Rightstart Math / Singapore and memorization

[Euromom]

Or the child does the operations mentally ?

 

For ex. my child ( 6 1/2 yo-going in 2nd grade soon) knows 9+7 = 16 because 9 becomes 10 , then 10+6 is 16 .

(we are using Math-u-see with Horizons )

He knows that from base ten blocks , unifix cubes and abacus . We have been practicing with manipulatives all year .We also have played math games , dominos ,etc

However , I have surprised him counting with fingers sometimes...so I decided to use flashcards for memorization.

 

He said that although he knows all the math tricks ,for him is much faster to just memorize the facts than to have to think about them , especially for subtraction (he likes to beat the timer ! )

And I noticed it's true. In his speed drill tests he is doing much faster than before since he has memorized two facts/week. We use triangular flashcards which are great because they can learn four facts in one card . Good especially for visual learners.

 

So I was wondering how Rightstart and Singapore works --do they just learn the facts from the program , are there any speed drills included ? I know RS has math games , what about Singapore ?)

 

Well , my whole question is even though I like to introduce concepts first and make them understand why 9+7=16 , is it ok to memorize the facts ? I would like him to go in 2nd grade with all his facts memorized now that he has been practicing conceptual math for k and 1st :) He knows most of them but there are a few , especially in subtraction that he needs more practice .

[MamaReads]

Yes, eventually those programs do reccomend that math facts be memorized. First they need to be conceptually understood, but then memorization does play a role.

[Kirch]

With RightStart, the idea is that you learn the concepts first and then the facts are memorized by playing the games over and over. So they're still memorized, just not by rote/with flashcards.

[Spy Car]

I saw your other thread too. I do hope you think seriously about what (it seems) you are considering, that being moving to a "traditional math" program because the "memorizing of subtraction facts" came so much faster and easier than doing the grunt work od re-grouping to 10s, which is not a "trick" but a fundamental still that will be important as yor son progresses.

 

Of course it is easier to just have them memorize. You could spend a fraction of the time. Same with reading. Why do all the hard work with phonics when they could just memorize sight words. It would be faster.

 

But of course one can leave huge holes this way. You can't memorize every word you will ever encounter, and you can't memorize every bit of basic math you'll encounter either. Going through the process of learning re-grouping is important. Not learning this very well leaves a mind unable to calculate well mentally, all that is left is what is memorized, and there is a difference there if you short-cut the process.

 

That said, RS and Singapore both expect students, once they have a firm grasp of the concept, and have mastered calculating mentally, do expect chIldren either know their math facts from the practice or they reinforce these by other means. The Singapore HIGs suggest drill and activities (including games), and the RS program makes extensive use of their games, but is disapproving of drill. I use Singapore, but I'm with RS on this one, and have found their games extremely effective.

 

Just please don't confuse the speed with which he memorized with the time he spent to re-group. Of course it takes more time. That is to be expected. You just need to me mindful of your true goals, and not be seduced by the siren-song of expediency.

 

Bill

[JudyJudyJudy]

I know this isn't a popular opinion, but if I had it to do over again, I would have my son memorize the math facts before (not instead of) learning the concepts. That's the way we did it back in the "old days" when I was in school, and I truly think it worked better. My son has now memorized the math facts, but he was resistant for a while because he had another way to get the answer. I saw the same thing happen when I was teaching school; it slowed the kids down a lot in their work.

[Euromom]

Bill , I like your correlation between phonics - math . If I will use a traditional math such as CLE , Saxon or Abeka , I would still use manipulatives and conceptual math anyway but only for things I see my son struggling with. I am pretty good at math (probably a right brainer ) and programs such as RS or Singapore make more sense to me but my son seems to be different . I think he is a left brainer , very gifted with language . So I read this up that for a left brainer , traditional programs work much better . Also , since I am a busy mom of four kids 7 and under , I thought a program like CLE is more open and go . This does not mean that I won't teach my ds , just that it's easier to implement it.

 

That said , I hesitate a lot because except the math facts he is doing great .

 

My son did not have problems switching from conceptual facts (like 15-7 is 10-7 + the difference) to memorization so I don't think I would first teach my next dc to memorize before understanding the whys .

[abrightmom]

Euromom,

 

We use Right Start and Math Mammoth and my kids are thriving with "conceptual math" and with learning about math in many different ways. I still feel "weird" when we lay on the floor and play with our Base Ten set for 30 minutes and that "counts" as doing math. :D I hope that Miquon will be joining our family this year as well. I also LOVE Bill's approach to teaching math and have learned a lot from him. He is a fantastic resource and mentor in this subject area.

 

The games with Right Start are a blast and my kids enjoy them. HOWEVER, I have had to swallow the bitter pill called "Reality". I have four children and it is IMPOSSIBLE aside from NEVER doing anything else to play enough games each week to help said children learn those facts. Perhaps as my younger moves up the ranks they can begin to play together, without Mom. Anyway, for now reality dictates another approach. We will continue to learn math with a multi faceted, hands on approach (and we don't even try that hard to follow a pre-set schedule right now). But, I am going to simultaneously encourage my oldest to learn those facts via a variety of methods (games being one of them). I won't drill and kill him but I will start encouraging/requiring other ways of practicing the facts outside of playing games. So, my response to your question is that I *think* it's O.K. to do both.

[Spy Car]

Bill , I like your correlation between phonics - math . If I will use a traditional math such as CLE , Saxon or Abeka , I would still use manipulatives and conceptual math anyway but only for things I see my son struggling with.

 

Then you could find yourself building a house on a sand foundation and needing to remediate the problems later. I will caution you, but you need to make your own choices.

 

I am pretty good at math (probably a right brainer ) and programs such as RS or Singapore make more sense to me but my son seems to be different . I think he is a left brainer , very gifted with language . So I read this up that for a left brainer , traditional programs work much better . Also , since I am a busy mom of four kids 7 and under , I thought a program like CLE is more open and go . This does not mean that I won't teach my ds , just that it's easier to implement it.

 

Of course it is going to be easier. If we follow that impulse we can make a great number of choices that may or may not be in the best interest of our children's education.

 

I'm just playing Devils Advocate here, but we tend to "implement" what we have, and implementing Singapore (or even Math Mammoth which has a reputation for having a more all-in-one organization) isn't that hard.

 

IMO you would be giving up a tremendous amount going with programs like Abeka or CLE.

 

It has been discussed almost ad nauseam recently, but have you read the book by Liping Ma? It does a pretty good job showing the differences that are possible in math education.

 

Forgive my being "pushy" :D

 

Bill

[Beth in SW WA]

:bigear: Just a fly on the wall here...

[Cindyz]

have you read the book by Liping Ma?

 

Could you please share the title of the book? Thanks!

[Spy Car]

Could you please share the title of the book? Thanks!

 

The book is called: Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics and the author is Liping Ma.

 

Here is a link to Amazon. This is the old edition, a 10th Anniversary Edition was just published, which you can link to from the link I'm providing. I'm not entirely sure how the new edition is different.

 

In the Amazon "preview" of the first pages one can get a feeling for Ma's book. Home educators are not the target audience, but I know there are a great many of us on this forum who consider this a life-changing read, and one that has informed the aspirations of many of us in terms of the math education we hope to provide our children (which does include attending to our own understanding of elementary mathematics).

 

Bill

 

 

http://www.amazon.com/Knowing-Teaching-Elementary-Mathematics-Understanding/dp/0805829091

[TracyP]

Euromom, as far as, "is it ok to memorize facts", I would say absolutely. My dd has her facts to 10 memorized and it has helped her immensely. She had a hard time regrouping 7+6 = 10+3 when she didn't have 7+3=10 memorized. Now that she has memorized her facts she can add double digit numbers on paper or mentally with ease. I think debate comes from how you should memorize them not whether you should (just my opinion). I should add that I only want her to memorize the facts to 10. I want her to use other strategies for larger numbers.

 

As far as switching math programs I don't know your situation but I would check out Math Mammoth. We are using it as a supplement to CLE right now but plan on moving to MM full time next year. It is similar to Singapore but laid out more traditionally. You might find it to be the best of both worlds.:001_smile:

[pageta]

We do flashcards. We practice concepts a lot with the abacus so my son can see how the numbers fit together. I've tried all sorts of manipulatives, but the abacus seems to work best for us.

 

I'm a big believer in KNOWING the facts. Your basic addition/subtraction/multiplication/division facts are the alphabet of math. If you don't know a word in a sentence, you don't grasp the meaning of the sentence. I think a lot of kids struggle with math because they're still figuring out what 2+2 is rather than seeing the concept which is being taught.

 

I really think the memorization vs concepts thing is a question of the chicken and the egg. I never did regrouping in order to learn 9+8=17. I knew that +9 was 10 more minus one, so I could start with 35 and count by nines easily. I didn't have to sit around and regroup in order to do that. Same with eights - two less than ten more. Sevens are two more than five more, and if you know you're fives, that's easy.

 

Understanding regrouping is important, just like learning to tell time. But it is not the central hinge upon which the entire world of math turns, which people seem to make it out to be every time this debate comes up. It's a great tool, but there is more than one way to get the job done.

 

For us, learning the addition facts was the hardest. Learning them up to 10 took six months during first grade. We're talking less than 5 minutes a day. I started with sums up to 5, then added six, then seven, etc. as he learned them. He could always use the abacus if he wanted. Now we're doing the corresponding facts in subtraction, and they're quite easy. When we come across problems like 9+6 in math, he just knows them even though we didn't learn beyond sums of ten.

 

For multiplication, we've been learning how to count by 2's, 3's, etc. Again, I have him learn with the abacus. He counts by 3's up to 30. Crossing over the tens is a great way to learn how each number is divided because some are on one row and some are on the next. But when it comes time to learn his multiplication and division facts, they way will be paved.

 

I don't have the time or the patience to sit on the floor and play math games for hours at a time. Some people enjoy that - more power to them. Our five minutes a day over the course of the year has proved very fruitful. My goal ultimate objective is for him to know all of his facts up through 9+9/9x9 and be able to do them in less than 3 minutes, which was what I was required to do. By the end of 2nd grade, we'll have addition and subtraction down within that time frame. During third and fourth grade, we'll do multiplication and division.

[Spy Car]

I don't have the time or the patience to sit on the floor and play math games for hours at a time. Some people enjoy that - more power to them. Our five minutes a day over the course of the year has proved very fruitful. My goal ultimate objective is for him to know all of his facts up through 9+9/9x9 and be able to do them in less than 3 minutes, which was what I was required to do. By the end of 2nd grade, we'll have addition and subtraction down within that time frame. During third and fourth grade, we'll do multiplication and division.

 

All I can tell you is we played two RS multiplication games the other night (Took what? A half-hour, roughly?) one was a memory game the other "who is on top" or something similar.

 

We have been "conceptualizing" math in ways ranging from "interesting" (like proving the Distributive Law with C Rods) to more ordinary. But no drill.

 

After one game of each, my son knew the multiples of nine (which was the objective). This morning he rattled them off to me before he went off to kindergarten.

 

We had the same experiences with the other games. We played "Go to the Dump" twice and he knew the pairs that make 10 (and he still does).

 

There is something quite important to me (and Dr Cotter is on to this) in the idea that if you make learning fun, it is more effective, more efficient, reduces anxiety, and makes the subject one that is associated with good-feelings. Too many children hate (or are frightened by math). Maybe I'd say "most." I see a value making math "unstressful". And I believe the results are better. So it is a win win.

 

Time well-spent.

 

Bill

[abrightmom]

After one game of each, my son knew the multiples of nine (which was the objective). This morning he rattled them off to me before he went off to kindergarten.

 

We had the same experiences with the other games. We played "Go to the Dump" twice and he knew the pairs that make 10 (and he still does).

 

:drool5: I wish my kids were that *quick*!!! I am going out on a limb here but I think your dear boy is a QUICK STUDY. If playing Go to the Dump twice cemented the pairs that make 10 (my boys do love this game!) then that is amazing. We have played numerous times over the months and we're not even close to that result! Your boy has a quick mind in this way . . . takes after his Dad perhaps?! I don't think that the majority of children learn these concepts that quickly. It requires many many games. On the RS yahoo group someone shared that the expectation with RS is to play more than 20 games a week (I can't remember the exact number). That is a lot for a family with multiple children each needing individual attention/tutoring in a variety of life skills/subject areas (not to mention having babies and toddlers wreaking havoc). The 20+ games a week standard is INSANE for my family. At some point I think my boys will be able to play the games together and we will get closer to that number. But that can't happen yet. So, I have to have a few ways to help my boy review addition and subtraction when I can't play games with him. He really likes the Flashmaster and sees it as fun. No harm no foul!!

 

 

if you make learning fun, it is more effective, more efficient, reduces anxiety, and makes the subject one that is associated with good-feelings. Too many children hate (or are frightened by math).

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree: Bill, you are like a magnetic force keeping us in line with our views on math. Sometimes I am pulled to the opposite, "traditional math" side, and your views pull me back and help me to remain balanced. When I feel like throwing a workbook at my child and saying "Do your math!" I remember all that I've gleaned in reading these threads. It IS rewarding to lay on the floor and play math with them! Yes, I did write "Play Math" because that is often what we do. They LOVE it and their eyes never glaze over. :D

[abrightmom]

One other teensy tinsy thing about those math games . . . in theory they are awesome. But in reality, the intended goal (learning of math facts) is not always met because the children FIGHT over who is winning, losing, or whatever!! :glare: I end up refereeing a spat and character training trumps math learning.

 

:001_smile: This doesn't happen every time we play but with one of my dear children it is a difficult hill to climb for him. It is HARD for me to buckle down to play with him when I know that if I beat him he's going to flip out. Ahhhhh, the joys of parenting and home schooling all mixed up together!!

[pageta]

My mother, to this day, still uses flashcards when she wants to learn things. Flashcards aren't necessarily a drudgery. I was drilled with flashcards as a kid, but only enough to prove that I already knew my facts, and they weren't a drudgery at all.

 

I tried the matching game with my son from RS to try and learn the math facts, or the one where you have cards in your hand and you draw a card and try to find pairs for a certain sum. Complete disasters, both of them. With the memory game, it wasn't like normal memory where you just remember where the other star is when you turn over a star; no, you have to remember which number goes with the number you just drew AND where that number might be. It only complicates a game that is already as dry as sawdust. The other game where you made pairs was about the same speed.

 

If I had to play games like that in order to learn new things, I would not like whatever it was that I was supposed to be learning. I much prefer learning the facts first before I try applying them. Applying them in situations before I know them just makes me want to pull my hair out. It only serves to frustrate me and make me hate what I'm doing. If that's how those games were introduced to me, I would not like them at all. It's one thing to play Memory or Old Maid, it's another to have to play them every day to learn your math facts. I'd much rather put five minutes into a few flashcards and then go do something I want to do.

 

BTW, I like playing games, and I can add up numbers in my head faster than my friends can punch them into their calculators.

 

Games may work well for some, but they're not for everybody. There is nothing wrong with taking a more cut and dried approach to getting the job done.

[fractalgal]

 

Games may work well for some, but they're not for everybody. There is nothing wrong with taking a more cut and dried approach to getting the job done.

 

:iagree:Unfortunately, the RS games did not work very well for my older children, either. Both have other games they prefer to play when we have game time.

 

I've not yet tried the RS games with my 5yo, but he likes to work on Saxon drill sheets. He requests one or two a day. He thinks its great to do math facts sheets like his older siblings - and he's quick, too. (I'm not complaining as long as he's enjoying it. ;)) (BTW: I have not taught him to memorize any math facts yet...he just figures them out either by counting manipulatives or on an abacus.)

 

I'm glad the games work for some; I'm also glad we have other choices.

[SophiaH]

:iagree:Unfortunately, the RS games did not work very well for my older children, either. Both have other games they prefer to play when we have game time.

 

I've not yet tried the RS games with my 5yo, but he likes to work on Saxon drill sheets. He requests one or two a day. He thinks its great to do math facts sheets like his older siblings - and he's quick, too. (I'm not complaining as long as he's enjoying it. ;)) (BTW: I have not taught him to memorize any math facts yet...he just figures them out either by counting manipulatives or on an abacus.)

 

I'm glad the games work for some; I'm also glad we have other choices.

 

This has been our experience as well. We enjoy the RS games, but they did not really help to solidify math facts for my dd. Yet, she *loves* the CLE warm-ups at the beginning of every lesson. She loves filling in the mark on the graph for the speed drill time and seeing how she matched up against past scores. She also loves her five minutes of flash card time. Not drudgery or drill and kill for her at all!

 

We spent two and a half years on RS B and C, doing all the warm-ups, playing games, etc. On more difficult problems like double-digit addition and subtraction, she could always get to the answer by using strategies (which is great!) but she struggled with the simpler facts. This began impeding her ability to solve higher level problems in her head. So, when we finished Level C at Christmas, we took a break and did CLE 205-304 from January to April. She has her addition and subtraction facts down now and has a really good start on her multiplication. We've since moved back into RS D and I am planning on finishing out the RS sequence, but I will NOT hesitate to stop and jump into CLE again for a few months to solidify multiplication and division facts if needed. DD just needs that kind of focused work (and I'm not very good at providing it on my own outside of a curriculum).

 

Now, as for my son...I have done only about a total of 20 days of RS lessons with him, but he just gets it. The other day he was quizzing my 3yo on which numbers pair up to make 10. "What goes with 7 to make 10?" We've never talked about that so I don't know where he's getting it from, but I'm hopeful that maybe he'll be one of those that can learn all his facts through games. Boy, would that make my life easy! :tongue_smilie:

 

So, to the OP, it is my opinion that it is definitely OK to solidify those math facts once they know why they're doing what they're doing. Whatever way works for your dc, you should go with. If he doesn't mind flashcards and drill sheets, do those! Or the flashmaster, or online drill, or games, or whatever...go for it!

[2squared]

On the RS yahoo group someone shared that the expectation with RS is to play more than 20 games a week (I can't remember the exact number).

 

:confused: I asked Dr Cotter this question at a conference last year, and she said to play the games when the manual said to play them. That's what we do, and it has been widely successful.

 

My two oldest dc learned their facts to 10 after playing Go to the Dump a few times. I have found the games to be very efficient and effective. We truly don't play any extra games.

[Spy Car]

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree: Bill, you are like a magnetic force keeping us in line with our views on math. Sometimes I am pulled to the opposite, "traditional math" side, and your views pull me back and help me to remain balanced. When I feel like throwing a workbook at my child and saying "Do your math!" I remember all that I've gleaned in reading these threads. It IS rewarding to lay on the floor and play math with them! Yes, I did write "Play Math" because that is often what we do. They LOVE it and their eyes never glaze over. :D

 

:001_smile:

[abrightmom]

:confused: I asked Dr Cotter this question at a conference last year, and she said to play the games when the manual said to play them. That's what we do, and it has been widely successful.

 

My two oldest dc learned their facts to 10 after playing Go to the Dump a few times. I have found the games to be very efficient and effective. We truly don't play any extra games.

:D Well, THAT is a relief!! I'm glad to hear it because 20+ games a week is just nuts IMHO . . . who has time for that?! Although, sometimes in the manual it just gives a generic directive, "Play games with the remaining time." or something to that effect. I suppose it leaves the number of games up to the parent/teacher.

[Poke Salad Annie]

 

There is something quite important to me (and Dr Cotter is on to this) in the idea that if you make learning fun, it is more effective, more efficient, reduces anxiety, and makes the subject one that is associated with good-feelings. Too many children hate (or are frightened by math). Maybe I'd say "most." I see a value making math "unstressful". And I believe the results are better. So it is a win win.

 

Time well-spent.

 

Bill

 

Yes, this. ^^^

[Euromom]

Thanks for the book suggestion , I will read it !

[2squared]

:D Well, THAT is a relief!! I'm glad to hear it because 20+ games a week is just nuts IMHO . . . who has time for that?! Although, sometimes in the manual it just gives a generic directive, "Play games with the remaining time." or something to that effect. I suppose it leaves the number of games up to the parent/teacher.

 

I take that direction literally. We do math for a limited amount of time per day - 15min for Level A, 20-25min for Level B, and 30min for Level C. When math time is up, it's up. Sometimes we have time for games and sometimes we don't. If I'm in a good mood or we need extra practice with something, I'll devote more time to games. If the kids are getting the concept and don't need the games, we don't play them.

 

Really, if your kids get the concept, why (other than for fun) play the games just to play them? On the flip side, if your kids aren't getting the concept, play games until it does stick!