Has anyone switched from Singapore Primary U.S. to the new Standards edition?

[MamaHappy]

Why did you switch? Is there a big difference between the two? Are you liking the new standards edition better? Thanks! :)

[MissKNG]

We are using US Edition for 1b but I plan on changing to Standards when we get to 2a. Reason being - I've heard the HiG is MUCH better with Standards.

[MamaHappy]

We are using US Edition for 1b but I plan on changing to Standards when we get to 2a. Reason being - I've heard the HiG is MUCH better with Standards.

 

The HIG is my reasoning for wanting to switch too, lol. :) We're doing 2A/2B of the US edition right now and we'll probably finish out the year with it, then switch to the Standards edition next year.

[mystika1]

Hi,

I had the same question last month and inquired about it at my local homeschool cottage store. They carry the new standards edition for k but said that they are not planning to sell the standards edition for any other grade level. They said that they have no desire switch as they have all used the US Edition with great success and prefer not to "conform to standards."(I am just repeating what was said to me:001_smile:)

 

I have heard that 6A in the standards edition is harder and requires more time to complete.(as much as two years) I have absolutely no idea if that is correct but would like find out. Maybe someone who is using it currently could chime in.

 

I am still on the fence about which one to purchase but as it costs less per year to use the US version, I suppose I will stick to that for now. Yes, I do understand that the SE has more pages which justifies the higher cost and still rounds out to be a bargain but...If I can give my dd a good foundation for cheaper then why not? Everyone is selling off their US Edition materials for cheap right now cause they are switching out. I can get multiple years worth of materials for the price of 1 year with the new stuff.:D I currently can't afford anything more expensive right now anyway.

 

Blessings,

 

Penny

[Susan in KY]

Why did you switch? Is there a big difference between the two? Are you liking the new standards edition better? Thanks! :)

I chose not to, and here's why: I mistakenly gave my ds the Standards exit exam for grade four, and I found it had a LOT of abstract math in it. Perhaps the 4th graders in CA can think abstractly before other 4th graders, but it seemed to me it would just be too much too soon. Instead of getting a math education that is useful and developmentally appropriate, Standards seems to me to push students into just memorizing things they aren't yet ready to understand.

 

SingaporeMath.com created Standards as a nod to CA, not because it was the right thing to do. The program straight out of Singapore is the one that produced the top students in the world, not the other way around.

 

We stuck with US Edition, and my ds is getting it and not complaining for the first year since kindergarten. I really had a lot of damage control to do after using Power K (a program used in the Singapore equivalent of US grade 1, no longer sold here in the US) with him in K. He suffered from that mistake for 4 years, because he shut down for math. He just wasn't ready for it developmentally. Last year we had to do a semester of nothing but math before he came out of it. Seriously. Don't push your dc before their time.

 

*getting off my soap box*

[Susan in KY]

Hi,

I had the same question last month and inquired about it at my local homeschool cottage store. They carry the new standards edition for k but said that they are not planning to sell the standards edition for any other grade level. They said that they have no desire switch as they have all used the US Edition with great success and prefer not to "conform to standards."(I am just repeating what was said to me:001_smile:)

 

They are very wise women, and so are you for sticking with the cheaper option. :)

[Penelope]

Reason being - I've heard the HiG is MUCH better with Standards.

 

This is one reason I switched, starting with 3A this year.

 

I don't know, I don't have US Edition to compare with for this level, but I'm not seeing a huge difference in HIG.

 

I also see a LOT of time spent (wasted?) in this book on rounding and estimation. Again, I don't have the US Edition to compare. For 3B I may try to find just the workbook so I have a basis for comparison.

[kalanamak]

prefer not to "conform to standards."(I am just repeating what was said to me:001_smile:)

 

 

This is laughable. The book from Singapore conforms to standards there.

 

I've got some of both, and the Standards edition has a little more content, which doesn't break my heart, and a little more picture examples, at least in the level 3, which doesn't upset me at all. You pay about the same per page. I'm sticking to US edition, because I think the spine flattens out a little better and kiddo is not patient with clamshelling books. :)

[Crimson Wife]

I'm awaiting my 4A SE order from RR and finishing up the last bit of 3B. I switched because I found the HIG for 3A/B rather hard to use and I've heard the SE HIG is better.

 

One thing I did NOT like about the SE when I previewed it at the local HS supply store is that it seemed rather "busy" from a visual standpoint. The US Ed. has a much "cleaner" look, which I prefer.

[Susan in KY]

This is laughable. The book from Singapore conforms to standards there.

 

When I called SingaporeMath.com and asked Jennifer Horst about the difference, she told me that the Standards edition was created for the California school systems, to conform to California state standards.

 

BTW, Jennifer Horst wrote the initial HiG's for Sonlight.

[mystika1]

Standards edition was created for the California school systems, to conform to California state standards.

 

.

That is why I didn't drop everything and switch. The US doesn't exactly score well in the math department and everyone says that the SE only added a couple of things in each level anyway so why bother? I think that is why the ladies at the homeschool cottage said that about "conforming to standards." I would rather stick with what is proven. It has been very tempting to switch as the new books are all in color and my dd would love it but.....if it ain't broke......:D Plus it is cheaper for me.

 

Sincerely,

 

Penny

[annabanana1992]

This topic comes up from time to time on the http://www.singaporemath.com website forums. You may want to check there for further information.

[MamaHappy]

This has become a very interesting thread! If you look at the scope and sequence for both the US and Standards editions, you will see they are very similar. There a few concepts that are introduced earlier in the Standards edition and there a few concepts in the Standards that are not in the US edition (like a little probability and stastics). I think it's important to remember that both editions are part of the Primary Mathematics series...so one is not necessarily better than the other and the integrity of the program is not compromised in the Standards ed. There just seems to be small differences between the two, at least as far as content. (I've been doing a little research this weekend, lol).

 

I applaud California's SBE for raising the bar on math standards. It's a shame that so many of the school board members and bureaucrats are fighting it. :(

Edited September 26, 2010 by MamaHappy

[kalanamak]

TI think that is why the ladies at the homeschool cottage said that about "conforming to standards."

 

But they are still using books "conforming to standards".

 

However, for every person who goes "eww, yuk, STANDARDS....CONFORMING", there is another schooler that says "hey, I can make my MIL shut up: we are conforming to standards" and buy it. :lol:

[MamaHappy]

"Conforming to standards" might not be a bad thing....I guess it all depends on what the standards are. :)

[Susan in KY]

Look at the exit exam for 4B, Standards Edition.

[hlee]

I am an example of a mom who did switch from U.S. to Standards edition. After my son finished 1B, I gave him a placement test to see how well he'd absorbed the material. Didn't do so well, and I wondered whether not having much review built-in to the U.S. edition was part of the reason. So I made the switch for 2A, and I've been pleased overall that there is much more review and practice built in, plus then I also added the Tests and Extra Practice books to help out. I don't necessarily feel so far that the HIG is that much better (in fact my version of 2A had pages missing and I had to get those sent to me!) but I definitely like the added practice that Standards builds in. So I'm happy with the switch so far.

[MamaHappy]

Look at the exit exam for 4B, Standards Edition.

 

I looked at it and compared it to the US ed. test. Every problem on the US test was on the Standards test and the Standards test has additional problems as well. I'm not sure what I'm looking for here? Is there something I'm not seeing? They both looked fine to me....:confused:

[mystika1]

I am an example of a mom who did switch from U.S. to Standards edition. After my son finished 1B, I gave him a placement test to see how well he'd absorbed the material. Didn't do so well, and I wondered whether not having much review built-in to the U.S. edition was part of the reason. So I made the switch for 2A, and I've been pleased overall that there is much more review and practice built in, plus then I also added the Tests and Extra Practice books to help out. I don't necessarily feel so far that the HIG is that much better (in fact my version of 2A had pages missing and I had to get those sent to me!) but I definitely like the added practice that Standards builds in. So I'm happy with the switch so far.

 

I am very glad you posted this as it helps when comparing the two editions. I was wondering how much review was added to the standards edition. Do you think that the SE provides enough review that it could eliminate the need for the extra practice book?

 

For the US Edition users who also use the extra practice book I have a question. I wanted to know how much extra practice is added with the EP book for each lesson. Such as 1 or 2 extra pages per lesson?

 

Thanks for starting this thread,:001_smile:

 

Penny

[Dana]

I am very glad you posted this as it helps when comparing the two editions. I was wondering how much review was added to the standards edition. Do you think that the SE provides enough review that it could eliminate the need for the extra practice book?

 

I use the Standards edition. I think ds needed the extra practice book (and more drill) in 2. He's got the hang of the concepts now, so in 3, I'm using the extra practice book a bit less - and we're skipping some of the text practice even on multiplication and division with 6-9.

 

I think using Standards, you're okay dropping extra practice, but if a concept is tricky, add in additional drill.

[kalanamak]

I am very glad you posted this as it helps when comparing the two editions. I was wondering how much review was added to the standards edition. Do you think that the SE provides enough review that it could eliminate the need for the extra practice book?

 

For the US Edition users who also use the extra practice book I have a question. I wanted to know how much extra practice is added with the EP book for each lesson. Such as 1 or 2 extra pages per lesson?

 

/QUOTE]

 

Well, the thing with math is that, at least for my kid, who is pretty "typical" IMO, SOME topics we breeze through, and some seem to be rehashed regularly. I cannot predict which ones he'll seem to "get" effortlessly, and which ones he will stumble on (although don't many have trouble, ie "hate", word problems?).

Thus, I cannot predict which topics we go right through, which ones we use EP, which ones we use EP and then IP, and then review again the next year.

 

I am use the US edition of 3A right now, with the SE of EP (I figured I could pick up, from there, what extras were in the SE). There is about the same amount of practice, per topic, in the EP as in the WB.

 

Additionally, we have found the FAN-Math PRocess Skills (replacing the inferior differently-name product...see the Singapore math site out of Oregon) really good for making word problems less of a problem.

 

On top of that we are doing the CWP for the year behind.

 

Perhaps I was deluded into thinking my kid was "mathy" because he came up with the concept of zero and negative numbers when he was 3 or so, but I think he is mathy, and we still have to work at it about 144 hours a year.

 

So, in answer to does the SE have enough review, I say it has to do with both the topic and your child. If I had more time, I'd skip the EP and get the IP and make my own EP problems. It isn't hard. But with full time work, I prefer to buy a book. YMMV.

[hlee]

The HIG will always list the corresponding Tests or EPs for assessment or reinforcement, and then I choose to use them as needed--like the poster above, there is no set rule, it depends on the child and what they might need more practice with. For me, it has been helpful to have it. I don't always use it, but I do use it enough that I'm glad I have it!

[HootyTooty]

We made the switch to Standards from the US this year after using it since 1A. So far so good. I like the added practice and have not seen a huge difference in the way the material is presented (not the order, since I know that did change). We still use the IP from the US edition so I don't know if that makes a difference.

[Susan in KY]

Well, the 4B Standards Edition includes rotational symmetry, tesselation, and a a few other things one learns in geometry. It also covers probability, which US/3rd editions do not. However, what really got me was the pre-Algebra in 4th grade. On pages five and six of the SE exam, students have to do ordered pairs and graph the pairs in the equation y=2x+1. Simple, yes, but really quite abstract for a 4th grader. My ds was totally blown away by it when he saw it on the exam.

 

At any rate, the SE exam is four pages longer than the 3rd edition/US edition exam. The findings of the US Dept of Ed regarding the differences between Singapore Math and US math programs were that Singapore goes for depth as opposed to breadth in the early years. (The summarized report is here.) US programs cover nearly twice as many topics, making them "a mile wide and an inch deep."

 

Just watching my son interact with the material on the SE exam, I could tell that the Standards Edition would seriously compromise the depth he needs in order to really learn his math. Incidentally, we use the textbook, workbook, HiG, Challenging Word Problems and Intensive Practice. It's rigorous, but effective.

 

FWIW,

Susan

[EKS]

We switched because the textbook is in full color for all of the books. This was important to my son. After switching, I've found that I appreciate the more systematic review and the addition of topics that are found in typical American math programs.

 

The Standards edition is the same material with a few things added in. I know, I've used both.

Edited September 27, 2010 by EKS

[kalanamak]

 

The Standards edition is the same material with a few things added in.

 

:iagree: And just a few things. The difference is not radical, it is not a commie California plot, your child won't be ruined, etc. etc.

[EKS]

:iagree: And just a few things. The difference is not radical, it is not a commie California plot, your child won't be ruined, etc. etc.

 

:lol:

 

Now if it were the *Washington* standards edition, I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole!

[Spy Car]

 

Just watching my son interact with the material on the SE exam, I could tell that the Standards Edition would seriously compromise the depth he needs in order to really learn his math. Incidentally, we use the textbook, workbook, HiG, Challenging Word Problems and Intensive Practice. It's rigorous, but effective.

 

How does it "comprise the depth" when the Standards Edition series contains ALL the material from the US Edition in addition to the extra materials and review.

 

One might not care for the wider scope and review (although I certainy do) but I don't see how the assertion that there is a "lack of depth" has merit.

 

Bill

[Susan in KY]

How does it "comprise the depth" when the Standards Edition series contains ALL the material from the US Edition in addition to the extra materials and review.

 

One might not care for the wider scope and review (although I certainy do) but I don't see how the assertion that there is a "lack of depth" has merit.

 

Bill

 

Hi, Bill,

 

I have the time now to add in CWP and IP. If we used SE, I am certain I would have to let go of some of that. Our normal schedule is Textbook/Workbook with HiG. At the semester's end, we go back through everything with IP and CWP. The test at the end of the IP is dc's grade. So no, if I have to cover more topics in a year, we will not have enough time to go through them as extensively as is necessary for mastery.

 

Better to delay somewhat and have a rock-solid understanding than to diversify and miss key concepts.

 

Susan

[Spy Car]

Hi, Bill,

 

I have the time now to add in CWP and IP. If we used SE, I am certain I would have to let go of some of that. Our normal schedule is Textbook/Workbook with HiG. At the semester's end, we go back through everything with IP and CWP. The test at the end of the IP is dc's grade. So no, if I have to cover more topics in a year, we will not have enough time to go through them as extensively as is necessary for mastery.

 

Better to delay somewhat and have a rock-solid understanding than to diversify and miss key concepts.

 

Susan

 

Hello Susan,

 

I understand what you are saying. But it's a different thing to say one version schedules out differently (for you) and that the extra material in the SE makes getting through the supplementary books (IP and CWP) more difficult due to time constrants you feel, than to make the statement the program "lacks depth" in some way.

 

My feeling is the SE has "more depth" because we cover more math ground, which includes both more topics and more review of the topics studied.

 

Even as "after-schoolers" who are a year in advance of grade level (and are supplementing with the IPs and CWPs and a good amount of material from MEP, Miquon, and a good number other math programs) I relish the added weight of the SE. And would not want to see the offerings lighter. For us that would mean less depth not more depth.

 

Perspectives may differ on the amount of material one wants to cover in a year. The SE books combined with the IPs and CWPs don't seem ovally burdensome here. In fact my "problem" has been how to slow down the consumption of the Singapore materials from happening too quickly rather than the reverse.

 

I appreciate that you feel the more limited scope of US Edition fits your pace better. But that remains a very different point than saying the SE "lacks depth" when the SE coursework has more depth built-in to it. Your preference for one edition over another may be perfectly sound for you and your child. I'm only concerned that people read these threads with an impression that the SE lacks depth, when on an objective basis it has more depth, as it covers all the material in the US Edition, plus additional topics and more review.

 

Cheers,

Bill

Edited September 28, 2010 by Spy Car

[Susan in KY]

I appreciate that you feel the more limited scope of US Edition fits your pace better. But that remains a very different point than saying the SE "lacks depth" when the SE coursework has more depth built-in to it. Your preference for one edition over another may be perfectly sound for you and your child. I'm only concerned that people read these threads with an impression that the SE lacks depth, when on an objective basis it has more depth, as it covers all the material in the US Edition, plus additional topics and more review.

 

Fair enough. I should have said it's too broad, since that is my real beef.

 

I think that the concepts they cover in 4B are confusing for a not-quite abstract thinking 9 year old (I had a young 4th grader) and are best covered at a later time. That is precisely what bothered me: tossing in concepts which, for some, are developmentally beyond them. There's a reason for waiting until middle school for algebra. The US/3rd Edition does a great job of teaching students the concepts behind the higher level maths.

 

I notice that a lot of the people using Standards have younger kids. I don't doubt that for most of them everything will work out just fine. However, I really think that considering the ramifications of acceleration beyond developmental abilities is wise when thinking about the program as a whole for elementary. The 3rd/US Edition worked, and still works, very well.

[mystika1]

 

I notice that a lot of the people using Standards have younger kids. I don't doubt that for most of them everything will work out just fine. However, I really think that considering the ramifications of acceleration beyond developmental abilities is wise when thinking about the program as a whole for elementary. The 3rd/US Edition worked, and still works, very well.

 

I really like this thread. It has given me lots of "food for thought.":001_smile:

Very interesting topic.

 

Thanks!

[TKDmom]

I have always used the Standards Ed. and I was just going to start a thread asking if anyone has switched from SE to US. I just recently heard that the US ed. has fewer lessons and review. I tend to feel so guilty when we skip the practice pages (there's usually one per chapter), even if it's obvious that my dc understand the concepts. I have never looked at the US ed., so I don't know if this is the same, but the SE also has a review lesson at the end of each unit. These reviews are much longer and more dense than a typical lesson, so I usually let my dc skip the textbook review and spread the workbook review out over 2-3 days.

 

ETA: You should also take into consideration that SE does not currently have CWP or IP books available--I wish it did.

Edited September 29, 2010 by bonniebeth4
clarification