adequately, too--meaning to draw what they can see. Because we don't do it in our schools doesn't mean it's not very possible. It was, in fact, something every middle-class girl was taught at one point.

 

I, too, think it's sad to write off a kid to procedural computations, which is not and never will be mathematics. It won't even help a child with the most basic mathematics in daily life. Again, I have not seen CLE in particular, but if a child is struggling with understanding math, the correct response is not to make it so that they don't have to understand anything anymore but to break things down further and take it more slowly. Singapore not working? Try RightStart's games for a few months.

 

I'd rather have a kid three years behind in math than have a superficial ability to compute mathematically with little comprehension.

[Reya]

UGH. CALVERT.

 

Now, THAT'S a math curriculum that I saw at first hand that I loathe. Yeah, it tries to teach concepts, but kids can breeze through with NO understanding and make great grades--until they crash and burn. It'd work okay for some personalities, even though I wouldn't really LIKE anything about it, but for the kid who was in it...flames! explosions! people screaming!

[Pongo]

Any other old-timers remember the math wars? On the old board, it used to get really firely at times Singapore versus Saxon and then it was Calvert versus Rightstart versus Singapore versus Saxon. And then it was...

 

SWB used to break in and stop it, threads were deleted, etc. etc.

 

 

 

Don't forget MUS, kinda like Teaching Textbooks now. :)

[TracyP]

It seems very sad to me to reach the conclusion that a child is incapable of understanding mathematical reasoning and is only capable of doing "procedural" mathematics. That may be the case with some children. I don't know. In the case of this girl perhaps that's the case.

 

Still, why "write-off" a child before they have a chance? Using something like CLE from the outset removes any chance they will have a deep math education, one that explores the "whys" of math (which really is the point) rather than just treating math as a series of math facts and procedures to be plugged in and/or memorized.

 

Bill

 

Bill, I hope you don't mind but I will try to clarify. I LOVE CLE for my dd. She was floundering with SM. I believe this to be my fault. I have learned so much from these boards. However, I am going to start my next child with a combo of Singapore and MEP. The asian style of math is a more conceptual, "better" way to be prepared for higher level maths.

 

Since you are starting from scratch, I personally would either look into MEP, Righstart, Singapore, Math Mammoth, ? or at least think about supplementing CLE with one of these.

 

CLE is one of the best "American" style math programs IMO. Good luck with your decision.

[EKS]

So talking about primary math, what are specific examples of what you saw were missing? I just don't understand the criticism that CLE is all procedural because I see all sorts of conceptual work. Please share with me the instruction and types of problems that would give the conceptual understanding you don't see in CLE. I am honestly curious.

 

One place where it is fairly easy to compare how much a math program makes a kid think is in the word problems. Here is a ratio/proportion problem from the CLE level 6 book:

 

Randy is 5 feet tall and his shadow is 7 feet long. The shadow of an electric pole [they should have indicated that this pole was nearby; I noticed ambiguous wording in several problems as I was going through the samples] is 35 feet long. How tall is the pole?

 

Versus a Singapore problem from Challenging Word Problems book 5 (this problem was not designated challenging; these problems are very similar to the problems found in the textbook and workbook of PM 5):

 

The ratio of the number of Maya's stickers to the number of Quentin's stickers is 8:5. If Quentin has 15 fewer stickers than Maya, how many stickers does Maya have.

 

And now a challenging problem from CWP 5:

 

The ratio of the number of cars to the number of bicycles is 10:7. Each car has 4 wheels and each bicycle has 2 wheels. If all the cars and bicycles have a total of 486 wheels, how many wheels do all the cars have altogether?

 

And a different topic from CLE 6:

 

If Rachel's mother drives at an average speed of 50 miles per hour (60 minutes) and it is 20 miles to town, how long does it take to drive to town?

 

And a non-challenging problem from CWP 5:

 

It cost $2.50 to rent a badminton court per hour or part thereof between 9:00 am and 6:00 pm, and $3.50 per hour or part there of between 6:00 pm and 10:00 pm. Jennifer rented two badminton courts from 4:30 pm to 7:10 pm. How much money did she pay?

 

And now a challenging problem of the same type:

 

A transport company charged $2 for each vase safely delivered but paid a penalty of $62 for each vase delivered broken or lost. If it collected $336 for the delivery of 392 vases, how many vases did it deliver broken or lost?

 

I admit that I don't have the CLE books in front of me, so it is impossible to know if these problems are representative or not. But every word problem I saw was of this type, meaning that very little to no in depth understanding was required of the student to solve the problems. The Singapore problems, on the other hand, require the student to understand what's going on and think flexibly about how to approach the problem.

[susankenny]

Hi,

 

We just switched from R&S math (used 2 years) to CLE Math. We really love it! We had to start Year 2 all over again, as it covers concepts we had not touched on yet in R&S (so I didn't want gaps). It's really so affordable, I'd recommend buying the first light unit to see how your child likes it. Personally, we love it & switching to CLE was a great choice for us. Good luck in your decision.

 

Susan

[Guest]

nvm

Edited April 5, 2010 by Guest

[MrsMe]

Okay, so what if Mom can't teach Singapore-ish math. Bill's samples, other than that first sailboat exercise, confused the heck out of me.

 

Scary, that I teach math.

 

I learned by rote. I stink at math. How do you not let your kids follow in that footstep?

[Jen500]

 

I learned by rote. I stink at math. How do you not let your kids follow in that footstep?

 

Learn it conceptually along with your kids. I 'teach' my kids subjects that I don't know a lot about....I just have the approach that I am learning it along with them. I also learned a lot of elementary-level math by rote. It was boring. I have had a blast learning the concepts with Singapore!

[EKS]

Okay, so what if Mom can't teach Singapore-ish math. Bill's samples, other than that first sailboat exercise, confused the heck out of me.

 

Scary, that I teach math.

 

I learned by rote. I stink at math. How do you not let your kids follow in that footstep?

 

I was terrible at math in school. I've found that starting at a 1st grade level in Singapore, as well as doing several other programs alongside (and ahead of) my children has really helped my math skills. The other thing that had helped *a lot* is reading books about math education (particularly Asian math programs). Some interesting books on the subject are:

 

Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics

Elementary Mathematics for Teachers

The Learning Gap and The Teaching Gap

Math Wars

 

The HIGs for the Singapore series are very helpful as well. I think if you know that you learned by rote, and most of us of a certain age did, assuming that learning math by rote is not what you want for your children, it is very important to not fall into the trap of thinking familiar (a math program that focuses on procedural knowledge) equals good.

[SophiaH]

Okay, so what if Mom can't teach Singapore-ish math. Bill's samples, other than that first sailboat exercise, confused the heck out of me.

 

Scary, that I teach math.

 

I learned by rote. I stink at math. How do you not let your kids follow in that footstep?

 

RightStart was very helpful to me because it's scripted so mom can't mess it up! We started out with Singapore, and *I* felt totally lost, even with the HIG. RS gave me the confidence to teach math the way I had never been taught, and gave me the confidence to branch out into other less-scripted programs like Singapore and MEP after using RS through levels B & C.

 

On a semi-related side note...The way I am (hopefully) developing conceptual thinking about math in my dd is to dabble in a few programs. Whether or not a child's main program is CLE or Singapore, if they can't translate algorithms to use in problems in other programs or to real-world problems, then even if they understand "why" they do it that way in their main program, they're not really understanding the big picture "why."

 

(And doesn't classical education theorize that the big picture "why"--logical thinking and making connections--really comes to fruition in the logic stage anyway? Wouldn't that apply to mathematical logic thinking as well? Or are they two different things? An honest question, really...just pondering...but now I'm really off-topic. ;))

Edited April 5, 2010 by mommahawk

[MrsMe]

RightStart was very helpful to me because it's scripted so mom can't mess it up! We started out with Singapore, and *I* felt totally lost, even with the HIG. RS gave me the confidence to teach math the way I had never been taught, and gave me the confidence to branch out into other less-scripted programs like Singapore and MEP after using RS through levels B & C.

 

On a semi-related side note...The way I am (hopefully) developing conceptual thinking about math in my dd is to dabble in a few programs. Whether or not a child's main program is CLE or Singapore, if they can't translate algorithms to use in problems in other programs or to real-world problems, then even if they understand "why" they do it that way in their main program, they're not really understanding the big picture "why."

 

(And doesn't classical education theorize that the big picture "why"--logical thinking and making connections--really comes to fruition in the logic stage anyway? Wouldn't that apply to mathematical logic thinking as well? Or are they two different things? An honest question, really...just pondering...but now I'm really off-topic. ;))

 

Funny, we did RS math. It made dd math phobic and I didn't get it at all. I didn't understand where it was going whatsoever. I found our short try with Singapore was more my speed, but for me I need a scripted TM for Singapore which is why I dropped it. :001_huh: I guess I can't get past what I grew up with. :tongue_smilie:And I hate when that happens.

 

But I have the same question. Logic stage doesn't really come until 4-6th grades and RS used logic (K), which I feel why it was so frustrating for dd. She hadn't developed that stage yet and here we were trying to teach it.

[Corraleno]

Okay, so what if Mom can't teach Singapore-ish math. Bill's samples, other than that first sailboat exercise, confused the heck out of me.

I learned by rote. I stink at math. How do you not let your kids follow in that footstep?

Try Math Mammoth. It teaches conceptually, and even uses the "bar diagram" method of solving word problems like Singapore does, but the explanations are much clearer and presented in smaller steps. Singapore was written for classroom teachers who are already trained in teaching math; Math Mammoth was specifically written for homeschoolers, and it teaches "Asian math" in a way that does not presume the teacher (parent) has any background in this area. Math Mammoth also has more practice & review, and includes more work with math facts and number bonds, than Singapore.

 

Jackie

[Mommyfaithe]

It seems very sad to me to reach the conclusion that a child is incapable of understanding mathematical reasoning and is only capable of doing "procedural" mathematics. That may be the case with some children. I don't know. In the case of this girl perhaps that's the case.

 

Still, why "write-off" a child before they have a chance? Using something like CLE from the outset removes any chance they will have a deep math education, one that explores the "whys" of math (which really is the point) rather than just treating math as a series of math facts and procedures to be plugged in and/or memorized.

 

Bill

 

Bill, I have been homeschooling for 15 years and I have seen my share of Math Programs including Singapore AND CLE. Since I have used both programs and a few others too, I feel qualified to say, you are not correct in your assessment of CLE.

 

I use CLE and you know what, I think it has definitely helped me to increase my children's understanding of math in all areas including reasoning, logical progression and critical thinking. CLE takes the stance that children are intelligent and can work out mathematical problems, but they also need to have a teacher to teach them. I don't just throw a workbook at my kids and let them have at it. We talk...and do...and manipulate...and talk some more. And while the workbook may say 7+5= 12...what you are not seeing is me the teacher saying, " Show me 7 & 5. now show me your rods and show me another way to make 12." What happens when I take this rod away?" Can I deconstruct that 10?" "How many 5's do I need in that 12?" "What are the twin facts." "Show me this in coins. How many ways can you make 12 cents?" "Draw me a picture which shows 7+5= 12." Some children organically understand the why's and look at you like you think they are a moron for asking.....and others find it amazing that numbers can do what they do. Some days we do the entire workbook lesson , some days we do just the new lesson and I expand on my own. Some days we review on our own. Math programs are a tool to introduce new concepts, but the actual learning to think, apply, crtique, prove etc. comes in the day to day discussion and application of concepts learned.

 

CLE is a solid math program, which like every other math program out there , needs a solid math teacher. To look at a few samples and make a blanket statemnt is ridiculous. I had that same feeling with Singapore. I thought the pictures were stupid. I thought the layout was awful...I really did not see what the big deal was....Then I used it with one ds for an entire year. I found it difficult to teach...I found their explanations confusing. Their methods were quirky and unfamiliar to me at the time. I did not see a greater understanding of math come out of the year we used Singapore. As a matter of fact, I came out the other end feeling stupid and unable to teach math...and this was only 5th grade! My ds thought he was dumb too. So , you know what? I ditched Singapore, read up on teaching mathematics in the elementary grades and stopped depending on the "program" and started teaching the child. This son did end up using Saxon and Larsons for High School and is now an engineering student and I have my confidence back as an ok math teacher (Although I definitely prefer to teach literature and history!)

 

I am happy Singapore works for you child Bill...but remember, you are just starting out. What I thought I REALLY knew when I was just the parent of small children has drastically changed over the years. Experience has shown me that we should never get too confident in our curricula decisions, as there is always that child there to prove you didn't choose as well as you thought you did. It is the nature of the homeschooler. LOL

 

Peace,

Faithe

[8filltheheart]

What I thought I REALLY knew when I was just the parent of small children has drastically changed over the years. Experience has shown me that we should never get too confident in our curricula decisions, as there is always that child there to prove you didn't choose as well as you thought you did. It is the nature of the homeschooler. LOL

 

Peace,

Faithe

 

:lol: and :tongue_smilie: and :iagree:

 

Homeschooling is ever the humbling experience! I now have an 8th grader that has to explain things to me. :eek: Now how did that happen??!!

[Spy Car]

Bill, I have been homeschooling for 15 years and I have seen my share of Math Programs including Singapore AND CLE. Since I have used both programs and a few others too, I feel qualified to say, you are not correct in your assessment of CLE.

 

I use CLE and you know what, I think it has definitely helped me to increase my children's understanding of math in all areas including reasoning, logical progression and critical thinking. CLE takes the stance that children are intelligent and can work out mathematical problems, but they also need to have a teacher to teach them. I don't just throw a workbook at my kids and let them have at it. We talk...and do...and manipulate...and talk some more. And while the workbook may say 7+5= 12...what you are not seeing is me the teacher saying, " Show me 7 & 5. now show me your rods and show me another way to make 12." What happens when I take this rod away?" Can I deconstruct that 10?" "How many 5's do I need in that 12?" "What are the twin facts." "Show me this in coins. How many ways can you make 12 cents?" "Draw me a picture which shows 7+5= 12." Some children organically understand the why's and look at you like you think they are a moron for asking.....and others find it amazing that numbers can do what they do. Some days we do the entire workbook lesson , some days we do just the new lesson and I expand on my own. Some days we review on our own. Math programs are a tool to introduce new concepts, but the actual learning to think, apply, crtique, prove etc. comes in the day to day discussion and application of concepts learned.

 

CLE is a solid math program, which like every other math program out there , needs a solid math teacher. To look at a few samples and make a blanket statemnt is ridiculous. I had that same feeling with Singapore. I thought the pictures were stupid. I thought the layout was awful...I really did not see what the big deal was....Then I used it with one ds for an entire year. I found it difficult to teach...I found their explanations confusing. Their methods were quirky and unfamiliar to me at the time. I did not see a greater understanding of math come out of the year we used Singapore. As a matter of fact, I came out the other end feeling stupid and unable to teach math...and this was only 5th grade! My ds thought he was dumb too. So , you know what? I ditched Singapore, read up on teaching mathematics in the elementary grades and stopped depending on the "program" and started teaching the child. This son did end up using Saxon and Larsons for High School and is now an engineering student and I have my confidence back as an ok math teacher (Although I definitely prefer to teach literature and history!)

 

I am happy Singapore works for you child Bill...but remember, you are just starting out. What I thought I REALLY knew when I was just the parent of small children has drastically changed over the years. Experience has shown me that we should never get too confident in our curricula decisions, as there is always that child there to prove you didn't choose as well as you thought you did. It is the nature of the homeschooler. LOL

 

Peace,

Faithe

 

No argument that it takes a committed math teacher to bring a program alive. I've seen nothing in the CLE samples (and it is not a few pages, as I keep mentioning, the samples are extensive) that suggest activities of the type you mention. No "de-constructing numbers." Nothing of the kind.

 

If you bring this sort of approach to CLE that's great. With the right parent/teacher involvement one could use math materials from the dollar store and have it work out.

 

The CLE Teachers materials show a lot of procedural math. Suggestions for memorizing math facts. Flash card suggestions and the like. I'm not seeing anything beyond that.

 

Not to mention the most common arguement I read in favor of CLE on these boards (beyond the low cost) is that it can be done "independently." Which seems like just the kind of hand the children the workbook and

let them figure it out approach that you are criticizing (and where we would agree).

 

No program is perfect. No program is going to be the perfect match for every child or every parent.

 

Learning about how to teach elementary mathematics, as you have done (and I endeavor to do) takes effort and commitment. I value the materials that have helped me be a better teacher. I just can't say I've seen much of value in the extensive samples I looked at in CLE.

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

Okay, so what if Mom can't teach Singapore-ish math. Bill's samples, other than that first sailboat exercise, confused the heck out of me.

 

Scary, that I teach math.

 

I learned by rote. I stink at math. How do you not let your kids follow in that footstep?

 

Kai (EKS) mentioned a couple books I'd certainly second.

 

One is Liping Ma's "Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics." This work contrasts the difference between procedural and more conceptually rich math education rather well, and with lots of examples of how Asian (particularly Chinese) teachers approach math and math education in contrast with "traditional" American math education. This work won't teach you how to overcome the problem, but it at least make one aware that there are alternatives. And might be both eye-opening and inspiring. Getting a copy from the library is probably sufficient.

 

She also mentioned "Elementary Mathematics for Teachers" by Parker and Baldridge (available from singaporemath.com). This is a "teacher education" course. Very valuable for understanding the approach used in Singapore Math.

 

The Standards Edition HIGs are also very well done as assists to parent-teachers.

 

The MEP materials are available free. They are outstanding! The example I gave from 3A was challenging. But it is a wonderful program. There are "Lesson plans" that make math fun an interesting for parent/teacher and student and they tie into the workbook problems (MEP calls these practice books).

 

I also loved what I learned from the Miquon teachers materials, but they are aimed more at children just starting out with math, up till maybe 3rd Grade.

 

Heather mentioned Right Start which is another highly methodical program a parent and child work through together.

 

And Jackie has certainly had many interesting post about Math Mammoth as a program that teaches math with in the same style as Singapore, with an aim of being more "home-schooler" friendly (if that's the right term?). Maybe with the aim of a more streamlined presentation would be better? I'm not intimate with MM but by reputation it seems a worthy consideration.

 

We can all take some deep-breaths. No one is perfect. We are all learning and trying to do the best for our children. Few of us (me included) grew up with the kind of math programs that I'd consider deep, inspiring, or fun. I'm doing my best to do better for my son, and have found there are interesting alternative out there these days. It takes a little more work. To me the efforts are worth the pay-off. And one need not be a mathematical genius to bring more to the table.

 

If I can be any help, I'll do my best to help :001_smile:

 

Bill

Edited April 6, 2010 by Spy Car

[Julie]

Bill, I am jumping in here a bit late, but do you use this program as a standa alone? I have been poking about on the web site, the materials look very intersting. Trying to figure out where I might jump in, my DD just finished CLE 1, and have been happy with the curricula, however, your points about critical thinking, got me thinking, CLE might not be enough or even the right choice. She is very mathy and can certainly translate what she has learned in CLE to the real world, but with a different math choice, she might go much further.

[MrsMe]

Kai (EKS) mentioned a couple books I'd certainly second.

 

One is Liping Ma's "Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics." This work contrasts the difference between procedural and more conceptually rich math education rather well, and with lots of examples of how Asian (particularly Chinese) teachers approach math and math education with "traditional" American math education. This work won't teach you how to overcome the problem, but it at least make one aware that there are alternatives. And might be both eye-opening and inspiring. Getting a copy from the library is probably sufficient.

 

She also mentioned "Elementary Mathematics for Teachers" by Parker and Baldridge (available from singaporemath.com). This is a "teacher education" course. Very valuable for understanding the approach used in Singapore Math.

 

The Standards EDition HIGs are also very well done as assists to parent-teachers.

 

The MEP materials are available free. They are outstanding! The example I gave from 3A was challenging. But it is a wonderful program. There are "Lesson plans" that make math fun an interesting for parent/teacher and student and they tie into the workbook problems (MEP calls these practice books).

 

I also loved what I learned from the Miquon teachers materials, but they are aimed more at children just starting out with math, up till maybe 3rd Grade.

 

Heather mentioned Right Start which is another highly methodical program a parent and child work through together.

 

And Jackie has certainly had many interesting post about Math Mammoth as a program that teaches math with in the same style as Singapore, with an aim of being more "home-schooler" friendly (if that's the right term?). Maybe with the aim of a more streamlined presentation would be better? I'm not intimate with MM but by reputation it seems a worthy consideration.

 

We can all take some deep-breaths. No one is perfect. We are all learning and trying to do the best for our children. Few of us (me included) grew up with the kind of math programs that I'd consider deep, inspiring, or fun. I'm doing my best to do better for my son, and have found there are interesting alternative out there these days. It takes a little more work. To me the efforts are worth the pay-off. And one need not be a mathematical genius to bring more to the table.

 

If I can be any help, I'll do my best to help :001_smile:

 

Bill

 

I was checking into these from Kai as you wrote. Thanks.

[HappyGrace]

Julie-Not Bill, but I know we've agreed a lot on math in the past! Just wanted to let you know that I do MEP with my little guy and he loves it. We do it on top of a mish-mosh of other stuff, but it doesn't take very long, and adds a lot of nice conceptual and logic-type thinking (and you can't beat FREE!)

 

My ds is about the same level as yours-just finishing Singapore 1. (He did Miquon orange and red too but we're dropping that and Singapore for next year.) I would actually say to start at the beginning of MEP 2. There will be some review and a lot will seem easy, but it will help him get into the swing of the MEP way of thinking about things with easier numbers.

 

I am doing CLE 2 (for spiral/traditional) and MM2 and MEP (end of 2, into 3) with him in the fall. And of course some RS games! :) I'm not sure but we might do bits of Singapore IP and/or CWP too. All this is NOT necessary-he just can't get enough math! I think you could do well with CLE and MM or MEP for more conceptual.

 

I don't use ALL of all these curricula, btw. I use two main ones as my "spine" and then add in as desired from the others. I look at math curricula as a tool to help me teach math effectively.

Edited April 5, 2010 by HappyGrace

[Spy Car]

Bill, I am jumping in here a bit late, but do you use this program as a standa alone? I have been poking about on the web site, the materials look very intersting. Trying to figure out where I might jump in, my DD just finished CLE 1, and have been happy with the curricula, however, your points about critical thinking, got me thinking, CLE might not be enough or even the right choice. She is very mathy and can certainly translate what she has learned in CLE to the real world, but with a different math choice, she might go much further.

 

I've been using MEP in tandem with Singapore, and then throwing in materials from too many to mention.

 

MEP is my favorite, and my son's favorite. The critical thinking challenges really are a lot of fun.

 

I'd certainly encourage you to try the materials. If I felt more "grounded" in the Singapore Model Method, I might make MEP our main program (and be able to do more of the great lesson plan activities). But I'm still learning the "Model Method", as my son is learning, and I don't want to lose the building blocks that will prepare him for the Singapore Complex Word Problems. I don't get to do all the Lesson plan activities in MEP, rather I have to pick and choose. So in that regard it is a "compromise." Where Singapore gets the "full treatment."

 

But what a treat!

 

The materials will cost you nothing but printing expenses.

 

As to "where" to start? I'd look earlier, rather than later. 1A would probably be a good start. If you ran into "procedural" problems (yes there are some) that you felt she has covered, you might skip them (or not).

 

I often add a note that MEP has their own style of inequalities, that look like:

 

73>4

 

Which means 7 is 3 greater than 4.

 

To the best of my knowledge this is a MEP specific notation, but it functions somewhat like "number-bonds" in Singapore Math. You will see it a lot in 1A.

 

Have fun!

 

Bill

Edited April 6, 2010 by Spy Car

[KrissiK]

OK, we're using A Beka and that would probably fall under the catergory of "procedural". But, that was the way I was taught, all my life. To me, math is theoretical. It's equations that I don't get and honestly, I hate math, although my husband keeps telling me I have more of a mathematical mind than I think I do. I took one teacher ed class that taught mathematical reasoning. In other words, the whys behind all the procedures. We actually "did" dividing fractions, not just on paper. I have a first grader and a kindergartner and the first grader would probably thrive in a different program, although he does well with A Beka. I just don't want to be one of those moms who jump around with curriculum, but I also don't want him to be one of those kids who think math is just a bunch of equations.

[Julie]

Bill thanks so much for jumping and and answering my questions. I have been looking over the lesson plans and practice books, they look great. I have to say I am stumped by the Copymasters. I have seen nothing like this in CLE, unless have missed something. I think my DD would like this, I am going to print off some work sheets for the morning. Thanks so much for posting this I had no idea it was out there.

 

HappyGrace, you are always full of insight, thanks so much for adding you two cents. We seem to gravitate towards similar curriculam.

[Spy Car]

Bill thanks so much for jumping and and answering my questions. I have been looking over the lesson plans and practice books, they look great. I have to say I am stumped by the Copymasters. I have seen nothing like this in CLE, unless have missed something. I think my DD would like this, I am going to print off some work sheets for the morning. Thanks so much for posting this I had no idea it was out there.

 

HappyGrace, you are always full of insight, thanks so much for adding you two cents. We seem to gravitate towards similar curriculam.

 

The "Copymasters" are just extra large copies of some pages that make teaching these pages easier and/or more interactive with the kids.

 

I'd love to hear how your daughter responds to MEP.

 

I would have really enjoyed something like MEP as a kid, instead of boring. boring. boring. :banghead:

 

Bill

[Julie]

Bill, I will post in a few days how it is going. Agreed, looks more interesting than anything I ever did. Again, thanks so much.

[mystika1]

Hi,

I wanted to jump in and say that I really enjoy the math threads here on this board. No matter how "heated" they may get I can count on alot of useful information. I wanna say that I appreciate Bill's honesty and help as I had a math issue while using CLE and reading threads like this helped me to move on to a much better choice for my daughter. She was getting all A's on LU's and tests so I thought it was the best math curriculum ever. I thought CLE was great at place value and other topics but.....I noticed if we were working with a different workbook or some oral work instead of CLE LU's she was at a loss. I was following the TM perfectly. The scriped material was very easy to follow. Very well layed out directions were very clear. I am sure that it works fine for some children because it has been around for a long time. If it would be aweful they wouldn't be here. I do think that mathy teachers or veteran homeschoolers know what they are doing and teach much better than I do so they probibly don't need a fancy curriculum to get the job done correctly. I need a curriculum that helps me teach math from all angles. I didn't get that from CLE(as much as I loved it) My new choice is much better and was an I noticed a difference right away.

 

If you are interested in CLE then Purchase a few light units and see for yourself. It is really the only way to know if it will work for your family.:001_smile:

 

Sincerely,

 

Penny

[Julie]

Penny,

 

Curious what your using now?

[Guest]

Hi,

I wanted to jump in and say that I really enjoy the math threads here on this board. No matter how "heated" they may get I can count on alot of useful information. I wanna say that I appreciate Bill's honesty ...

 

:iagree:

[jazzyfizzle]

I second that, Penny I would also love to hear what you are using now.

[jazzyfizzle]

LOL Well, I had a paragraph and poof it is gone to cyberspace! If I hadn't had just a bit of :cheers2: I would try to retype. :D

[mystika1]

My new choice is much better and was an I noticed a difference right away.

 

Wow, I messed that up. It was supposed to say My new choice is a much better fit and I noticed a difference right away.:D

 

I am now using Math Mammoth. I really like it. It has made a very big difference in her understanding of math. Like all math curriculum....Some people love it and some don't. It has been said here on this board that it is very close to singapore math but a bit simpler to use. I have never tried singapore math so I can't say with certainty that that is the case. Here is one older thread that compares the two.

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=152741

I would have liked to try Singapore math back then but MM is a very cost effective choice(I downloaded the material and printed it out on a laser printer for cheap and I can reuse it so.....)I don't regret my choice. My daughter and I are very happy with it.

 

I believe I have read several post where users of CLE Math use MEP as a supplement with great success. I think that would work great as MEP is free and CLE is cheap. I only had a couple of LU's left to complete so I shelved them for MM. I prefer to use one math program as it is a simple doable solution for me.

 

I hope you find a solution as I know how hard it is to find the right fit. I have used MUS, RS, CLE, workbooks from walmart and it is a pain in the rear(and the wallet). Kinda like pulling teeth.:)

 

Sincerely,

 

Penny

[lovemyboys]

I am happy Singapore works for you child Bill...but remember, you are just starting out. What I thought I REALLY knew when I was just the parent of small children has drastically changed over the years. Experience has shown me that we should never get too confident in our curricula decisions, as there is always that child there to prove you didn't choose as well as you thought you did. It is the nature of the homeschooler. LOL

 

Peace,

Faithe

 

Wow, Faithe, thanks for sharing all your experience. You've given me good food for thought here.

 

I'm just posting to say that :iagree: with you on this last para. too. If not that child then the second or third one who will be completely different, just because.

 

Parenting and homeschooling are humbling experiences. :001_smile:

[stripe]

Some interesting books on the subject are:

 

Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics

Elementary Mathematics for Teachers

The Learning Gap and The Teaching Gap

Math Wars

 

 

Have you read Marilyn Burns' "About Teaching Mathematics: A K-8 Resource" ?

[Heather in VA]

I am happy Singapore works for you child Bill...but remember, you are just starting out. What I thought I REALLY knew when I was just the parent of small children has drastically changed over the years. Experience has shown me that we should never get too confident in our curricula decisions, as there is always that child there to prove you didn't choose as well as you thought you did. It is the nature of the homeschooler. LOL

 

Peace,

Faithe

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

 

My youngest is the perfect example of this - both in school and in life. Just when I thought I knew what to do... God gave me Claire :-)

 

Heather