Dolciani, Foerster, or Singapore DM... help me have clarity please!

[butterfly113]

We have been using Singapore Primary, and have been very pleased. Ds11 has done very well, scores exceptionally on standardized testing, is math/science minded... wants to go into Engineering... specifically Aviation... With all of that being said... I am looking at the years past Singapore 6A/B... He will complete them next year, and then we move into pre-algebra, algebra, etc...

I have read, and read and read... and have narrowed it down to these three options...

Option 1: Singapore DM 1-4 and then... maybe their college math or other to be determined

 

Option 2: Foerster's for Algebra texts, Jacobs or Jurgensons/Brown Geom.

 

Option 3: Dolciani for Algebra texts, Jacobs or Jurgensons/Brown Geom.

 

Which of these would best fit the following criteria???

 

Clear, easy to understand explanations

• Explicit, step-by-step working through problems

• Sufficient practice and continual review of concepts

• Clear building upon and relationships between concepts

• Explicit demonstration of how to apply concepts to word problems

• Challenging, real-life word problems

• Solutions manual provides worked out solutions for every problem

• Solid preparation for SAT, sciences, college level math

 

I am having a hard time seeing the black and white differences between these three programs/options... probably because my brain is in overload! LOL... :lol: So any thoughts or other suggestions would be so appreciated!

[HSDCY]

I think all 3 options are good, what you choose really depend on your style and the student you have. We've done Singapore PM all the way through, then Chalkdust pre-algebra, Foerster algebra with Singapore DM2, and now using AoPS Intro to algebra to run through algebra a second time (ds is young), then we'll move on to Jacobs Geo next year.

 

I think Foerster is a solid program with real life word problems. But if I have to compare the challenge level, Singapore DM is more challenging. I did use Foerster as my main algebra text and only pick and choose from DM2 to supplement because I wanted to follow the US math sequence. I am going to use DM2 next year to supplement Jacobs geo text as well.

 

As I type, I just thought of an option for you. Why not use Foerster as your main text (it only costs me $5 plus shipping) and use DM2 workbook ($14) to supplement? That way, you teach from Foerster which has clear, step-by-step instructions, and then choose whatever is appropriate from Foerster section exercises or DM2 workbook for your student to work on.

 

I can't comment on Dolciani because I don't have experience with it.

[Gailmegan]

And I am only familiar with Dolciani. I think it meets your criteria, except I'm not sure how easy it is to find a teacher's manual/answer book. and the word problems might be outdated in relation to real life if you use an older edition. But I'm huge Dolciani fan. I used them myself and was more than adequately prepared for college.

[WishboneDawn]

We're doing Singapore DM 1 right now and to me it meets all your criteria. I agonized over this when dd was in grade 6 but I finally just decided that if Singapore has been doing the job so far why not stick with it? I did chicken out of NEM thinking it might be a bit too much for me but I've been very happy with DM and have no regrets.

[Karie]

WE are doing option #2. We finished Singapore 6, Int. practice, and Challenging word problems. My son, 11, went right into Foerster's algebra. We are taking it slowly to make sure he is comprehending everything, and so far he is. I really like the Foerster's algebra text. We'll do Jacob's for geometry.

[butterfly113]

We're doing Singapore DM 1 right now and to me it meets all your criteria. I agonized over this when dd was in grade 6 but I finally just decided that if Singapore has been doing the job so far why not stick with it? I did chicken out of NEM thinking it might be a bit too much for me but I've been very happy with DM and have no regrets.

 

WishboneDawn, I had to chuckle when I read "If Singapore is doing the job so far why not stick with it?" I have wrestled with this so much, as I come from the school of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" :lol:

But I have heard that DM may not be as well and extensively explained as Foerster and Dolciani... Do you find it to be thorough enough in explaining concepts, and reinforcing with some review??, but still mastery? Any big changes that stand out to you from Primary Math?

[zaichiki]

I agree with the "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" people. We're going right into NEM 1 b/c Singapore Primary Math has been fabulous for my kids all the way through.

 

But... I also have curriculum envy...

 

I have VideoText on the shelf. (We tried to watch Module A, but it went so SLOWLY... maybe that's just the way it starts out, though.)

 

I have Lial's Intermediate Algebra on the shelf. I've heard SO many good things -- and I got it at at library book sale for a dollar!

 

I NEED to get AoPS!

 

What else do I need??? :lol:

[HSDCY]

WishboneDawn, I had to chuckle when I read "If Singapore is doing the job so far why not stick with it?" I have wrestled with this so much, as I come from the school of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" :lol:

But I have heard that DM may not be as well and extensively explained as Foerster and Dolciani... Do you find it to be thorough enough in explaining concepts, and reinforcing with some review??, but still mastery? Any big changes that stand out to you from Primary Math?

I am not WishboneDawn, but I can tell you that DM definitely follows the pattern of Primary series in explaining concepts. Like I said before, if DM is written in US's math sequence, I'd use it in a heart beat. If you don't care about following US's math sequence, then why not continue with what works well?

[WishboneDawn]

WishboneDawn, I had to chuckle when I read "If Singapore is doing the job so far why not stick with it?" I have wrestled with this so much, as I come from the school of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" :lol:

But I have heard that DM may not be as well and extensively explained as Foerster and Dolciani... Do you find it to be thorough enough in explaining concepts, and reinforcing with some review??, but still mastery? Any big changes that stand out to you from Primary Math?

 

I find it satisfactory in every way. :) There's been the odd time when something didn't quite click and done a bit of Googling on the internet for another explanation or some extra worksheets but I've never found a curriculum I didn't have to occasionally do that with.

 

I'm quite sure there are some thing F&D does exceptionally well but I tend to think DM does the same things really, really well and for the sake of making my dd's math simpler to teach and more focused I'm quite willing to settle for really, really well. :D

[WishboneDawn]

I am not WishboneDawn, but I can tell you that DM definitely follows the pattern of Primary series in explaining concepts. Like I said before, if DM is written in US's math sequence, I'd use it in a heart beat. If you don't care about following US's math sequence, then why not continue with what works well?

 

Here in Nova Scotia the sequence, at least when I was in school, was much more like Singapore's. I found the whole Algebra I, II, Geometry thing very confusing when I first came to these boards. :)

[8filltheheart]

We have been using Singapore Primary, and have been very pleased. Ds11 has done very well, scores exceptionally on standardized testing, is math/science minded... wants to go into Engineering... specifically Aviation... With all of that being said... I am looking at the years past Singapore 6A/B... He will complete them next year, and then we move into pre-algebra, algebra, etc...

I have read, and read and read... and have narrowed it down to these three options...

Option 1: Singapore DM 1-4 and then... maybe their college math or other to be determined

 

Option 2: Foerster's for Algebra texts, Jacobs or Jurgensons/Brown Geom.

 

Option 3: Dolciani for Algebra texts, Jacobs or Jurgensons/Brown Geom.

 

Which of these would best fit the following criteria???

 

Clear, easy to understand explanations

• Explicit, step-by-step working through problems

• Sufficient practice and continual review of concepts

• Clear building upon and relationships between concepts

• Explicit demonstration of how to apply concepts to word problems

• Challenging, real-life word problems

• Solutions manual provides worked out solutions for every problem

• Solid preparation for SAT, sciences, college level math

 

I am having a hard time seeing the black and white differences between these three programs/options... probably because my brain is in overload! LOL... :lol: So any thoughts or other suggestions would be so appreciated!

 

Here is my experience with Foerster and AoPS. I am copying and pasting a reply on the high school board where a discussion about these two took place and I'm going to follow that with my opinion for an aspiring engineer. FWIW, Kathy in Richmond has her phD in math and used AoPS with her kids when AoPS was still a beta program.

 

I was talking to Kathy in Richmond yesterday about Foerster and I think her assessment is probably the easiest way to explain [the difference between the AoPS and Foerster.]. She said that Foerster gives lots of details and she personally does not learn that way. She likes to be given the big picture and fill in the details on her own. [Foerster teaches the details that lead to the big picture. AoPS gives the big picture and leaves the student to fill in the details.]

 

My ds that thinks mathematically sees patterns which he likes to then dissect in order to find their relationships. He "fills in the details on his own." Quoting him, "Not only [does AoPS] expect you to develop the little points through guided practice, they expect you to assimilate the information to see the big picture in order to allow you to truly understand the concepts that you are learning."

 

I do NOT think that way with math. I need to be taught the details in order to completely understand the big picture. Once I understand what I am being taught, I can think things over and make the connections in order to "own it." I am watching my dd and I know she does not think like my ds (only my oldest ds (so far) seems to think the same way he does). I do not know for sure how she will end up doing with AoPS, but I am very cognizant of their different thought processes and I have a gut feeling that she is going to want (and perhaps need) the details.

 

AoPS is absolutely fantastic and I am so thrilled for my ds that he finally has something to use that appreciates how he processes math. I just know that not all people think that way.

 

A couple of other thoughts about the 2. AoPS is much heavier in theory. Foerster is much heavier in application. I have spent a LOT of time thinking about this b/c my oldest used Foerster and will be graduating from college with a degree in chemical engineering. My 9th grader used Foerster for alg 1-alg2 (I didn't know about AoPS back then) and he has used AoPS for alg 3, intro to counting and probability, and pre-cal.

 

My 9th grader's understanding of math definitely surpasses anything that my oldest ever approached. He dwells in math theory. He loves it. However, w/in the AoPS books, there is very little in the way of real life application problems (now ds gets those but not from AoPS). Foerster has more real life application problems any other math program I have seen. My oldest had zero problem in his college math/science/engineering courses b/c he knows how to solve problems.

 

Somewhere on the forum there is are several posts where I was in distress about my oldest wondering if he would have had a different course to his life if he had been exposed to the level of math theory that my youngest ds has had b/c their perspectives are very different and I know that it is in large part due to the math they were exposed to.

 

It is impossible for me to convey what I am thinking in a post with a toddler trying to climb on top of the coffee table. :tongue_smilie::lol: They are just very different programs. Foerster will absolutely provide a solid math foundation for engineering and give the practice in application that they need. AoPS will expose them to math theory.

 

I don't know if that clarifies or confuses the issue more!!;)

[Capt_Uhura]

8FilltheHeart - THANK YOu! THat absolutely clarifies things for me. I've seen folks do Foerster's first then do AoPS, especially for kids on the younger side. Is this something you'd recommend or would you choose one over the other depending on the kid's personality/learning style/love of math?

[Kalmia]

Capt. Uhura. I have Foersters if you want to look at it. Got it for a dollar. Soon I will be storing all my curriculum at Capt. Uhura's house!

[8filltheheart]

8FilltheHeart - THANK YOu! THat absolutely clarifies things for me. I've seen folks do Foerster's first then do AoPS, especially for kids on the younger side. Is this something you'd recommend or would you choose one over the other depending on the kid's personality/learning style/love of math?

 

I would not repeat alg 1 w/AoPS if a child has finished Foerster with a solid understanding. The main difference between the 2 is how the present they information, not the information itself. Once you reach AoPS alg 3 and pre-cal there is more difference. AoPS covers material not taught in typical high school courses. (I have not used their intermediate alg, so I can't address that course specifically.)

 

FWIW, my dd that is using AoPS alg right now used MUS alg as pre-alg. Even with MUS (which is an incredibly weak alg course) she hasn't seen anything she doesn't already know in the first 3 chapters of AoPS). When my kids have moved from MUS to Foerster, the first 5 chpts are review but there is a ton of word problems to practice on. With the AoPS, she knows the material and there are much fewer word problems, so it hasn't been the same sort of move from one program to another. (I don't know if that makes any sense or not.)

Edited May 6, 2011 by 8FillTheHeart

[Capt_Uhura]

 

 

My 9th grader's understanding of math definitely surpasses anything that my oldest ever approached. He dwells in math theory. He loves it. However, w/in the AoPS books, there is very little in the way of real life application problems (now ds gets those but not from AoPS). Foerster has more real life application problems any other math program I have seen. My oldest had zero problem in his college math/science/engineering courses b/c he knows how to solve problems.

 

 

 

Where is your DS getting the real life application from now?

 

So, let's see if I have this straight. Your oldest, who is now graduating from college w/ a degree in chemical engineering, did Foerster's and had no issues.

 

Your next son, did Foerster's Alg1-2, but then did AoPS Alg3 (Isn't that intermediate AoPS?), Intro to counting and Probability, pre-Cal. He has a much deeper understanding of math theory from switching over to AoPS but also has the real-world application since he did Foerster's Alg1-2.

 

Your DD will do AoPS alg1 but you think she might need more details.

 

You wouldn't repeat AoPS after having done Foerster's. How about supplementing AoPS w/ real-world problems from Foerster's? I think my DS is a give me the big picture and let me figure out the details.

[8filltheheart]

Where is your DS getting the real life application from now?

 

So, let's see if I have this straight. Your oldest, who is now graduating from college w/ a degree in chemical engineering, did Foerster's and had no issues.

 

Your next son, did Foerster's Alg1-2, but then did AoPS Alg3 (Isn't that intermediate AoPS?), Intro to counting and Probability, pre-Cal. He has a much deeper understanding of math theory from switching over to AoPS but also has the real-world application since he did Foerster's Alg1-2.

 

Your DD will do AoPS alg1 but you think she might need more details.

 

You wouldn't repeat AoPS after having done Foerster's. How about supplementing AoPS w/ real-world problems from Foerster's? I think my DS is a give me the big picture and let me figure out the details.

 

 

LOL!!:lol: Can you wrap your head around all of that??!! :D

 

Ds had a math coach and was doing a lot of competition math and the last couple of months lots of math camp applications.......more math than I would ever want to even think about.

 

Yes, ds did get all the application problems in Foersters 1 and 2, so I guess I don't know how to say what it would be like if he hadn't. He is very math intuitive and works on complex math problems for fun. He really isn't the avg "good at math" kind of kid. My dd is more that. ;)

 

I'm not sure dd will continue with AoPS next yr. She finished MUS early and very easily so I put her in AoPS to see how it would work with her. I think in the fall I am going to put her in Foerster. In addition to the fact that I love Foerster, it is easier for me to teach. Foerster reflects how I think so I can teach and stretch her understanding better as a teacher b/c it is a natural extension of how I would present the info.

 

I guess you could try to throw in the word problems from Foerster, but it really is just a very different way of approaching math. I would pick whichever style suits your student and have them do their best with that approach. Both are solid, but very different.

 

Oh, and you are correct, AoPS intermediate is not alg 2, it is alg 3. Their intro to alg book is alg 1 and alg 2. So, I posted incorrectly. I guess it is the alg 2 that I can't compare.......dd is only finishing chpt 3 in the alg 1 book.

Edited May 6, 2011 by 8FillTheHeart

[Capt_Uhura]

I'm doing my best, 8filltheheart, doing my best!!! I may have to make a spreadsheet. :lol:

 

DS did RS and did well with it and made the leaps and filled in the details all on his own. I will look at the AoPS pre-alg1 text coming out the end of summer and see if we will do that after MM6A/6B or instead of....depending on the overlap.

 

Thanks for all your info!

 

Is the baby down off the coffee table? :lol:

capt uhura

[butterfly113]

8FilltheHeart,

 

With Foersters texts, are you using current editions or older editions?

I have heard with Dolciani the pub year makes a difference with some things such as set theory not being included in new editions.

Do you find the same with Foersters??? Do you have a preferential year for Alg I or Alg II??

Also, what have you used for Geometry?

 

Thanks! :001_smile:

[8filltheheart]

8FilltheHeart,

 

With Foersters texts, are you using current editions or older editions?

I have heard with Dolciani the pub year makes a difference with some things such as set theory not being included in new editions.

Do you find the same with Foersters??? Do you have a preferential year for Alg I or Alg II??

Also, what have you used for Geometry?

 

Thanks! :001_smile:

 

I think all the older editions are the same. The new ones are still reprints of the older ones.

 

I have used 3 different geometry courses with my kids: Larson's, Jacobs, and the new CD. My preference is for the new CD textbook.

[butterfly113]

8FilltheHeart,

 

I haven't looked at too much math curriculum lately... just gearing up for looking into algebra and on down the road... DIdn't realize Chalkdust had a new text, silly me...:lol:

Can you share what it is about the new CD you prefer or like more over the others???

[elegantlion]

Just to throw this out. I was just reviewing Doliciani (copyright 1965) Algebra II at my library. They have you developing proofs in chapter 1. My issue is that the solution manual can be very hard to find. There are odd numbered answers in the book, but no solutions.

 

I have a dolciani (65 and 75) algebra I, if anyone wants to know the TOC let me know.

[butterfly113]

Thank you Elegantlion, that is one reason I am really shying away from the Dolciani text at this point... I may still pick up one for the explanations... but not sure...

That is a very good point you bring up! :-)

[8filltheheart]

8FilltheHeart,

 

I haven't looked at too much math curriculum lately... just gearing up for looking into algebra and on down the road... DIdn't realize Chalkdust had a new text, silly me...:lol:

Can you share what it is about the new CD you prefer or like more over the others???

 

Jacobs (we used the 2nd ed) is very verbose. My kids just wanted him to get to the point.

 

Larson is a standard high school geometry text with alg review interspersed, etc. It is ok.

 

The new CD text is pure geometry, no alg review. It has a lot more proofs than either of the other 2. I just like the way it teaches better.

[Capt_Uhura]

I am *reading* AoPS Intro to Alg1 right now. I realize reading it is different from *doing* it, however, I AM IN LOVE! Granted, I'm coming from the aspect of already knowing Algebra so that's different from a student doing it, but I feel like I'm having a conversation with someone when I'm reading it. I have Foerster's and NEM1 and I don't think I felt the love that do when I read AoPS. I have more reading to do today of similar content but so far, I'm leaning strongly towards AoPS for my DS. I think it will fit him nicely.

[Matryoshka]

I am *reading* AoPS Intro to Alg1 right now. I realize reading it is different from *doing* it, however, I AM IN LOVE! Granted, I'm coming from the aspect of already knowing Algebra so that's different from a student doing it, but I feel like I'm having a conversation with someone when I'm reading it. I have Foerster's and NEM1 and I don't think I felt the love that do when I read AoPS. I have more reading to do today of similar content but so far, I'm leaning strongly towards AoPS for my DS. I think it will fit him nicely.

 

I know just what you mean. I thought Forester's was going to be great, had ti all picked out for AlgI. Then I tried AoPS Number Theory last summer with dd. It is just so wonderful. I love it.

 

I have to say that I am liking Singapore DM 1 quite a lot as well. I think it's going to give my dd an excellent foundation for all the brain-stretching in AoPS.

[butterfly113]

What has made you decide to go from Singapore DM to AoPS??? It is my understanding that AoPS give alot of depth...and goes higher in Math as Singapore Dm only goes through AlgII.??? but will Singapore Primary suffieicently prepare one for AoPS???

I know that AoPS encourages the student to learn through figuring it out first... yet if there are concepts that the student does not completely grasp... will AoPS give thorough in depth step by step explanations after the student tried to figure it out on their own first??? (hope that makes sense... my brain is fried trying to figure all this out!) :lol:

[Matryoshka]

What has made you decide to go from Singapore DM to AoPS??? It is my understanding that AoPS give alot of depth...and goes higher in Math as Singapore Dm only goes through AlgII.???

 

I'm loving DM, but I also love AoPS. :tongue_smilie: My decision to switch I think comes down mostly to wanting to say without reservation that my dd has taken and completed Algebra I - I'm thinking of sending her to high school, and I didn't want them nit-picking how much Alg was really in DM 1&2 (which she would've finished by then).

 

If we were definitely homeschooling all the way through, then I might've stuck with DM. But OTOH, AoPS is so cool...

 

but will Singapore Primary suffieicently prepare one for AoPS???

 

I would not have wanted to throw my dd right into AoPS Alg I after Primary. Others might have a different opinion. But I think doing a year of DM will have prepared her well.

 

I know that AoPS encourages the student to learn through figuring it out first... yet if there are concepts that the student does not completely grasp... will AoPS give thorough in depth step by step explanations after the student tried to figure it out on their own first??? (hope that makes sense... my brain is fried trying to figure all this out!) :lol:

 

That's a whole 'nother question... I think whether AoPS' way of teaching works is largely dependent on how that kid learns best. I was emboldened to take the leap after we tried Number Theory last summer and my dd seemed to do really well with that method.

[Capt_Uhura]

I've only been reading through AoPs but I found the explanations were in depth and very clear. In fact, the author says if your child has trouble with this, you can do the explanations first and then the problems and it would work just fine.

[butterfly113]

Matroyshka,

I can certainly see where you would want Alg I to be thorough with the possibility of her going to a classroom... and while we have really liked primary and I had planned on going with DM, I have had reservations all along of how the scope and seq is laid out... and being integrated verses clear cut Pre alg, algI, geom, algII... and then of course where to go from there as well.

Ds will need to go through precalc and most likely calc with aeronautical engineering as his goal... and I have the utmost confidence he can do it... my worry is messing it all up! UGH! :tongue_smilie:

Capt Urha... thank you so much for mentioning that the author states with AoPS the explanations can be approached first if needed... I think that may be just the 'comfort zone' ds will need to hear. Even though he has a great ability to see the big picture and fill in the gaps... that confidence level is just not there yet... although he did have a great light bulb moment this week... :lol: but that will certainly be helpful and make a big difference.

I think once pre Alg is avail I will order it to go through... so, does anyone know when it will be available other than Summer of 2011... this summer???

[Capt_Uhura]

No further info on when the pre-alg1 will be ready but I'll be one of the first 50 to order it. :001_smile: