Mind-sucking math--OhElizabeth, please elaborate

[Tiramisu]

nm

[m4given]

:bigear:

[Wee Pip]

LOL, Love it!

I have been knee deep in mind-sucking math research lately, but then I came to this conclusion:

 

I'm so worried that my kids aren't going to get all those math skills that *I* think they need, mostly due to *my own* experiences with math. (Don't we all? Even those that had the best math education?)

 

But I just realized that I cannot control my dc's outcome in math. I can physically beat them to a pulp with the best math books, but it doesn't guarantee a good education. If math is mind-suckingly dull to them, most likely they aren't going to be real receptive to the education I'm offering them.

 

I've tried making it exciting. I :lol: at myself for all the crazy ideas I've had to make it fun. It isn't met with much enthusiasm. So at this point, I think we'll just make due until the kids go to college.

[siloam]

I was intrigued by the "mind-sucking" comment by OhElizabeth on the recent TT thread. It just hit home with me (even if my interpretation isn't what she meant). We have been challenged with math over the years that sucks up the mind and our days. Different programs have sucked up the minds and time of different dc even though I think my dc grasp math concepts easily. The two I've tested before have had excellent scores on standardized tests in the math portions. But, math programs either click with them or not. If they don't one will zone out and the other will cry. This could happen every day and could be a chronic problem and it makes it so hard to choose a curriculum that challenges them sufficiently in my book without destroying their attitude toward math. I'm not looking for advice on curriculum but I wouldn't mind hearing from others who walk that fine line in choosing appropriately challenging curriculum and avoiding mind-sucking.

 

I walk this line by doing 2 programs. One that is easy, that clicks for the child not matter how "easy" it is considered. Then a second program more known for thinking (Singapore), but in which I don't expect them to get it all, and that there well be portions I will have to walk them through. They just don't have the interest/drive, ect... to figure about 1/4 of the IP and word books out on their own. But I do think there is value in just showing them how it works out even if they don't own it by figuring it out on their own.

 

Heather

[Tiramisu]

I walk this line by doing 2 programs. One that is easy, that clicks for the child not matter how "easy" it is considered. Then a second program more known for thinking (Singapore), but in which I don't expect them to get it all, and that there well be portions I will have to walk them through. They just don't have the interest/drive, ect... to figure about 1/4 of the IP and word books out on their own. But I do think there is value in just showing them how it works out even if they don't own it by figuring it out on their own.

 

Heather

 

Thanks, Heather. I looked in your sig, but I couldn't figure out what "easy" math you use. How do you work in the two programs?

[siloam]

Thanks, Heather. I looked in your sig, but I couldn't figure out what "easy" math you use. How do you work in the two programs?

 

Right Start is easier than Singapore. Where Singapore makes logical leaps, RS will show those in-between steps. RS also doesn't take and apply what is learned to new situations like Singapore does.

 

In upper level math I plan to use Kinetic books for the easier program, and then follow it up with Signapore's Discovering Math.

 

Heather

[Tiramisu]

LOL, Love it!

I have been knee deep in mind-sucking math research lately, but then I came to this conclusion:

 

I'm so worried that my kids aren't going to get all those math skills that *I* think they need, mostly due to *my own* experiences with math. (Don't we all? Even those that had the best math education?)

 

But I just realized that I cannot control my dc's outcome in math. I can physically beat them to a pulp with the best math books, but it doesn't guarantee a good education. If math is mind-suckingly dull to them, most likely they aren't going to be real receptive to the education I'm offering them.

 

I've tried making it exciting. I :lol: at myself for all the crazy ideas I've had to make it fun. It isn't met with much enthusiasm. So at this point, I think we'll just make due until the kids go to college.

 

Math was the worst when I tried to make it exciting. "Hey kids, look at these cool cuinenaire rods!" Miquon was a real bomb. I even used the rods when we had a stint with Singpore and one dd would move them around so quickly I couldn't keep up. I experienced math vertigo, but her answers were right.

[Tiramisu]

Right Start is easier than Singapore. Where Singapore makes logical leaps, RS will show those in-between steps. RS also doesn't take and apply what is learned to new situations like Singapore does.

 

In upper level math I plan to use Kinetic books for the easier program, and then follow it up with Signapore's Discovering Math.

 

Heather

 

I'm looking at Lial's for Algebra 2, but I've wondered if Kinetic Books might keep my slow moving but math-bright high schooler on track time-wise.

[siloam]

And just to add my background. I grew up loving numbers, and doing well in math. I accepted any formula they gave me and used it without understanding what was really going on. Even used to schedule my Calculus classes in college at 8AM because I could easily get an A without attending class.

 

My dh, on the other hand, had to know why. Never did well in math because by the time he figured out the first concept the class was on the 3rd, and he quickly was snowed. Not because he wasn't smart, but he just wouldn't accept a formula without understanding why.

 

My dh would have loved to have hsed and done a program like Singapore, or Dolcani, or Foerster. I on the other hand just loved numbers. I learned to think and analyze from dh not from school (despite being honor roll). I would need a simple introduction, then I could have managed some deeper stuff, but I need a life line. Even now I enjoy a challenge but only to a certain point.

 

My two oldest hated Miquon I think because they wanted things explained up front and didn't enjoy the discovery process (I am the same way). They also didn't like Singapore, and still don't love it. Right Start they do enjoy. If I were to push to do one of the high end programs alone, I would loose their attitude towards math long term. They would learn to avoid it. By doing a simpler math first, they feel good about their abilities and while they don't love math they don't hate it either. They might even decide long term that they like math, or at least they won't avoid it. They know Singapore is a challenging program, and they tolerate it knowing I will come to their rescue and help them through the hard ones (I schedule time for this). It is my hope that long term Singapore will stretch them more than they realize, even if they don't own it like someone who figures it out on their own.

 

It is the best I can give kids who don't love math and don't want to think that deeply. They can't help the way they are wired. I would be a fool to push them beyond what they are able.

 

I am still considering VT too. It is supposed to be easy and teach why. The way the program is structured is going to be hard for us to use. Touch and feel stuff, not content. Kinetic just looks like more fun, even to me and the way it is laid out plays to our needs (independent, stops dd dead in her tracks when she reads the instructions wrong instead of doing a whole page wrong, takes over some of the correcting for me, has step by step instructions that are easy to go backwards forwards and start in the middle on), where VT plays to our weaknesses (neither of us like having to watch video material, they encourage a child to correct their own material and dd has had cheating problems in the past, encourages the child to do part of the problems then check answers but dd will do the whole set).

 

What I really want is to find a way to make VT work for us. DD though is already pretty set on Kinetic so that is going to be a hard sell.

 

Heather

[Tiramisu]

And just to add my background. I grew up loving numbers, and doing well in math. I accepted any formula they gave me and used it without understanding what was really going on. Even used to schedule my Calculus classes in college at 8AM because I could easily get an A without attending class.

 

My dh, on the other hand, had to know why. Never did well in math because by the time he figured out the first concept the class was on the 3rd, and he quickly was snowed. Not because he wasn't smart, but he just wouldn't accept a formula without understanding why.

 

My dh would have loved to have hsed and done a program like Singapore, or Dolcani, or Foerster. I on the other hand just loved numbers. I learned to think and analyze from dh not from school (despite being honor roll). I would need a simple introduction, then I could have managed some deeper stuff, but I need a life line. Even now I enjoy a challenge but only to a certain point.

 

My two oldest hated Miquon I think because they wanted things explained up front and didn't enjoy the discovery process (I am the same way). They also didn't like Singapore, and still don't love it. Right Start they do enjoy. If I were to push to do one of the high end programs alone, I would loose their attitude towards math long term. They would learn to avoid it. By doing a simpler math first, they feel good about their abilities and while they don't love math they don't hate it either. They might even decide long term that they like math, or at least they won't avoid it. They know Singapore is a challenging program, and they tolerate it knowing I will come to their rescue and help them through the hard ones (I schedule time for this). It is my hope that long term Singapore will stretch them more than they realize, even if they don't own it like someone who figures it out on their own.

 

It is the best I can give kids who don't love math and don't want to think that deeply. They can't help the way they are wired. I would be a fool to push them beyond what they are able.

 

I am still considering VT too. It is supposed to be easy and teach why. The way the program is structured is going to be hard for us to use. Touch and feel stuff, not content. Kinetic just looks like more fun, even to me and the way it is laid out plays to our needs (independent, stops dd dead in her tracks when she reads the instructions wrong instead of doing a whole page wrong, takes over some of the correcting for me, has step by step instructions that are easy to go backwards forwards and start in the middle on), where VT plays to our weaknesses (neither of us like having to watch video material, they encourage a child to correct their own material and dd has had cheating problems in the past, encourages the child to do part of the problems then check answers but dd will do the whole set).

 

What I really want is to find a way to make VT work for us. DD though is already pretty set on Kinetic so that is going to be a hard sell.

 

Heather

 

Thanks, Heather, for sharing all this. There is a lot here I can relate to. I think even with my own and my dd's resistance to deep thinking and tough problem solving, we could probably make more headway if I didn't always feel pressured for time.

 

I've been thinking of investing in Right Start for my youngest. I'm blessed that Grandma likes to work with her so there may be time for that. Now if I can try Singapore over the summer with the others as a supplement that would be better than nothing. I have to say that our brief time with Singapore taught me concepts that I never was aware of and never would have appreciated myself as a child. Now I apply them when I'm teaching my dc with CLE or Horizons. I should just go through all the Singapore books myself! ;)