Is there a stand alone math program?

[lisamarie]

I am getting a little overwhelmed by all these threads about using one math program, but supplementing with another. Is there even 1 stand alone math program on the market that I can buy and just use that without adding in something else that won't lead to gaps in my kids' educations? I don't have the $$$ to buy 2 programs--1 program is expensive enough. I want 1 program that works that doesn't need supplementation. Does such a thing exist? :confused:

[OnTheBrink]

I think MOST math programs are stand-alone. I think supplementing comes in to give the student extra practice. JMO, of course.

 

I think switching math programs every year can cause some gaps, but I think most any math program you find is fine on its own.

[Orthodox6]

I always have used one program at a time, and have supplemented as needed with free materials from the Internet.

[rdolphingirl]

For what its worth ...

I use only CLE with my oldest ds.

If I feel he needs extra help on something I will find a worksheet online, or just sit down and explain it to him myself.

 

I get the feeling (IMO of course) that most the people who are supplementing are worried about teaching the how and the why even at the beginning ages. Frankly I am not. As long as my ds can DO it I am happy with it.

 

HTH,

[siloam]

I am getting a little overwhelmed by all these threads about using one math program, but supplementing with another. Is there even 1 stand alone math program on the market that I can buy and just use that without adding in something else that won't lead to gaps in my kids' educations? I don't have the $$$ to buy 2 programs--1 program is expensive enough. I want 1 program that works that doesn't need supplementation. Does such a thing exist? :confused:

 

Lisa,

 

Most programs are stand alone. Just because we supplement doesn't mean there is a need to. I my case, we are math centered by choice. DH and I are both nerds and in math fields and want the kids to really have this down. Other subjects are treated lightly because of it.

 

Both programs I use can stand alone. I use RS for the hands on element my kids need. It is easier for me to use RS than to add that element to Singapore. I still use Singapore because I love the critical thinking element and I plan to use their higher level math programs. It works for us for our goals and needs, but I could make just one work.

 

Make sense? I think you will find the majority of people don't supplement because of holes in programs, but because of having a specific goal in mind, that one program doesn't totally meet, so they use part of another.

 

Heather

[8filltheheart]

I only use one math program. I think the key is to teach the material to the child and have conversations with them about what they are doing to make sure they understand.

 

FWIW.....I can't imagine using multiple programs b/c I don't have the time.

[plain jane]

Lisa,

 

Most programs are stand alone. Just because we supplement doesn't mean there is a need to. I my case, we are math centered by choice. DH and I are both nerds and in math fields and want the kids to really have this down. Other subjects are treated lightly because of it.

 

Both programs I use can stand alone. I use RS for the hands on element my kids need. It is easier for me to use RS than to add that element to Singapore. I still use Singapore because I love the critical thinking element and I plan to use their higher level math programs. It works for us for our goals and needs, but I could make just one work.

 

Make sense? I think you will find the majority of people don't supplement because of holes in programs, but because of having a specific goal in mind, that one program doesn't totally meet, so they use part of another.

 

Heather

 

:iagree::iagree: I totally agree. And sometimes, it just comes down to plain old indecision. :001_huh: When I couldn't decide between 2 programs that were very different yet both very appealing to me, I decided to simply combine them. In the beginning there really wasn't a much bigger reason than that. :o After 3 years I still use both and have finally found a few deeper reasons ;) although it's not because either program is inadequate on its own.

[happyhappyjoyjoy]

:iagree::iagree: I totally agree. And sometimes, it just comes down to plain old indecision. :001_huh: When I couldn't decide between 2 programs that were very different yet both very appealing to me, I decided to simply combine them. In the beginning there really wasn't a much bigger reason than that. :o After 3 years I still use both and have finally found a few deeper reasons ;) although it's not because either program is inadequate on its own.

i think i will say this in 3 yrs:)

[K&Rs Mom]

I always have used one program at a time, and have supplemented as needed with free materials from the Internet.

 

Same here. It's tempting, reading about everyone else's favorites, to try them all. Luckily the first one we tried was a success, and cheap, so I'm sticking with it! (Miquon, if you're curious)

[robsiew]

I am just starting to supplement MUS, but not because I see any problems/holes with it. My kids are doing very well with it. My main reason is to make sure they are learning the concepts and not just able to work the problems one way. I think Mr. Demme does a good job of teaching the concepts so I'm not looking for another program to teach. I just bought MM to throw at them once in a while and my oldest just started fractions so I HAD to try LOF with him! Gives him a little different perspective....

[SilverMoon]

I always have used one program at a time, and have supplemented as needed with free materials from the Internet.

 

 

This is what we've done. :001_smile: All four of my students will go into Rod and Staff this fall. I wish we'd found it sooner.

 

Somewhere along the road Life of Fred did wiggle into our home, but it's not a stand alone program at the levels we're using.

[Shelly in the Country]

I only supplement math because the kids enjoy it, and math is a priority in our house since both dh and I really like math. My kids like doing one than one math program. If this were not the case, I would probably change course a bit. I actually told my dd this morning she could skip her LoF assignment today if she wanted to because she has a test in another subject today AND math today was CWP from Singapore (I didn't want her burned out.). She looked at me crestfallen. I said, "You don't have to skip LoF if you don't want to...". She breathed a sigh of relief and told me, "Besides, Mom, it was just word problems. They don't take that long." Some of us use more than one program just to keep everybody happy.

[Ellie]

Oh, yes: Rod and Staff, BJUP, ABeka, Singapore, MCP, Making Math Meaningful, Miquon, MUS, Saxon...all of these were intended to be the only math instruction children received.

 

It would not occur to me to supplement any of these.

 

:001_huh:

[alpidarkomama]

We've happily used only Singapore Math. We do the workbook, followed by the intensive practice book for some quick review (usually most of the first half) and some harder problems (usually the second half). Haven't needed anything else.

[Karen in CO]

I am getting a little overwhelmed by all these threads about using one math program, but supplementing with another. Is there even 1 stand alone math program on the market that I can buy and just use that without adding in something else that won't lead to gaps in my kids' educations? I don't have the $$$ to buy 2 programs--1 program is expensive enough. I want 1 program that works that doesn't need supplementation. Does such a thing exist? :confused:

 

I think the problem is that A math program will not teach our kids - we have to do the teaching. If anyone expects to buy a math program, assigning the problems in it and do no math outside of that program for 13 years and have a kid that excels at math - she is sadly mistaken. Even the best math program in the world still required interaction between a teach who knows the math (and and knows it well enough to see what the student is not understanding and find a different explanation) and a student and the material.

 

I use multiple math programs because my ability to teach math is weaker than I would like. The multiple programs give my different ways to approach the same type of problem. My brother is a terrific math teacher - I watched him over Christmas prepare some of his lessons for when he went back to school. He sat down and created an Algebra and a Geometry test - then took the tests and checked the various types of solutions against his notes for what he had recently taught to make sure that the problems covered the right material. There is no way I could sit down and come up with 10 -15 Algebra II problems plus challenging word problems that covered a set of material - forget AlgII - I'm not sure I could do it for anything more than the third grade math I am beating my head against right now, and I have already graduated one homeschooler.

 

So I repeat my first assertion - it doesn't matter what math program(s) your buy - you still need to be the teacher.

[Jen+4dc]

I am just starting to supplement MUS, but not because I see any problems/holes with it. My kids are doing very well with it. My main reason is to make sure they are learning the concepts and not just able to work the problems one way. I think Mr. Demme does a good job of teaching the concepts so I'm not looking for another program to teach. I just bought MM to throw at them once in a while and my oldest just started fractions so I HAD to try LOF with him! Gives him a little different perspective....

 

:iagree::iagree: (emphasis mine)

 

 

I think this is why most people supplement.

[Karen in CO]

I only use one math program. I think the key is to teach the material to the child and have conversations with them about what they are doing to make sure they understand.

 

FWIW.....I can't imagine using multiple programs b/c I don't have the time.

:iagree:

You need more students, don't you? :) I've got a third grader you could borrow at least until she understand lowest common denominators. :D

Edited April 10, 2010 by Karen in CO

[WiseOwlKnits]

We supplement, but not because we need to. Horizons is our main program and it would be just fine to use without supplementation I'd think. We started supplementing because DD asked to. She's VERY math-oriented and she kept begging for more math to do. I picked Singapore because I've heard good things about it and that it works well with Horizons. And I like that DD is learning different ways of thinking about the same thing. The more she sees it, thinks about it, does it...the more ingrained it will be in her brain. We do MEP as well because it's very logic-based and she thinks it's fun.

[Paula in PA]

We supplement, but not with another whole math curriculum. She does E-M Daily Word Problems, Challenge Math, and Key-To workbooks on Friday, mostly as a way for her to use what she's learned in RightStart in a different setting. It lets me see if she can apply those concepts elsewhere.

[Corraleno]

I use Math Mammoth as a stand-alone program for 1st-4th grade, then add in Life of Fred for fun with MM5 & 6. It's very complete, and combines a strong conceptual foundation with lots of practice problems, including really good, meaty multi-step word problems. It also comes with software you can use to generate extra practice sheets if you need them, so you really don't need anything else. And it's inexpensive and reusable with multiple kids, to boot!

 

Jackie

[Medieval Mom]

We use CLE, which I consider a complete program. We supplement with MEP because my son loves math (and considers MEP his "logic" program). Since MEP is free for the printing, it still fits into our budget. It is SO different from CLE at this level (1), that we don't consider it redundant. We also have fun reading out of and discussing problems in Ray's Arithmetic, but we're geeky like that ;) On any given day, if we don't have the time, we just do CLE.

 

Another way to "supplement" math without the expense or commitment to another program is to borrow "living math" books from the library. There's an awesome site with numerous recommendations here. Don't forget games and such on the weekends, too! :D Math is everywhere, from the kitchen to the grandparents discussing mortgages. If you're aware to the possibilities of casually exploring math every day, you'll really never NEED another program. ;)

Hooray for math! :D

[lotsofpumpkins]

We use CLE too. I was trying to combine R&S and Singapore (and some MEP) before that, and it was just too much. I am very happy just doing CLE for now. It seems to combine all of the things I liked about the other programs we have tried. We may or may not add some of Singapore's CWP later on if they need some more challenging problems, but right now I'm content with just CLE.

[Kuovonne]

:iagree::iagree: I totally agree. And sometimes, it just comes down to plain old indecision. :001_huh: When I couldn't decide between 2 programs that were very different yet both very appealing to me, I decided to simply combine them. In the beginning there really wasn't a much bigger reason than that. :o After 3 years I still use both and have finally found a few deeper reasons ;) although it's not because either program is inadequate on its own.

 

Same here. I really liked my first math program. Then I fell in love with my second math program as well. The two programs are really different. Either program would be fine by itself, but I like both of them too much to give up either.

[EKS]

I use Singapore (Standards edition) with my 8yo and don't supplement (unless you count CWP as supplementation).

 

ETA: I just realized that what I wrote here isn't entirely true. I will use MUS (because it's on the shelf and usually has a unique way of approaching things) if my son isn't getting something with Singapore. This happens so rarely that I forgot about it the first time around.

Edited April 10, 2010 by EKS

[Orthodox6]

I also supplement because (until I discover where it has been hiding) no math program solidly covers everything. One may be good on concept, another strong on techniques, another is weak on word problems, etc. Primarily, though, I supplement because often an explanation in the text does not "work" for the student's comprehension, and I need alternative way(s) of presenting the material.

[6packofun]

I agree. Supplementation more often than not, in my experience, is about meeting the individual needs of the child rather than completing an incomplete program.

 

However, that said, we use Singapore's Primary Math up until 6th grade and we *must* drill math facts because that is not written into the program and is assumed you will be doing that anyhow. :) Sometimes extra practice is required for a certain child, sometimes not.

[mom4him]

I use CLE math and we have loved it. I don't use anything else. I was using MCP Math, was seeing that they just were not getting some things, changed to CLE and it has been wonderful. I would encourage you to take a good look at it.

[RENEEinVA]

We used Singapore in the earlier grades and then switched to Chalkdust. Both programs have worked well for my kids. We did use Saxon 8/7 for one year before starting my younger dd in Chalkdust Alg. I. That really helped solidify her math skills.:)

[lotsofpumpkins]

I agree. Supplementation more often than not, in my experience, is about meeting the individual needs of the child rather than completing an incomplete program.

 

However, that said, we use Singapore's Primary Math up until 6th grade and we *must* drill math facts because that is not written into the program and is assumed you will be doing that anyhow. :) Sometimes extra practice is required for a certain child, sometimes not.

 

:iagree: Last summer we used just Singapore for about 2 months. Then one day I noticed that dd was getting REALLY slow with remembering very basic addition facts. I pulled out a speed drill from R&S math and she only got 7 answers in one minute. These were problems like 7+2, 4+5, etc. That's when I realized that this child NEEDED to have her math facts drilled daily. So, we added back in R&S. Then eventually we switched to just CLE, and we are super happy with it. My 6yo is the type who does not need the constant drill of facts as much, but he LOVES speed drills, so he's very happy with CLE, since there's a speed drill every single day!

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

We've used only Saxon for math and don't "supplement" it exactly. I have at times used other workbooks (the sort available in Parent/Teacher stores) for extra facts drills and I have a couple Singapore Math story problem books. I wouldn't say I use books like this for extra teaching-they are really more for extra practice in areas I feel the kids need more work.

[Marla]

When I used RightStart, I did not supplement. This year we used CLE without supplementation and all is well. :)

[MissKNG]

Threads like this just show the beauty of home schooling! Everyone has their own individual way to meet the needs of their kiddos!

 

Right now, we are using Horizons. In a few months, we will begin Singapore 1A as our spine and use Horizons as the supplement. Two main reasons: I like giving her different ways to approach stuff mathematically and I'm noticing that my big girl tears through math programs so I want to make sure she has "enough".

 

I also have Challenging Word Problems and Primary Challenge Math to use later on as well.

[mcconnellboys]

Singapore doesn't need to be supplemented.

 

Saxon doesn't need to be supplemented.

 

I think most programs are meant to be complete. The reason I've added extra things in past (and the reason many folks add in) is to provide extra drill work or extra work in areas that a particular program might not cover as thoroughly as we'd like. You could do that by making up your own worksheets, or by finding extra worksheets online, etc. - it's just easier to buy a book that already has it....

[FO4UR]

I agree that most math programs are stand alone.

 

I fully admit that my multiple math programs are unnecessary and even too much at times.

 

I relate the the poster that said that the reason for mutliple currics is b/c of my own lack in ability to teach/explain math multiple ways "off the cuff," although I'm getting much better at that.

 

I also relate to the poster who said it's just too hard to decide and resist the urge to try a program that so many people rave on about.

 

Plus, although my ds catches on quickly to math concepts, he gets BORED with the same format! So, going from Miquon to Singapore....spending a whole week just playing RS games and doing a few MEP "toughies"....and back again keeps things fresh *for him*. This routine with other dc (like my dd in a couple years) would be a disaster! (and my ds is only 7...I don't worry too much about leaving gaps at this point...I worry more about trying to cover too many concepts and not nailing down the basics.)

 

I vote for choosing one and sticking with it until that isn't working. Then worry about supplementing. (Yep, I'm giving advice I don't take myself!:tongue_smilie::lol:)

[selh09]

We are using Saxon and are not supplementing. I do add math games because dd loves games. I've considered supplementing, but have realized that it's just too much, at least for now. We school 3 to 4 days a week and between phonics, spelling, reading, Bible, math, science, handwriting, outdoor time, etc. there is just not enough time to throw in another thing for us to do, so for now we are good. :D

 

HTH!

[MaureenNJ]

I'm using ALEKS for my second year now. I thought at first that there were major gaps, but as I've learned to work the program I've found what I've needed to meet the needs for review, drill, etc. We're NOT mathy and I so appreciate no longer being the bearer of bad news that my son has to do over all the long division problems he got wrong (after he just spent over an hour doing them). This now works for us.:001_smile:

[Spy Car]

I agree that most math programs are stand alone.

 

I fully admit that my multiple math programs are unnecessary and even too much at times.

 

I relate the the poster that said that the reason for mutliple currics is b/c of my own lack in ability to teach/explain math multiple ways "off the cuff," although I'm getting much better at that.

 

I also relate to the poster who said it's just too hard to decide and resist the urge to try a program that so many people rave on about.

 

Plus, although my ds catches on quickly to math concepts, he gets BORED with the same format! So, going from Miquon to Singapore....spending a whole week just playing RS games and doing a few MEP "toughies"....and back again keeps things fresh *for him*. This routine with other dc (like my dd in a couple years) would be a disaster! (and my ds is only 7...I don't worry too much about leaving gaps at this point...I worry more about trying to cover too many concepts and not nailing down the basics.)

 

I vote for choosing one and sticking with it until that isn't working. Then worry about supplementing. (Yep, I'm giving advice I don't take myself!:tongue_smilie::lol:)

 

OK Replicant, what have you done with my Paula?! :lol:

 

Bill :001_tt2:

[Guest rubilynne4]

Lisa,

 

Most programs are stand alone. Just because we supplement doesn't mean there is a need to. I my case, we are math centered by choice. DH and I are both nerds and in math fields and want the kids to really have this down. Other subjects are treated lightly because of it.

 

Both programs I use can stand alone. I use RS for the hands on element my kids need. It is easier for me to use RS than to add that element to Singapore. I still use Singapore because I love the critical thinking element and I plan to use their higher level math programs. It works for us for our goals and needs, but I could make just one work.

 

Make sense? I think you will find the majority of people don't supplement because of holes in programs, but because of having a specific goal in mind, that one program doesn't totally meet, so they use part of another.

 

Heather

being a math nerd, what do you think about saxon? thanks

[siloam]

being a math nerd, what do you think about saxon? thanks

 

It isn't my favorite, because the focus is on memorizing and applying formulas instead of on why math works the way it does and how to use it.

 

That said I am pretty sure I learned via Saxon (or similar program), and as an adult filled in the why, so it is not my ideal but can still work.

 

Heather

[Guest RecumbentHeart]

I have friends that are loyal Saxon only users and one that uses A Beka alone. We're just starting out so I want to try various things that interest me and each one was very inexpensive (free for printing or bought used or gifted) and besides .. MEP Reception Yr is intended to only be a 2 day a week program which is the pace I'm using it at to stretch it through to the end of our year so that gives us 3 days a week to do something else. It's nowhere near as intense or time consuming as it looks when one reads 3 different math programs for a Ker. :tongue_smilie: I would like to settle down with just one curriculum eventually. I'll probably end up trying out Math Mammoth when we reach first grade but only using their free samples so no real investment involved there either. :)

[blessedmom3]

CLE is perfect for us . I still add Singapore because my son enjoys it . But CLE is a complete math program.

[corbie]

I like the teaching of a master program (MUS, Math Mammoth) but my kids need the review of a spiral (Horizons, etc...) Also, some programs don't have enough word problems or enough review. It's tough. Math is a biggie for me. I never thought I'd jump around. I loved MUS, but when my oldest forgot how to divide after two months of Epsilon (fractions), I had to make a change. My younger dd hated MUS, started her with Horizons. Horizons is fine but not much instruction. I love Math Mammoth for the mental math and self instruction. I also like Life of Fred. Not trying to make it worse, but I also supplement with Real World Math Problems. I want to make sure they know how to work the problem from the real world, not just a formula they learned. My dd has learned how to do certain math problems but when faced with a situation in real life that used that math, she was clueless. That's why I use different programs. I want her to see math from all angles.:001_smile:Tough, but i feel worth it.

[mom4him]

I am getting a little overwhelmed by all these threads about using one math program, but supplementing with another. Is there even 1 stand alone math program on the market that I can buy and just use that without adding in something else that won't lead to gaps in my kids' educations? I don't have the $$$ to buy 2 programs--1 program is expensive enough. I want 1 program that works that doesn't need supplementation. Does such a thing exist? :confused:

I have been using CLE Math by itself and love it.

I have never used more than one math program at one time. It may take a bit to find what fits for you and your dc but I personally don't think you need to use more than one if it is good. Just my opinion though.

[Mom0012]

I haven't read all the replies. I think CLE Math is a stand-alone program. My son uses R&S, which I love, but I do like to supplement with some additional things. My daughter uses, CLE, and while I just assumed I would supplement with her eventually as well, I am starting to think maybe I won't. We will see how I feel after she completes CLE 3 this summer.

 

When I think about it, this may actually be more of a difference though between children rather than math programs though. My daughter is naturally very good at problem solving and picks things up very easily whereas my son needs a little more hand holding.

 

Lisa

[Soror]

I plan on just using RS math but who knows. He also loves playing various math games so I am highly tempted now by the Muggins Math. I hope he loves Math as much as I do!

[Guest rubilynne4]

It isn't my favorite, because the focus is on memorizing and applying formulas instead of on why math works the way it does and how to use it.

 

That said I am pretty sure I learned via Saxon (or similar program), and as an adult filled in the why, so it is not my ideal but can still work.

 

Heather

i hear this alot about saxon, but i'm not sure i follow you. i know there is alot of memorizing, but i think that memorizing is one necessary part of math, especially in the beginning. also, since i started using saxon, i understand more about math than i ever did in school (of course i attended many public schools, military brat). of course i understand more about everything now that i'm teaching it. :D could you give an example of how saxon doesn't show the why? thanks.

Edited June 30, 2010 by rubilynne4

[catz]

i hear this alot about saxon, but i'm not sure i follow you. i know there is alot of memorizing, but i think that memorizing is one necessary part of math, especially in the beginning. also, since i started using saxon, i understand more about math than i ever did in school (of course i attended many public schools, military brat). of course i understand more about everything now that i'm teaching it. :D could you give an example of how saxon doesn't show the why? thanks.

 

I haven't looked closely as saxon, but for some VS kids, memorizing is very difficult without knowing the why. I grew up in a very rote, memorization based elementary math curriculum. It was horrible for me. I hated math. Once I hit algebra, math made sense, I immediately knew everything I needed to memorize although I probably still would win any speed races. And I went on to get a BS in Math and computer science. I think if that approach is working for you and your kids are learning and generally enjoying math, then that's great! I just don't think that approach will work with every child well. Some kids really do need the why early on, and then they can move very rapidly. My 9 year old is at pre-algebra/early algebra level but I still have him work on multiplication tables seperate of conceptual math. He knows them now, but isn't wildly fast at them.

 

All that said, we use 95% Singapore as a complete curriculum! We've taken a few side trips between levels and use the CWP or IP on occasion, but I think of Singapore as a very complete and rigorous curriculum.

[siloam]

i hear this alot about saxon, but i'm not sure i follow you. i know there is alot of memorizing, but i think that memorizing is one necessary part of math, expecially in the beginning. also, since i started using saxon, i understand more about math than i ever did in school (of course i attended many public schools, military brat). of course i understand more about everything now that i'm teaching it. :D could you give an example of how saxon doesn't show the why? thanks.

 

 

It is hard to see the difference.

 

With base 10 math there is no need to memorize any math facts beyond 1-10. You just convert any other problem into a base 10.

 

13-7 This you would memorize in Saxon, in Singapore or Right Start you change it:

 

3+10-7

3+3=6

 

This is very slow at first if you didn't learn that way, but once you get it, it is a much faster way to do math and makes it much easier to do it mentally.

 

Same with addition, all my kids do double digit addition mental addition easily.

 

85+35= Saxon would have you add and carry

 

RS is particularly strong on this and teaches the child to add the tens first:

 

85+30 (hold 5 ones in your mind)=115+5=120

 

With multiplication and division there is less of a difference, other than the programs activity allow the child to change problems if needed in order to get the answer. So in Saxon a child needs to memorize 9x9, but in base 10 system it is perfectly acceptable to thing 9x5=45 and 9x4=36, so 45+36=75+6=75+5+1=81

 

Because I am dyslexic, I have a hard time remembering my math facts. I can remember as a child having columns down the sides of my papers where I would start with what a number was x5 (because I didn't forget them), then instead of multiplying I would add: 45+9=54+9=63+9=72+9=81. I used addition because I couldn't remember the answer, but I prefer the freedom the other programs give one to change problems, because now I still use addition, but in a much easier way instead of having columns going down the side if my paper. Can you tell that I am very concrete? It never occurred to me as a child to simply do (9x5)+(9x4), I was told to go to 9 and to 9 I would go (the hard way).

 

Once you get into Algebra and higher it shows up in how the material in introduced. The programs I prefer are ones that show you why the formula works. Saxon tends to just give you the formula and show you how to work it, but not why it works. The problem with that is that unless you come across a neat clean real life problem that just fits the formula you won't recognize when to use it in real life. If you understand why, and do work in applying it to new situations, then you can better use it in the messiness that is real life. For example the reason why Singapore's New Elementary Math (NEM) is considered so tough is because it introduces a concept, explaining why, gives you the formula, gives you a couple of clean practice problems and then introduces a totally different situation that you have to apply the principles and formula to.

 

Philosophy aside, not all kids can do NEM, as much as I would like it to be different. Ok maybe they could given the time needed, but our system, even for hsers doesn't really allow that.

 

I do love math but more than loving math I love numbers. I did well in math because I didn't care about why, but would accept the formulas and use them. I just liked writing out all the numbers and being good at something (I went into accounting as a field, if that tells you anything).

 

My dh on the other hand did horrible at math, not because he just couldn't do the work till he understood why. Saxon didn't give him why, so he had to figure it out on his own. To this day he has a hard time passing a college level math class because they don't explain why enough and by the time he figures it out the class is two steps beyond it. Despite that he is a programmer and does math daily in multiple systems: binary, hexadecimal, base 10, ect... Math really isn't a problem for him, how we teach it is.

 

My kids are somewhere between us. The girls don't love math, and Singapore was just too much for them on its own. Right Start doesn't make the logical leaps Singapore does, and is more concrete. They enjoy RS and then after doing RS can do Singapore fairly well. They still don't like the hard problem solving work. With upper level math I will follow a similar path, but will lead with a more Saxon like program. Then follow it up with the why in Singapore, yet not NEM. I am going to use their Discovering Math series, which has less logical leaps than NEM and more of the practice problems before introducing the tough problems, with fewer tough problems overall. I do have some hope that ds is like me and just loves numbers, but only time will tell for sure. :)

 

My point is I really think kids need to know the why, but often concessions have to be made. You can't force feed it to them, unless you want them to hate math. My concessions have been to go at a slower pace than ideal and use two programs, one that is easier and follow it up with a more challenging one. If you have student who like me just loves numbers, then Saxon might really be a good choice. They can learn why later like I did, if they need or desire it. If you have a child who needs the why, like my dh, then Saxon would not be a good choice and would only make a child hate math.

 

Sorry if I am rambling a little. :D

 

Heather

[Soror]

13-7 This you would memorize in Saxon, in Singapore or Right Start you change it:

 

3+10-7

3+3=6

 

This is very slow at first if you didn't learn that way, but once you get it, it is a much faster way to do math and makes it much easier to do it mentally.

 

Same with addition, all my kids do double digit addition mental addition easily.

 

85+35= Saxon would have you add and carry

 

RS is particularly strong on this and teaches the child to add the tens first:

 

85+30 (hold 5 ones in your mind)=115+5=120

 

With multiplication and division there is less of a difference, other than the programs activity allow the child to change problems if needed in order to get the answer. So in Saxon a child needs to memorize 9x9, but in base 10 system it is perfectly acceptable to thing 9x5=45 and 9x4=36, so 45+36=75+6=75+5+1=81

 

Because I am dyslexic, I have a hard time remembering my math facts. I can remember as a child having columns down the sides of my papers where I would start with what a number was x5 (because I didn't forget them), then instead of multiplying I would add: 45+9=54+9=63+9=72+9=81. I used addition because I couldn't remember the answer, but I prefer the freedom the other programs give one to change problems, because now I still use addition, but in a much easier way instead of having columns going down the side if my paper. Can you tell that I am very concrete? It never occurred to me as a child to simply do (9x5)+(9x4), I was told to go to 9 and to 9 I would go (the hard way).

 

Once you get into Algebra and higher it shows up in how the material in introduced. The programs I prefer are ones that show you why the formula works. Saxon tends to just give you the formula and show you how to work it, but not why it works. The problem with that is that unless you come across a neat clean real life problem that just fits the formula you won't recognize when to use it in real life. If you understand why, and do work in applying it to new situations, then you can better use it in the messiness that is real life. For example the reason why Singapore's New Elementary Math (NEM) is considered so tough is because it introduces a concept, explaining why, gives you the formula, gives you a couple of clean practice problems and then introduces a totally different situation that you have to apply the principles and formula to.

 

Philosophy aside, not all kids can do NEM, as much as I would like it to be different. Ok maybe they could given the time needed, but our system, even for hsers doesn't really allow that.

 

I do love math but more than loving math I love numbers. I did well in math because I didn't care about why, but would accept the formulas and use them. I just liked writing out all the numbers and being good at something (I went into accounting as a field, if that tells you anything).

 

My dh on the other hand did horrible at math, not because he just couldn't do the work till he understood why. Saxon didn't give him why, so he had to figure it out on his own. To this day he has a hard time passing a college level math class because they don't explain why enough and by the time he figures it out the class is two steps beyond it. Despite that he is a programmer and does math daily in multiple systems: binary, hexadecimal, base 10, ect... Math really isn't a problem for him, how we teach it is.

 

My kids are somewhere between us. The girls don't love math, and Singapore was just too much for them on its own. Right Start doesn't make the logical leaps Singapore does, and is more concrete. They enjoy RS and then after doing RS can do Singapore fairly well. They still don't like the hard problem solving work. With upper level math I will follow a similar path, but will lead with a more Saxon like program. Then follow it up with the why in Singapore, yet not NEM. I am going to use their Discovering Math series, which has less logical leaps than NEM and more of the practice problems before introducing the tough problems, with fewer tough problems overall. I do have some hope that ds is like me and just loves numbers, but only time will tell for sure. :)

 

My point is I really think kids need to know the why, but often concessions have to be made. You can't force feed it to them, unless you want them to hate math. My concessions have been to go at a slower pace than ideal and use two programs, one that is easier and follow it up with a more challenging one. If you have student who like me just loves numbers, then Saxon might really be a good choice. They can learn why later like I did, if they need or desire it. If you have a child who needs the why, like my dh, then Saxon would not be a good choice and would only make a child hate math.

 

Sorry if I am rambling a little. :D

 

Heather

/ot hijack

I bought RS for ds because I think the manipulatives will be good for him as well as I suspect dyslexia- just memorizing facts does not work for him at all. That is the most thorough description I have read of how it works and find it totally intriguing- I am totally a math gal- love it all and the way you described the base 10 math is how my brain works- I sometimes try to explain answers to problems that I do mentally and people look at me like I have 2 heads- it makes so much sense to me that I don't understand why everyone doesn't do it that way :)

 

dh is a math geek in a different way as well- he hated school but he is always programming as well- I am soooo excited to read about this as it sounds like we will both be learning some new tricks- thanks so much for the info.

 

/hijack

[marsha617]

We've used Saxon for 4 years. It is a stand alone program. We use lots of manipulatives for the lessons. Also I don't let my kids count with their fingers. I supplement with wrap-ups for math facts/drills or something like that. Next fall I am going to use Cuisenaire Rods with my 4 year old one day a week so I will probably have the older boys use them as well.