For All Who Freak Out About Math...Including Myself :)

[Rivka]

From now on, I'm prefacing all my posts with "As a Ph.D.-level psychologist..."

 

Then you'll all have to bow down to my every pronouncement! Bwahahahaha!!!

 

...Or maybe "credentials" aren't worth all that much here. Just a thought.

[cdrumm4448]

I thought, even if we all have different ideas about what classical education actually meant, and what it looks like in our own homes, we at least agreed that it should be rigorous.

 

It should be rigorous. I don't personally believe state standards are rigorous enough. Thus, why I homeschool.

 

 

ETA: I am friends with an unschooling family. Not my cup of tea, but I have to say their kids (4 of them from 3 years old to 9 years old), who have never been "taught" a single thing are all at least average in their knowledge and proficiency of math. They could easily equal the results of an average public schooled student. So, this friendship plays into my idea of standards.

Edited April 21, 2011 by cdrumm4448

[texasmama]

There’s never enough time to do it right the first time, but there is always enough time to go back and do it again.

 

The above was pulled from the article listed by the OP. I'll give someone an isosceles triangle if he/she can explain the meaning of it to me.

 

Really? There is never enough time to do it right the first time? I'm pretty pressed for time currently, but I'm giving it my best shot at "doing it right the first time".:tongue_smilie:

 

(I don't object to MUS. I have never even seen MUS. This is not about MUS.;))

[nmoira]

From now on, I'm prefacing all my posts with "As a Ph.D.-level psychologist..."

 

Then you'll all have to bow down to my every pronouncement! Bwahahahaha!!!

 

...Or maybe "credentials" aren't worth all that much here. Just a thought.

Ahem, you missed the "AND kids in double digits." You'll have to wait a bit yet before we can take your opinion with anything other than a grain of salt. :tongue_smilie:

[junepep]

Just in case anyone was curious about math before the bible, here's a link to the Before Pythagoras exhibit:

http://www.nyu.edu/isaw/exhibitions/before-pythagoras/

The highlights page has information about cuneiform tablets that give us an idea of what types of mathematics were being performed by the ancient Babylonians.

 

As to everything else, I'll chime in with-- as a parent I never feel like I'm doing 'enough' or things the 'right' way, but by that same token I have trouble believing that I'd be OK with the idea that a developmentally 'normal' child of mine would be behind the (imho) non-rigorous public school standards. I hated math. I'm pretty darn sure that it hated me, and I know that I'm terrible at it now. I'm currently trying to re-teach myself pre-algebra in an attempt to obtain some small appreciation for the subject, barring that perhaps a better understanding of it, so that I can teach my children not to struggle with it as well. However, despite all that, after 13 years of public school I was never behind in math. LOL those are my credentials ;)

 

I will also refrain from commenting on gender biases except to say that spy car is catchier and easier to spell than Nmoira(sp? I'm so sorry if I've misspelled it again!)

 

and...

 

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, I WANT that cowboy icon :lol: *makes grabby hands* Where is he?!?! HOW do I get him? waaaannnnntttttttt!!!

[Spy Car]

Bill, have you ever looked at MUS materials? Addition and subtraction are taught in the same level. As soon as addition is introduced, they also introduce baby algebra (4+__=8). When subtraction is introduced, they have the kids check their answers by "adding up." While the focus of each level is mastery of a certain topic (addition and subtraction, multiplication, division, etc.) there is also inclusion of other topics such as fractions in earlier levels as they relate to the focus topic.

 

I have not looked at the MUS materials in a long time. It was one of the programs I looked into when my son was still a toddler and I was researching how I wanted to approach his math education.

 

I watched the MUS DVD and found Steve Demme to be an engaging and avuncular teacher. I can see why people like him and many of his demonstrations made complete sense to me. My persuing the use of C Rods was inspired in part by watching Steve Demme use MUS blocks, so I have cause to thank him.

 

I did have "mixed feelings" about some of the extra-mathematical elements (such as explanations that 9s like to such up ones) felling that that might work for some children, but that is was not the way I wanted to teach concepts. Not the end of the world.

 

I realize now I misspoke about addition and subtraction not being mixed in the first two levels. I'm sorry about that. But is it true that multiplication not dealt with until the 3rd Level (Delta), that division is in the 4th Level (Gamma) and fractions are in Level 5 (Episilon)?

 

This (if so) is a very non-standard sequence. Again, I am happy to admit there may be children who trive best on this sequence so it is good to have the option. But is it an optimal sequence for most children? I have my doubts. In fact it is the antithesis in many ways of what has worked in our situation, which is stressing the interrelatedness of basic mathematics.

 

I continue to think the people at MUS are putting out a very strange message in this article, and one that is not ultimately helpful.

 

Bill

[Halcyon]

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, I WANT that cowboy icon :lol: *makes grabby hands* Where is he?!?! HOW do I get him? waaaannnnntttttttt!!!

 

 

[jewellsmommy]

Admittedly I have never used MUS. My close irl does use it and I have seen it when I have helped her son with math. It seems the kids eventually arrive at the same place but the timing of topics are different. So, I can easily see how they get the reputation of being behind.

 

Anyway...I think it is great to remind parents that not all kids are at the same level at the same time. However, if you live in a state where you have to test, you can't just wait it out. You have to figure out the problem and address it or risk not meeting the benchmark. If you don't reach that then you will be put on "academic probation" in VA. So, rather or not I agree with state standards or not, I still have to meet them. I see what the author was saying, but that is a luxury not everyone has.

[joysworld]

I can understand the the basic message behind the article. And to a degree, I agree with it. As homeschoolers, at least the ones I know, it's so easy to fret over how our children compare academically with those is ps. So I think a message saying 'that's not what matters' is needed for some.

 

I'm one that is VERY relaxed with my school approach. For kindergarten, we unschool of sorts. In first grade, I do some formal schooling, but not much. We do some formal reading and math lessons. My son will be 6 in May, and he's doing simple multiplication, division, very simple algebra. His sister on the other hand (she's 16 months younger) has no care to even know that one plus one is two. Does this mean something is wrong with her? Nope. What it means is that he and her are two different people.

 

She starts Kindergarten this next year, and I already have people pressuring me to do formal schooling for her because she's 'behind'. Often I feel the pressure to make sure she keeps up, not with her brother by any means, but with other typical children her age. I have to keep my self from pressuring her to do something that she is just not ready for. I know that she will catch on, in her time. If in first grade, she still doesn't get the concept of one plus one equals two, then I still won't think she's behind. I will just start her formal lessons with where she is at, and teach her how she will absorb it best. It still will not be rigorous lessons.

 

What I don't understand is why things got so ugly on here? Isn't that why we all homeschool? So we can school our children how we think is best? Just because I think my way is best;) doesn't mean that other ways aren't as good for other families as my way good for ours.

[junepep]

 

This is just so unbearably cruel :crying:

 

& Joysworld, it got heated because there is some room for disagreement in what constitutes "behind" and frankly people tend to get defensive when they feel that someone makes a comment that resembles them. It happens a lot on these forums. It doesn't help that tone is so hard to convey electronically as we're all jotting our thoughts off before running to put out some household fire or spend time with our significant other. As a side-note I rarely post unless I'm not feeling well, which seems odd at the outset ;) but here I am, cold *check* well trained mind forum login *check* otherwise I just lurk because I feel that I haven't the time to get sucked in -- because I do get sucked in and emotional about posts -- not this one, but others ;)

 

My youngest is on the snail track, and there's nothing wrong with that. She is beautiful and creative in ways that my oldest isn't and I adore her even if she can't even count to 5 or doesn't know her letters by either names or sounds yet, she's far more interested in the colors and bugs in her world than anything else -- but there comes a point at which I would worry about a child that couldn't add 1+1 with manipulatives by the time that they're six. And I would be seeking a second opinion about a potential learning delay or processing problem.The beauty of homeschooling is that we can move at our pace, the danger that I see in homeschooling is that sometimes we don't know when to get help or even if we should seek help at all. It's so easy to second guess the stuff that really Doesn't matter, that a real issue could be swept under the rug in the same way.

[Ellesmere]

Bill, just curious how long you've taught math, how many high school and college graduates you've raised?

Mr. Demme may take a different approach but I'd say he's proven himself. He's not only a math scholar with a thriving business, but on a personal note has raised 4 children sucessfully into adulthood.

 

What exactly are your credentials again?

 

I am very new here, and will gladly apologize if I step on toes. But the tone of this post really is unkind. In no way am I saying that you are unkind, but I think this was rude and it does not add constructively to the discussion. Even if I disagreed with Bill's view, I would be still be disappointed in the tone here.

I have every right to question his credentials in regards to his knowledge of math and raising children. ... Reminds me of how much I knew about parenting before I actually was one.

Just because you can doesn't mean you should. And it's ok to admit when you are wrong. (I've had to apologize plenty of times!) I'm not going to quote the entire post, as it doesn't deserve repeating, but do you believe your tone was polite and in any way conducive to civil discussion? Sure, I was a huge parenting expert before I had kids, the worst source of parenting advice. But I think he is offering commentary based on what he's done in his journey and it's exciting to hear what his son is learning ... and enjoying. Maybe Bill hasn't raised kids to college age. But I think Bill contributes positively in this forum. He offers advice and his world won't collapse if I disagree with him. And I've never heard him claim to be the ultimate authority on math. Posts from him and others have kept me reading, posts like this are a turn-off. But, you may disregard me since I'm not even a homeschooler yet, and my kids are not as old as yours.

From now on, I'm prefacing all my posts with "As a Ph.D.-level psychologist..."

 

Then you'll all have to bow down to my every pronouncement! Bwahahahaha!!!

 

...Or maybe "credentials" aren't worth all that much here. Just a thought.

:lol:

 

Now, back to the article. I agreed with a few points (not letting age dictate everything, not letting students progress based on grade level without achievement) but being behind is a real problem and I share those concerns. Just my quick thoughts on it, and I appreciate those who have discussed it thoughtfully.

[kiana]

FWIW: I think there's a real difference between a kid who's moving slowly but steadily forward, and a kid who's completely floundering.

 

If the kid's making progress slowly, but putting in appropriate time and effort and understanding what he is learning, I agree with the article. It doesn't need to be a race.

 

If the kid's lost, in tears every day, learns something one day and forgets it the next, it's time to re-evaluate. You don't have to wait until he's 18 and still counting on his fingers.

[RanchGirl]

Wow, this is an incredibly rude post.

 

But (a) accurate and (b) no more rude than several other posts on this thread. Maybe some folks are tired of Mr Millstone getting a free pass on rudeness and attitude.

[Paintedlady]

Without going back and quoting all the different posts, I just want to clear up something. I didn't say your kids need to be adults or that you need a Phd to form an opinion. On the contrary, everyone is entitled to an opinion. But if I'm trying to decide who's opinion gets more weight, I'm going with the guy who writes the books from the depths of his experiences, not from the guy who's read the books and has yet to experience anything.

 

Bill constantly presents himself as a math guru and will argue you into the ground if you disagree with him. He has the right to his opinions but frankly I give his opinion very little weight b/c he has no experience with teaching.

 

So forgive me if I'm a bit irritated with his condemnation of someone who's proven himself, when he has miles yet to go before even hitting the starting line. It's insulting.

[Geo]

But (a) accurate and (b) no more rude than several other posts on this thread. Maybe some folks are tired of Mr Millstone getting a free pass on rudeness and attitude.

 

:iagree:

I think the "tone" was set early on. It set the ball-a-rollin'.

 

Geo

[Hedgehogs4]

I was reading this post with interest about the content. Then the mud-flinging started.

 

It's not about whether or not the comments are right, wrong, deserved, or earned. These comments clearly violate the board rule of "NO PERSONAL ATTACKS." What started out as an interesting debate became a gauntlet that an interested reader had to run through, ducking and covering. please read here... http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/faq.php

 

It's not Bill who is "painted" in a poor light right now. I hope you who "got the ball rollin" feel better for having said all of that, but really it's just silly. The board is big enough for all of our opinions. We're here to learn from each other.

 

That said, Bill, I do appreciate your insight because I really struggle with "am I doing enough in math?" and do feel it is a disservice to a child to not push him in this area. Thanks for the input.

Edited April 21, 2011 by Hedgehogs4

[Guest RecumbentHeart]

This whole thing seems wrong-headed to me.

 

I spent a Sunday afternoon talking to a PS teacher and listening to her talk about the speed she HAS to teach at and the time she DOES NOT HAVE to help the students who don't get it in the scheduled time before she HAS to move on.

 

THIS is a reason for ME not to want my children in PS. NOT more/better math at ages earlier than PS - I just want my child to GET IT and get it WELL. Whether that's in line with some schedule or not.

 

Being able to educate my child at his/her own speed is reason enough for me to homeschool whether that's faster OR slower and it was encouragement in THAT that I (and no doubt, others) got out of the article - as I believe it was intended.

 

Thankfully, although my state tests, they don't and can't do anything about the results of those tests (in part because the majority in PS schools here are BEHIND the tests).

 

 

eta: sorry for the caps .. I was too lazy to go through and use italics. Not meaning to "shout".

Edited April 21, 2011 by RecumbentHeart

[Hedgehogs4]

This whole thing seems wrong-headed to me.

 

I spent a Sunday afternoon talking to a PS teacher and listening to her talk about the speed she HAS to teach at and the time she DOES NOT HAVE to help the students who don't get it in the scheduled time before she HAS to move on.

 

THIS is a reason for ME not to want my children in PS. NOT more/better math at ages earlier than PS - I just want my child to GET IT and get it WELL. Whether that's in line with some schedule or not.

 

 

 

your name says it all...and I agree. I want my child to get it thoroughly before we move on, and so I choose mastery-based programs.

 

My primary struggle (and I'll wager that I am not alone in this) is often pride, i.e. will I look incompetent if my child is "behind" where the ps or other super-bright hs-ers are in their studies...but that's my problem, isn't it!? :tongue_smilie:

Edited April 21, 2011 by Hedgehogs4

[Hedgehogs4]

oops sorry...double post.

[Guest RecumbentHeart]

My primary struggle (and I'll wager that I am not alone in this) is often pride, i.e. will I look incompetent if my child is "behind" where the ps or other super-bright hs-ers are in their studies...but that's my problem, isn't it!? :tongue_smilie:

 

I have that same temptation. Reading the article and this thread made me examine that again. I realized that while I wholeheartedly mean what I said I my post I also find myself subconsciously defining the value of "at the child's pace" in terms of whether the child is "ahead" or "behind". I was emphatic in my post because I was kicking myself in the backside for my double-mindedness.

[Bee]

most parents don't have the luxury of waiting and hoping that their child will eventually get math concepts. My dd who goes to school struggles horribly with math (and she did at home too) and I'm worried about what will happen when she gets to high school and she is still struggling and not understanding the basic math concepts and they will want her to be taking algebra and geometry and passing the state mandated test so she can graduate. When I discussed this with a retired teacher who still subs, she said "Well if she struggles in high school they can give her a private tutor paid for by the state and if that doesn't work and she can't pass the test they will label her and have her take a different version of the test." Great, so my child has to consistently flunk math for years before anyone besides her parents worries. Ultimately, it does come down to us, as her parents, to find whatever works to help her succeed and we won't be doing her any favors if we take a "just wait and see" attitiude.

[Flux]

Just in case anyone was curious about math before the bible, here's a link to the Before Pythagoras exhibit:

http://www.nyu.edu/isaw/exhibitions/before-pythagoras/

The highlights page has information about cuneiform tablets that give us an idea of what types of mathematics were being performed by the ancient Babylonians.

 

As to everything else, I'll chime in with-- as a parent I never feel like I'm doing 'enough' or things the 'right' way, but by that same token I have trouble believing that I'd be OK with the idea that a developmentally 'normal' child of mine would be behind the (imho) non-rigorous public school standards. I hated math. I'm pretty darn sure that it hated me, and I know that I'm terrible at it now. I'm currently trying to re-teach myself pre-algebra in an attempt to obtain some small appreciation for the subject, barring that perhaps a better understanding of it, so that I can teach my children not to struggle with it as well. However, despite all that, after 13 years of public school I was never behind in math. LOL those are my credentials ;)

 

I will also refrain from commenting on gender biases except to say that spy car is catchier and easier to spell than Nmoira(sp? I'm so sorry if I've misspelled it again!)

 

and...

 

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, I WANT that cowboy icon :lol: *makes grabby hands* Where is he?!?! HOW do I get him? waaaannnnntttttttt!!!

 

I haven't even read the original article yet. Instead, I just kept reading responses...kind of like when you're channel flipping and get stuck on Jerry Springer for just a couple of minutes before wondering why you stopped to watch.:tongue_smilie:

Thanks for the link. This is why I love this board so much. You never know what kind of new info you'll happen on. I wish I lived in a place that got such neato exhibits. Speaking of, I saw (online, not IRL) something that made me think of Spy Car last night. Hark! The White Whale! Oh yeah, and thanks for the Pythagoras kids book recommendation from earlier, too. I'm adding it to my library list.

Edited April 21, 2011 by Flux

[Dana]

Bill constantly presents himself as a math guru and will argue you into the ground if you disagree with him. He has the right to his opinions but frankly I give his opinion very little weight b/c he has no experience with teaching.

 

 

I didn't read the article.

 

I do have over 15 years teaching math at high school and at college. I haven't seen Bill say anything I'd disagree with on math. I think his opinions are well researched and can't think of something he's said on math that has been contrary to my years of experience. Some of his posts on Miquon and Cuisinaire rods finally got me to get the rods. I wish I'd started earlier with them.

 

I get students who test into developmental studies classes and they have recently graduated from high schools. Algebra I is the lowest class students can get high school credit for - so high school graduates should be testing MUCH higher - but they were just passed along through school and didn't learn the material.

 

A solid foundation is SO important for higher-level maths. NOT just being able to do arithmetic, but being able to understand WHY you need a common denominator to add but not to multiply.

 

Ray linked an article earlier in the week about math that talked about some of the issues with math education in the states. It mentioned students not understanding an equals sign. I saw this when working with one of my students last night. This article is definitely a good one - and they mention Singapore math for word problems.

 

No, you shouldn't be going around feeling constantly guilty over what you're not doing; each child is different and it's wonderful that there are different texts and approaches; BUT I really hate how the US has the "math is hard" mentality and that we say it's okay not to understand math. It's not.

[Guest RecumbentHeart]

most parents don't have the luxury of waiting and hoping that their child will eventually get math concepts. My dd who goes to school struggles horribly with math (and she did at home too) and I'm worried about what will happen when she gets to high school and she is still struggling and not understanding the basic math concepts and they will want her to be taking algebra and geometry and passing the state mandated test so she can graduate. When I discussed this with a retired teacher who still subs, she said "Well if she struggles in high school they can give her a private tutor paid for by the state and if that doesn't work and she can't pass the test they will label her and have her take a different version of the test." Great, so my child has to consistently flunk math for years before anyone besides her parents worries. Ultimately, it does come down to us, as her parents, to find whatever works to help her succeed and we won't be doing her any favors if we take a "just wait and see" attitiude.

 

But the article isn't about a "just wait and see" attitude - it's about letting the child learn at their own pace to make sure they really get what they're learning and making that the priority over a time schedule.

 

It's no surprise for a child to be behind on math in the PS system - they have to move them along can't stop and give the child the time they need to get what is being taught. That's the beautiful liberty of homeschooling - not a luxury, a liberty. It shouldn't be a luxury to have the chance to actually learn what is being taught.

[Spock]

 

This sort of "ultra-mastery" approach may be just the thing some children need. For those families whose children need this type of learning/teaching I can imagine MUS is a god-send.

 

But I question if the average student ought not be taught the interrelationship of mathematical operations. Learning that addition and subtraction are the inverses of one another from the beginning. That multiplication is serial addition, that division is the inverse of multiplication (as well as serial subtraction) and fractions are division in a different form.

 

 

 

Just so you know, MUS teaches addition and subtraction together the first year, and does teach that they are inverses of each other, though the main focus that year is mastering single digit addition/subtraction facts and concepts, as well as the yearly focus on place value and its meaning. The second year extends the knowledge of place value, addition, and subtraction with a focus on multi-digit addition and subtraction. (Of these, I have only used Beta, which my daughter hated because she got sick of multi-digit addition and subtraction and wanted more variety of topics. That is why we switched after using that one year.)

 

I haven't used the third and fourth years (as mentioned above), but I have looked at the samples online. The 3rd year covers multiplication, and does show that it is repeated addition. While division is not taught that year, problems such as ____ x 4 = 32 are covered, preparing the way for division. The division book (the next year) reinforces division as the opposite of multiplication, and does present division problems in fraction form thus introducing fractions as a form of division.

 

My oldest used the fraction and decimal/percent levels as remedial work before pre-algebra. They also concentrate on the relations between the operations.

 

So, while MUS has a strange scope and sequence, it DOES address the meaning of and relations between operations.

 

I think the article talks about not worrying if a child is behind in math because many parents START MUS with a child who has had difficulty learning math with other approaches. The idea is to reassure a parent that the fact that the child has not learned material at the usual time does not mean that the child will not learn math. There is no reason to despair if your child is learning more slowly than average. The article was not aimed at the kind of parent who would just think "it doesn't matter, then"--it was aimed at the kind of parent who would be reassured, but would redouble efforts to help the child master the material at their own pace.

[Paintedlady]

But the article isn't about a "just wait and see" attitude - it's about letting the child learn at their own pace to make sure they really get what they're learning and making that the priority over a time schedule.

 

It's no surprise for a child to be behind on math in the PS system - they have to move them along can't stop and give the child the time they need to get what is being taught. That's the beautiful liberty of homeschooling - not a luxury, a liberty. It shouldn't be a luxury to have the chance to actually learn what is being taught.

 

:iagree: Thank you! I'm starting feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone. People are reading all sorts of meanings into Mr. Demme's words that are just flat out wrong. I don't know that I've ever seen such a misconception here.

[Paintedlady]

Just so you know, MUS teaches addition and subtraction together the first year, and does teach that they are inverses of each other, though the main focus that year is mastering single digit addition/subtraction facts and concepts, as well as the yearly focus on place value and its meaning. The second year extends the knowledge of place value, addition, and subtraction with a focus on multi-digit addition and subtraction. (Of these, I have only used Beta, which my daughter hated because she got sick of multi-digit addition and subtraction and wanted more variety of topics. That is why we switched after using that one year.)

 

I haven't used the third and fourth years (as mentioned above), but I have looked at the samples online. The 3rd year covers multiplication, and does show that it is repeated addition. While division is not taught that year, problems such as ____ x 4 = 32 are covered, preparing the way for division. The division book (the next year) reinforces division as the opposite of multiplication, and does present division problems in fraction form thus introducing fractions as a form of division.

 

My oldest used the fraction and decimal/percent levels as remedial work before pre-algebra. They also concentrate on the relations between the operations.

 

So, while MUS has a strange scope and sequence, it DOES address the meaning of and relations between operations.

 

I think the article talks about not worrying if a child is behind in math because many parents START MUS with a child who has had difficulty learning math with other approaches. The idea is to reassure a parent that the fact that the child has not learned material at the usual time does not mean that the child will not learn math. There is no reason to despair if your child is learning more slowly than average. The article was not aimed at the kind of parent who would just think "it doesn't matter, then"--it was aimed at the kind of parent who would be reassured, but would redouble efforts to help the child master the material at their own pace.

 

I'm not saying that everything Bill says is wrong. My irritation is with his dismissal of Mr. Demme's decades of experience as teacher, writer and parent. Clearly Mr. Demme is doing something right and I think dismissing him without any experience is laughable.

[My3Monkeys]

I realize now I misspoke about addition and subtraction not being mixed in the first two levels. I'm sorry about that. But is it true that multiplication not dealt with until the 3rd Level (Delta), that division is in the 4th Level (Gamma) and fractions are in Level 5 (Episilon)?

 

This (if so) is a very non-standard sequence. Again, I am happy to admit there may be children who trive best on this sequence so it is good to have the option. But is it an optimal sequence for most children? I have my doubts. In fact it is the antithesis in many ways of what has worked in our situation, which is stressing the interrelatedness of basic mathematics.

 

I continue to think the people at MUS are putting out a very strange message in this article, and one that is not ultimately helpful.

 

Bill

 

It is a different sequence but just because there isn't a focus on fractions until Epsilon doesn't mean that fractions haven't been introduced at all. My daughter is just finishing up Gamma. Equivalent fractions were introduced right along with multiplication. It looks like fractions will be discussed again in the Delta book (just gave it a quick look).

 

Odd sequence and all, it works for us. Not every family is going to like every curriculum out there and that's part of the beauty of homeschooling - we can pick and choose.

 

As far as the article is concerned, I think it would be comforting to a parent who is pulling a child from PS and homeschooling for the first time. When a parent pulls a 6th grader out of school and finds that their child can't multiply, I would much rather see them go back and focus on mastering the skills rather than focusing on the fact that their child is in 6th grade and just plugging along.

[Homemama2]

But the article isn't about a "just wait and see" attitude - it's about letting the child learn at their own pace to make sure they really get what they're learning and making that the priority over a time schedule.

 

It's no surprise for a child to be behind on math in the PS system - they have to move them along can't stop and give the child the time they need to get what is being taught. That's the beautiful liberty of homeschooling - not a luxury, a liberty. It shouldn't be a luxury to have the chance to actually learn what is being taught

 

 

This is what I took away from the article. I had spent the day before freaking out b/c we weren't as 'far in the book' as we need to be to finish school on a certain date. If it takes a few extra days to finish a lesson or the math book but the child gets the info, thats more important than pushing them through just to finish it by a certain date. For me, the article was just saying :chillpill:. Keep steadily working on the concepts until the kid gets it. And I needed a BIG dose of :chillpill: that day, lol!

[Spy Car]

 

That said, Bill, I do appreciate your insight because I really struggle with "am I doing enough in math?" and do feel it is a disservice to a child to not push him in this area. Thanks for the input.

 

Thank you for the other nice words.

 

I hope you don't mind if I pick up on the one word "push" and launch into a discussion that almost certainly deviates from what you mean by the term, so bear with me here.

 

When I hear "push" it makes me think of using developmentally inappropriate means to teach things that children are not ready to learn yet (at least in that fashion). It is not about the "content" of what is being taught, but "how" that content is being taught. And, using this definition, "pushing" is a bad thing.

 

The key (to me) when teaching math, among other subjects, is to really understand what a child comprehends, what they do not comprehend, and what they need to know to be able to reach an understanding of things they are having a problem with (even if this goes back to learning precursor skills) and how a parent/teacher can frame the concepts that a child is struggling with in terms they are most likely to understand (which includeds deviating from a curiculmn prescribed method when it clearly is not working).

 

My impression of Steve Demme (from my very limited exposure to his MUS materials) is that he believes the same thing. I have always been impressed from the overview MUS video that he has a gift for making things simple for a child to understand. I don't think MUS would have been a good fit for us, I question the scope and sequence as being what I would choose as a "standard" but have always valued that there is a program of this sort for children who need (or would thrive best using) this sort of method.

 

If and when a child has difficultly understanding a concept I believe it is wise to address those misunderstanding poste haste rather than assuming the child will "get it" two years from now. For me that means looking at the method and meeting the child on their level in terms of how material is taught and learned, with an eye towards having break-throughs in areas of difficulty.

 

 

That does not mean every child has to be in the same place. I have no doubt that Mr Demme has helped many children learn math, and that his program has been particularly valuable for children who may not have succeeded with alternative methods.

 

I don't know if he wrote the linked article (or not) but I do not think his words were not well-chosen nor the message a positive one. Saying where in the Bible does it say children need to do algebra (as if today most children don't need to) strikes me as a very strange thing to say. And omitting the need to take positive action when a child is "behind" is to my mind not the thing people need to hear (or not hear).

 

On the other hand, accepting our children for who they are and not making ourselves crazy with guilt about where they are in relation to other children is a good thing. I'm sure that at the end of the day there would be a great deal of common ground.

 

Sorry for using your post as a launching pad. I hope you have good success finding the the right means of turning on lightbulbs with your child.

 

I appreciate the kind words, as I actually am a human being with feelings.

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

So, while MUS has a strange scope and sequence, it DOES address the meaning of and relations between operations.

 

Thank you for the examples. While the MUS scope and sequence is "non-standard" (and not what I would choose for my child), I have always acknowledged that there is likely a subset of children for whom this is exactly what *they* need to succeed and that MUS is likely a godsend for those parents and students who need this type approach.

 

It is a great thing for parent/teachers to have a different option.

 

I think the article talks about not worrying if a child is behind in math because many parents START MUS with a child who has had difficulty learning math with other approaches. The idea is to reassure a parent that the fact that the child has not learned material at the usual time does not mean that the child will not learn math. There is no reason to despair if your child is learning more slowly than average. The article was not aimed at the kind of parent who would just think "it doesn't matter, then"--it was aimed at the kind of parent who would be reassured, but would redouble efforts to help the child master the material at their own pace.

 

If that is the point, and it may be, it think it is made poorly. I see nothing in the article that would inspire or urge a parent to "redouble" their efforts, in fact it seems to be the opposite advice. I would have appreciated an article that said "don't worry, meet your children on their level, don't get caught up in comparing them to others, but do they to focus on what they are failing to understand and try to find ways to help them grasp what they are struggling with in ways you think they will comprehend." That, for me, would have been a good article. This one leaves much to be desired.

 

Bill

[Hedgehogs4]

Thank you for the other nice words.

 

I hope you don't mind if I pick up on the one word "push" and launch into a discussion that almost certainly deviates from what you mean by the term, so bear with me here.

 

When I hear "push" it makes me think of using developmentally inappropriate means to teach things that children are not ready to learn yet (at least in that fashion). It is not about the "content" of what is being taught, but "how" that content is being taught. And, using this definition, "pushing" is a bad thing.

 

Bill

 

I totally agree, and thank you for not launching into a projected assumption of my meaning. "Pushing" for me means expecting mastery of a developmentally-appropriate subject, the self-discipline to practice that subject regularly, and for increasingly long periods of time without whining (again, at age-appropriate levels), not allowing a child to give in to his / her frustrations on something that is not understood, but coming alongside him/her to guide her through it and then gain independence.

 

Math and music are the two areas where my son is "pushed" because he has both the talent and ability, and the need to develop the self-discipline to not whine about having to do it. The more he succeeds, the more he enjoys it, therefore it is worth it to keep the "gas pedal" engaged and the "vehicle" moving forward at a decent pace. If he were frustrated to tears and not comprehending...then it would be "pushing" in the negative sense.

 

On the other hand, he has struggled with handwriting and certain aspects of language arts, and for that I have backed off at different times to allow both physical and cognitive ability to catch up. I have led him to success in these areas by going at it indirectly, in ways he was not realizing that he was "writing" or "doing grammar." (hehe.) Is that pushing? It's guiding through a different avenue, I think, because in the case of straight LA, spelling, etc, he would be frustrated to tears, and I know that I know that this kid will someday be able to write very well. He is extremely creative and articulate, but at the time we were confronting these challenges a couple of years ago, he was still all tumbling and fists, not ready to sit for long periods of time with a pencil in his hand. Now he may be a bit "behind" (I figure about 1/2 to 1 year behind his peers) but the ground will easily be made up with maturity, and already is. This comes from knowing your child and understanding what is best for him. The payoff is now he is able and ready to face grammar and LA and take it in stride, and even enjoy it (plugging WWE! here)

 

Now that I've said all that, the better word choice would probably be "to appropriately challenge rather than "to push."

Edited April 21, 2011 by Hedgehogs4

[DarlaS]

I'm not saying that everything Bill says is wrong. My irritation is with his dismissal of Mr. Demme's decades of experience as teacher, writer and parent. Clearly Mr. Demme is doing something right and I think dismissing him without any experience is laughable.

 

Mr. Demme was likely writing to a very specific audience: consumers of his books.

 

It does have an atypical scope & sequence, and because of that, will be behind in some areas--temporarily.

 

I believe this article was written to address that.

[Surfside Academy]

Darlasowders: I think you're assessment is correct.

 

I'm not sure even saying the are "behind" is correct though. I would say that there are concepts that just haven't been introduced yet. Just because another curriculum introduces fractions in first grade and a child can write the fraction 1/2 by looking at a circle partly shaded doesn't mean they "know" fractions. There are still many more concepts to be introduced over the following years. MUS just chooses to introduce most of the concepts in one year.

 

I liken it to California history. In our state, it has been tradition for many years that CA history is taught in 4th grade...no rhyme or reason...that's just the way it's always been. Just because I choose to wait till 5th grade doesn't make my children "behind". They'll eventually get it during their elementary years, I just chose a different sequence...much like MUS.

[Spy Car]

Mr. Demme was likely writing to a very specific audience: consumers of his books.

 

It does have an atypical scope & sequence, and because of that, will be behind in some areas--temporarily.

 

I believe this article was written to address that.

 

Mr Demme undoubtedly wrote this to his target audience, which likely includes a good number of parents who have children who have struggled with math.

 

So is this what those parents need to hear:

 

Now if you have an 18 year old that is still counting on his fingers I recommend you consult a learning specialist to determine if there is a problem.

 

Is 18 really when a parent should look to see if there are learning difficulties? I doubt the author even believes it--so why say it?

 

Bill

[Guest RecumbentHeart]

Mr Demme undoubtedly wrote this to his target audience, which likely includes a good number of parents who have children who have struggled with math.

 

So is this what those parents need to hear:

 

Now if you have an 18 year old that is still counting on his fingers I recommend you consult a learning specialist to determine if there is a problem.

 

Is 18 really when a parent should look to see if there are learning difficulties? I doubt the author even believes it--so why say it?

 

Bill

 

 

An ill-timed/poor sense of humor?

 

I took it as ... hyperbole ...? Is that the right word? ... I'm better at math. :tongue_smilie:

[unsinkable]

No standards can ever represent address where every individual student ought to be. That is an impossible demand. Even we (who know our children best) have got to grapple with the fact we are not perfect interpreters of what our children need to know and when. But home educators are at a huge advantage in being able to individuate the education their children receive. No question about that.

 

I think the people at MUS are very sensitive about the idea students using this program might be "behind" state standards because MUS takes such an unusual approach in teaching basically one topic per level.

 

This sort of "ultra-mastery" approach may be just the thing some children need. For those families whose children need this type of learning/teaching I can imagine MUS is a god-send.

 

But I question if the average student ought not be taught the interrelationship of mathematical operations. Learning that addition and subtraction are the inverses of one another from the beginning. That multiplication is serial addition, that division is the inverse of multiplication (as well as serial subtraction) and fractions are division in a different form.

 

Singapore math (something we have in common using) does these things. It is a better method IMO as a standard approach that treating them as one topic per level skills. If the "standard" doesn't work for a child it is great that there are alternatives (like MUS) to meet those children's needs.

 

I am troubled by the attitude in the MUS article that one can wait until a child is 18 and still counting on their fingers to look at their being a "problem". I understand this was probably said in half-jest, but the totality of the argument leaves me feeling really troubled.

 

Those students who are struggling are in special need of attention. The idea that time will take care of things is folly. We (I am including myself) who are taking the responsibility of teaching our children need to be responsible. That is not the message I'm reading in this article. And I continue to think it is bad advice.

 

Bill (who is still on his first marriage :tongue_smilie:)

 

I'm pretty sure you have me on ignore b/c you never respond to anything I write.

 

But multiplication is not serial addition.

 

Not serial addition

[joysworld]

What I want to know from both side of the camp here, is why is counting on ones finger wrong? I'm a mother of three and still count on my fingers. :cheers2:

[Twilight Woods]

I spent a Sunday afternoon talking to a PS teacher and listening to her talk about the speed she HAS to teach at and the time she DOES NOT HAVE to help the students who don't get it in the scheduled time before she HAS to move on.

 

THIS is a reason for ME not to want my children in PS. NOT more/better math at ages earlier than PS - I just want my child to GET IT and get it WELL. Whether that's in line with some schedule or not.

 

Being able to educate my child at his/her own speed is reason enough for me to homeschool whether that's faster OR slower and it was encouragement in THAT that I (and no doubt, others) got out of the article - as I believe it was intended.

 

This reflects our current situation and reasoning behind us pulling DD out of public school.

[nmoira]

An ill-timed/poor sense of humor?

 

I took it as ... hyperbole ...? Is that the right word? ... I'm better at math. :tongue_smilie:

I did as well. However, I think either some indication of when and why concern is appropriate (our at least some links) would have been helpful. I assume these exist elsewhere on the site?

[stripe]

Not serial addition

Thanks for this. It bothers me too.

 

I think the trouble is that multiplication is introduced via serial addition. "We have 5 groups of 3, so instead of writing out 3+3+3+3+3 and making our hands tired, let's do a short cut and do 5x3, wee hee!"

[joannqn]

I've seen the various concerns with MUS presented on this board, and frankly, I simply don't understand them.

 

So what if MUS teaches concepts on a different sequence? Isn't the end result what's important? And despite the different sequence, neither of my kids have ever tested behind on a standardized test. From my vantage point, the program works, and it works well.

 

Mr. Demme's point, I think, is that we need to look at each child and their particular gifts. Not every kid is going to be a math genius, and that's okay. Just keep working on math (or whatever subject), at their level and stop worrying so much about what the kid next door is doing. Don't judge your kid by what my kid is doing! If it becomes obvious that there is a learning disorder, get help for that. (I feel that the 18 year old example is an obvious hyperbole.) Otherwise, keep working at it and progressing at your kid's level.

[Twilight Woods]

What I want to know from both side of the camp here, is why is counting on ones finger wrong? I'm a mother of three and still count on my fingers. :cheers2:

 

I still count on my fingers. I also do not have my math fact memorized well and can't do long division to save my life hence why math in general [mental math UGH] is a problem for ME. I wonder if there is a correlation between the two? It has always been hard for me. I think my DD is a lot like me. She learns at a different pace then most.....so we are taking a step back and taking all the time in the world for her grasp what she needs to grasp in order to move on successfully in math.

 

Now if I could just figure out a math curriculum that will do that for us :)

 

I know I have posted A LOT about Math these last few days, about her being behind and I think overly obsessing about what program to choose for her.....so I do need to chill.....I have been giving her placement test after placement test and overall she is doing ok...there are some key places she needs to work on but it all comes back to how well she knows her Math facts..multiplication and division specifically...I think once she has them nailed we can move forward.

 

This thread has been immensely helpful for me so I thank everyone who has contributed in a meaningful manner :)

 

No matter what level she is at I'm still going to worry....i"m her mother it's part of my job description.

[Spy Car]

I'm pretty sure you have me on ignore b/c you never respond to anything I write.

 

But multiplication is not serial addition.

 

Not serial addition

 

I don't have you on ignore. Far greater mathematical minds that I have taken on Devlin's article and concluded that he is wrong.

 

I don't have time to search at the moment but perhaps one of our other board members has links to the kerfuffle his article caused in the math community.

 

Bill

Edited April 22, 2011 by Spy Car

[Dana]

 

But multiplication is not serial addition.

 

Not serial addition

 

His other articles are pretty interesting as well... I liked this one on the same topic... but it really does create some questions on how you'd go about giving kids that exposure and way of thinking.

 

I like how he talks about functions in another article as well.

 

I haven't looked at AoPS curriculum yet, but I think it may lead towards this way of thinking too. At an elementary level I can't think of anything other than possibly the CSMP materials that would be along these lines. Do you have any thoughts on what would get there?

 

I used the Elements of Mathematics (same authors as CSMP) in middle school and in looking at the books recently think they do an excellent job of showing (along with graphing) multiplication as a scalar quantity - but you still have that expectation of the basic arithmetic foundation... and I don't have any better ideas with a child than using the repeated addition as a starting point. How do you approach/explain this to your kids? (Really interested in thinking through other approaches/explanations! This is the sort of thing that intrigues me!)

[H.S. Burrow]

I don't have you on ignore. Far greater mathematical minds that I have taken on Devlin's and concluded that he is wrong.

 

I don't have time to search at the moment but perhaps one of our other board members has links to the kerfuffle His article caused in the math community.

 

Bill

 

 

Well, I just printed out his articles on why multiplication is not serial addition to read and highlight later. :glare: I am not a mathy person, so can you give me a couple of greater mathematical minds that can be easily understood?

 

Thanks. :)

 

[Dana]

Well, I just printed out his articles on why multiplication is not serial addition to read and highlight later. :glare: I am not a mathy person, so can you give me a couple of greater mathematical minds that can be easily understood?

 

Thanks. :)

 

 

 

This one is pretty good (and I like it as stressing that we shouldn't ONLY teach multiplication as repeated addition). I also like the discussion of different number systems too.

 

Here's a response by Maria Miller.

 

I love this :)

[dancer67]

I guess I am in real trouble because I still count on my fingers:tongue_smilie:

 

And, what do you do when you have started your child off "wrong", but you want to make it "right"?

 

Ex: 6th grader who only knows rote learning, and not the "why"'s. So what do we do, pick up SM or MM and start all over from the beginning? Has rote memorization set them up for failure in the high school years?

 

:001_huh:

[Dana]

And then there's this that suggests Singapore bar models do deal with this some.

[amandajh]

As the original poster of this article, I in no way meant to start this kind of thread. I do not even use Math U See. We use Christian Light! :)

 

My only intent was to help encourage so many of us who totally FREAK out over finishing a certain workbook by May27th or switch math programs constantly or push our kids on through when they really need to slow down and understand what they are doing.

 

So sorry this turned into what it is.....it was posted with the best of intentions.