Can anybody compare Right Start Math with McRuffy math?

[LynnG in Arizona]

I've searched the board but can't find this specific comparison. Anybody out there who has used both?

 

If so, please compare in terms of daily time, rigor, retention, student's interest, etc.

 

I am still planning my daughter's kindergarten curriculum, and really need to make some decisions soon. ;) Sadly, I actually found it easier and less stressful to plan my daughter's Grade 12 year than her sister's kindergarten year! I do so badly want to get started "well", if you know what I mean! :)

 

Thanks so much for any help you can give!

[Crimson Wife]

I haven't used McRuffy but wanted to point out a major difference between the two programs is that RS is based on the Asian way of teaching math (like Singapore and Math Mammoth) while AFAICT McRuffy isn't. At least, I didn't see anything on the McRuffy website or in the samples I looked at to indicated that it is.

 

I highly recommend reading Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics by Dr. Liping Ma for a discussion of why the Asian approach is better than the traditional American one.

 

I always got A's in math growing up and scored >700 on the math portion of the SAT. But while I could calculate the correct answer, I never really understood why the formulas worked until I started homeschooling using a program based on the Asian way of teaching math (first RS, then Singapore supplemented with MM). It's like the "light bulb" went on over my head and it all finally made sense. I really wish I'd been taught that way all along.

[KinderSafari]

I agree. RightStart has been WONDERFUL as a base for my kids. THey all started out with the abacus and numbers up to 100 just clicked for them. They could visualize numbers so much easier than with a 10 base block system.

 

I wish we had continued further than just the first 2 years, but it was trickier for me to read up on the concepts and present them every day than just pull out the math books I was familiar with as a kid and do those. (Basically, we switched because of my laziness and not creating time to lesson plan.) But I was truly stunned by the positive results the first year I used it with my oldest.

[Guest RecumbentHeart]

:bigear:I have been curious about these two as well.

[FawnsFunnyFarm]

Well, as it seems no one yet has been able to compare the two, and I can't either, I will just tell you about McRuffy.

 

McRuffy is a spiral approach, it is full of fun manipulative and games that makes my kids BEG for math... even the workbookish parts.

 

I don't really feel you need to use an abacus or a foreign math program for your children to understand the hows and whys of math working.. in fact my goal for my kids is not to memorize math what so ever, it's to make sure my kids understand the inner workings of it... and well McRuffy does a perfect job for the kids being able to see why it's working the way it does.

 

McRuffy is wonderful, I can't say anything bad about it.. esp since it's pretty much a grab and go curriculum (ok so you may have to quickly put games together the night before on occasion, but really it's painless). I love that it's lightly scripted and makes my kids happy.

[Delighted3]

I have seen rightstart, but I haven't used it. I would say it is more of a non-traditional method than we are used to in the U.S. It also requires more teacher time. I don't know for sure whether it is mastery of spiral. Maybe someone else can comment on that. I use mcruffy and I would say that it is a much more traditional, spiral way of teaching math, but with a lot of games and manipulatives. It also has short lessons, so the teacher time is about 15 minutes a day explaining a new concept or playing a game and then the child has a workbook page to do.

HTH,

Joy

[LynnG in Arizona]

Thanks very much to all who have responded! :)

 

I am listening carefully to all the feedback.

 

I am somewhat familiar with the concept of Asian math, having done Singapore for maybe four years with my older girls (during the middle elementary years).

 

Truth be told, I want to lay a very strong foundation in math for my little ones, but I am a bit nervous about reports that Right Start is extremely teacher intensive, especially if used for more than one child.

 

Not that I expect to be able to teach my children math in a 5 minutes a day at this age - I don't - but I'm just wondering if McRuffy might be slightly more manageable. I just need to figure out if it's as solid of a program.

 

More input would be much appreciated!

[Homeschooling6]

We are loving our McRuffy math. I enjoy teaching it as well. The manipulatives are great. McRuffy uses tangrams, patter blocks, pentominoes, counters and more. The math pages are not overwhelming. One workbook page per day. Some of those workbook pages are having the child use pentominoes/pattern blocks to figure out a puzzle (logic). The teacher manual is well laid out and is lightly scripted. I have blogged some about our McRuffy adventure ;)

 

I tried RS math a few years back. Ordered everything for four dc. It was a bit boring (for us) and it just didn't click for us. I ended up giving it all away. I really can't comment more on RS since I don't own it anymore. I do remember it taking me a while to figure out how to teach RS and the games (at the time they didn't have the dvd) we never got around to them. I don't know I just didn't care for RS :blushing:

Edited July 2, 2010 by Homeschooling6

[Snowfall]

I don't really feel you need to use an abacus or a foreign math program for your children to understand the hows and whys of math working..

 

RS isn't a foreign math program. It was created by an American. :)

[FawnsFunnyFarm]

RS isn't a foreign math program. It was created by an American. :)

 

But it still based on Asian ways of teaching.

[sbgrace]

Thanks very much to all who have responded! :)

 

I am listening carefully to all the feedback.

 

I am somewhat familiar with the concept of Asian math, having done Singapore for maybe four years with my older girls (during the middle elementary years).

 

Truth be told, I want to lay a very strong foundation in math for my little ones, but I am a bit nervous about reports that Right Start is extremely teacher intensive, especially if used for more than one child.

 

Not that I expect to be able to teach my children math in a 5 minutes a day at this age - I don't - but I'm just wondering if McRuffy might be slightly more manageable. I just need to figure out if it's as solid of a program.

 

More input would be much appreciated!

 

There have been some threads recently about the "teacher intensive" label RightStart gets.

It's not a child sit and do it without the parent math curriculum. But what math is at the young ages? I doubt McRuffy is either based on what I saw in samples. RightStart is entirely planned/scripted so it is open and go without prep time. You do go through the lesson with the child. So that's where teacher intensive comes in--you're there the whole time. That time is about 15 minutes for RightStart A from what I've seen (my average--some may spend more time or some less but this seems to be a typical time spent). It could be less if you do 1/2 lessons per day which is easy to do. In fact I believe it was planned for 1/2 lessons for K. So easy to split. Fifteen or so minutes a day (period--no prep) for math with a youngish child is simply not teacher intensive to me. It's a terrific foundation in place value particularly.

 

McRuffy might be better for you. I don't know of course. I like the visual-spatial aspect of McRuffy. However, if you want that conceptual math base that Asian math including RightStart does well don't let "teacher intensive" scare you away from RightStart.

Edited July 2, 2010 by sbgrace

[Crimson Wife]

But it still based on Asian ways of teaching.

 

On the most recent international math comparison (TIMSS 2007)' date=' the top scoring countries in the world were all Asian ones. For 4th grade, the highest were Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, and Japan. For 8th grade, the highest scoring were Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Japan. All of these had average scores that were [b']significantly [/b]higher than the U.S.

 

Not only that, but these countries were able to get a significant portion (one quarter to nearly half) of their students to the "advanced" category while the U.S. managed to get only 10% in 4th grade and only a mere 6% in 8th grade.

 

Read the Liping Ma book- she gives a much better explanation than I can about why the Asian way of teaching math is superior.

[Snowfall]

But it still based on Asian ways of teaching.

 

Oh, I know. I was just pointing that out because some people might have been confused after reading the thread. It would matter to people who might think a math curriculum designed for students in another country might not be as good for American kids, for whatever reason.

[BatmansWife]

We have both. I've had RS for several years and have tried using it many times but just can't get very far. It's not that there's anything really wrong with it....it's just not really MY way of doing math, so it's hard for me to stick with it. I do think the card games are great (you can go to youtube and search for Right Start math games and see quite a few demonstrated). We have been using McRuffy K and my daughter just loves it. In MY opinion, WE favor McRuffy much more. I wouldn't hesitate in sticking with McRuffy....but money has been a big issue with us. I already own Moving With Math for several grades (the Primary versions)....so we might try that for 1st grade. But, my daughter saw the samples of McRuffy 1st and loves it. Soooooo....not sure what I'll do for next school year. :sad:

[Crimson Wife]

Oh, I know. I was just pointing that out because some people might have been confused after reading the thread. It would matter to people who might think a math curriculum designed for students in another country might not be as good for American kids, for whatever reason.

 

With globalization, our kids are increasingly going to be competing with foreigners. The days when a kid could get a decent-paying manufacturing job straight out of high school are over. The U.S. economy is increasingly becoming "knowledge-based" and if we want our kids to have a shot, we need to make sure they can keep up with the foreign competition.

 

I'm proud to be an American and I truly believe that our country's traditional values (liberty, individualism, etc.) are the best.:patriot:

 

But when it comes to mathematical knowledge, we shouldn't hesitate to look to Asia and adopt what will help our kids be successful in the globalized economy.

[lovinmomma]

There have been some threads recently about the "teacher intensive" label RightStart gets.

It's not a child sit and do it without the parent math curriculum. But what math is at the young ages? I doubt McRuffy is either based on what I saw in samples. RightStart is entirely planned/scripted so it is open and go without prep time. You do go through the lesson with the child. So that's where teacher intensive comes in--you're there the whole time. That time is about 15 minutes for RightStart A from what I've seen (my average--some may spend more time or some less but this seems to be a typical time spent). It could be less if you do 1/2 lessons per day which is easy to do. In fact I believe it was planned for 1/2 lessons for K. So easy to split. Fifteen or so minutes a day (period--no prep) for math with a youngish child is simply not teacher intensive to me. It's a terrific foundation in place value particularly.

 

McRuffy might be better for you. I don't know of course. I like the visual-spatial aspect of McRuffy. However, if you want that conceptual math base that Asian math including RightStart does well don't let "teacher intensive" scare you away from RightStart.

I hate to say it. because RS is awesome, but 15 mins. must be for older children or something. It took us a good 45 mins. per lesson. I definately find it more teacher intensive than Singapore. Now, I'm gonna duck and run......

[sbgrace]

I hate to say it. because RS is awesome, but 15 mins. must be for older children or something. It took us a good 45 mins. per lesson. I definately find it more teacher intensive than Singapore. Now, I'm gonna duck and run......

Don't duck and run! :001_smile:

 

I've got one child who I'm pretty certain has a math disability and major attention issues. I still spend very little time on RightStart lessons.

I don't think RightStart is for everyone and I'm going to say based on this thread http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=187672&highlight=rightstart where people seem to be spending around 15 to 20 minutes that something might be going on if RightStart A is taking that long for your child. I don't think it's typical and my "math phobic" child would absolutely not tolerate anything close to that long on math. In your place I think I'd take a break or if I had to continue I'd set a timer and stop where I was at 15 or so minutes (or whenever things began downhill/weren't pleasant). It's easy to split up RightStart. If you look at the thread above someone else mentioned that it's taking that long. That's not typical. Someone (post 21) suggested the child in question might not be developmentally ready for math right now and I'd agree. It just shouldn't take that long (unless the child is into games or whatever and wants to just keep going with an activity of course). I'd break for a while I think. I take it your child is young. I'd just play with math for a while and keep it pleasant above all!

[Snowfall]

With globalization, our kids are increasingly going to be competing with foreigners. The days when a kid could get a decent-paying manufacturing job straight out of high school are over. The U.S. economy is increasingly becoming "knowledge-based" and if we want our kids to have a shot, we need to make sure they can keep up with the foreign competition.

 

I'm proud to be an American and I truly believe that our country's traditional values (liberty, individualism, etc.) are the best.:patriot:

 

But when it comes to mathematical knowledge, we shouldn't hesitate to look to Asia and adopt what will help our kids be successful in the globalized economy.

 

I feel like everyone thinks I disagree with them in this thread. :lol: I totally agree that Americans need to be competitive (and I personally think we aren't doing a very good job of it right now). I couldn't care less who wrote a curriculum, where they come from, or for what country they were designing it. I just thought it might matter to some people. I use RS and I'm also using MEP. I wish I had time to try Singapore also, but that would definitely be overkill. :D I also have Horizons, but I actually don't care for it at all, and that's the only full on American-style one I own. I just bought it for the colorful worksheets, since DD begs to do colorful math worksheets.

[LynnG in Arizona]

Thank you to all who have contributed. AprilMay, it was nice to finally find someone who has used both programs! :)

 

If there is anybody else out there who has experience with both McRuffy and Right Start math, I would love to hear from you!

 

And I appreciate the discussion so far on "Asian" vs. traditional American math.

[Guest Cheryl in SoCal]

Thank you to all who have contributed. AprilMay, it was nice to finally find someone who has used both programs! :)

 

If there is anybody else out there who has experience with both McRuffy and Right Start math, I would love to hear from you!

 

And I appreciate the discussion so far on "Asian" vs. traditional American math.

I second (or third, fourth, etc:lol:) the Liping Ma book and think it's the best way to really understand the differences! The only "American" curricula that I have liked are not traditional (MUS and LOF). I used Horizons for 5 years and Saxon for 3/4 of a year. They are "traditional American" and I (and my students) hated them. I've only just started using Math Mammoth with my youngest (MUS is my main and MM is the supplement because she can't get enough worksheets:001_huh::lol:) and have been very impressed with it but don't have enough experience with it to really give an opinion.

 

I looked at RS when I was switching my older children out of traditional American curricula and starting over but decided against it because it doesn't go all the way through high school. They were already in 5th and 6th grades so I wanted something we could stick with for more than a couple of years (which is probably the longest they would have been with RS).

[Joyofsixreboot]

Just my $.02 on RS and time. I spent much more time instructing my ds when we used MM than we do in RS. I have one in B and one in D an probably only spend 30 min total.