Is it just me?....(Saxon vs. Singpore issue)

[nmoira]

But let me be clear: if your math lessons only last 20 minutes, your dc is not learning math.

:lol:

 

I'll be sure to let my daughters know we've been doing it wrong. Hmmmm.... I'm doing MEP with DD the Younger and it does take a bit longer than Singapore did, 30-40 minutes daily. Do you think she might be learning some math? Maybe twice as much as a 20 minute lesson with Singapore, at least on the 40 minute days?

 

Is there a time threshold that must be met, or is it proportional? :tongue_smilie:

 

FWIW -- I'm in the poking my eyes out crowd over Saxon, though of course YMMV. Heck, Right Start was too incremental for us.

[nmoira]

 

I think programs like Singapore are easier to custom-fit to your child. Some kids need more (or less) practice and review of certain topics.

:iagree: We ended up using IP in lieu of the workbooks with DD the Elder as the text was sufficient for mastery (sufficient for her -- I feel the need to qualify and re-qualify my words in this thread).

[Carol in Cal.]

DD is not mathy, but she liked Saxon because it made her master the material and it was straight forward in its requirements.

 

I liked it because it was thorough and her retention was far better than when I tried to teach without a curriculum, and also better than when we used Harcourt CA math, the premier local public school program.

 

I did supplement but not with another complete program. We used Quartermile Math instead of Saxon's facts practice. We used Equate and various number bingo and math dice games to cement mental math and conceptual flexibility. Every once in a while I would stop our progress through Saxon, mostly in 87, and 'pull together' the various incremental pieces of information that had been presented kind of piece meal. We used the DIVE CD's starting in level 76, but I also did some teaching of the lessons myself when necessary. DD was supposed to read the lesson, try to understand the examples, then watch the DIVE, ask me any questions, and then do the homework. She would periodically fall into the habit of just watching the DIVE and doing the homework, and I would pull her back. I would also stop her progress occasionally and sort of quiz her on the material, teaching as necessary. I also taught the lessons that I thought were hard, but DIVE always came first.

 

When DD finished Saxon Algebra 1, she took the math placement test at an academic Catholic high school. She did not test out of Algebra 1, but tested into Algebra 1H and Geometry 1H, which is pretty unusual. She has done well in each of them this year. I was disappointed at first that she would need to take algebra again, and inclined to push the issue, but decided that two runs through that material, one of them done 'their way', would be all to the good. And in fact, that has worked out well. I would say that we had covered most of the material in Algebra 1H already, maybe 85% of it, and the material we did cover included somewhat more depth than in the class that she is taking now--mostly the quadratic formula and its implications is what was emphasized earlier and far more in her current class than in Saxon. Saxon was better at various types of factoring, and at unit analysis; both skills that are crucial for applied math in science later on. Saxon also offered considerably more practice.

 

I have looked seriously at various constructivist math programs, which were advocated by some very capable math teachers locally, and never could figure out what they were getting at. And if I don't know where I'm going with a curriculum, I can't teach it. I also looked at Singapore and felt more or less the same way about it. It might have been a good program, but I certainly could not have taught it. I have an engineering background, and math is not hard for me, but if I don't understand the goal, I will not be able to facilitate a student getting there.

Edited May 21, 2011 by Carol in Cal.

[mystika1]

I an really curious....

 

I understand that the Asian children score or "do math" so much better than children in the US but...was this test done on public schooled children? Honestly....In my opinion(which is not much)anything is better than our public schools. Homeschooled children in the US score wayyyyyy higher than our ps. Atleast that is what is advocated on most pro homeschooling sites. I wonder how homeschooled kids would do in a test like this?

 

That would change things...

That would mean..It's not what you use but how you use it.:D

 

Thanks,

 

Penny

[Jen500]

Homeschooled children in the US score wayyyyyy higher than our ps. Atleast that is what is advocated on most pro homeschooling sites. I wonder how homeschooled kids would do in a test like this?

 

T

Thanks,

 

Penny

 

I'd love to see a real study backing up that claim. AFAIK one doesn't exist.

[TracyR]

NOT saying that this is the case for all or even most Saxon users - just the ones I know. For the ones I know, their primary concern is test scores. None of them spend time on forums like this or talk about math as much as the people I've met here. None of them have heard of Liping Ma or show much of any interest in contemplating these arguments about methods and conceptual understanding. Saxon is familiar and long tested tried and true (in their experience).

 

That said, the only people I know in real life who use Singapore don't supplement either. No one I know off these forums does so, whatever they use.

 

 

This is not true. Evidently you aren't part of the Saxon Math board on Yahoo. Its a large group and guess, what? We talk about math there. And its a pretty large group with over 1,000 members.

 

Saxon doesn't need to be supplemented because everything is just all inclusive. Meaning its all put together. You have your manual, which is scripted if you need to use it that way. You have the drill sheets in the program, you have your worksheets. The manual is very self explanatory and it guides you step by step. Its not cluttered with math theory ( that's what books on that topics are for). It gets to the nitty gritty of math. That is why there is no need to supplement Saxon. Its all there.

 

Now with other math programs like Singapore , drill isn't included. You have to include that yourself. I used Bob Jones with my oldest when I first started homeschooling. Went with the concept math is better theory. One problem was that drill wasn't included in the program. It wasn't all there infront of me. So it got skipped quite often. Looking back that was a HUGE mistake. My oldest understands math concepts but her computation is poor at best. So now that she understands how to do math. It takes her forever and she makes to many simple mistakes because of it. I did try Singapore for a short time with my 2nd daughter. I didn't have the manual so I can't comment on it. But it was so short lived because it frustrated her so badly. She needed more repetition.

This would be another difference. Saxon math is repetitive. Some children need that. My 2nd , 3rd and 4th need that kind of repetition. My oldest does not. I can show her how to do a math problem and she understands the first time. Also breaking up the math like it does in Saxon totally and completely frustrates her. This year she is using Saxon at her private school and Saxon is just killing her. She can't wrap her brain around it. But it works well for my 2nd 3rd and 4th.

I personally like Christian Light better though than Saxon. Its like Saxon but from a Christian company. It includes many of the conceptual math ideas that many talk about, and try to say aren't in the program.

 

In the end what is important is to 1. Use what you can afford and what makes sense to you as your child's teacher. If you don't have the time to pull together all of the resources, or to use multiple math programs. 2. To use what works for your child. This is the most important thing of all and the most important thing people tend to forget in the homeschool circles. We like to focus on what other people are using and people will always boast that what they are using is more superior than the next person. But please don't forget the big picture. You homeschool to use what works for Your child. Not what works for everyone else.

 

Next there are plenty of people out there that have used Saxon math and have turned out just fine and working mathematical based jobs. Just because they weren't taught using Liping Ma doesn't mean that they are any less superior or intellectual than the next person. I'm most sure that there are plenty of mathematicians out there that never learned using Liping Ma's idea of how math should be taught.

 

I bet there are many Saxon users that have heard of Liping Ma. I have. So to say that Saxon users have never heard of or maybe read of Liping Ma is just plain rude. The thing that Saxon users know is they are using something that is making sense to their child at that moment in time of their life. Conceptual learning of math CAN come later in life. I was taught math conceptually as a child and I now , as an adult HATE math. It made no sense to me. It wasn't until I was in high school in my 11th grade year , when I had a teacher that taught just like Saxon does ( we didn't use Saxon math books though). I passed his class with a B and it was the only time I ever understood math. Now at the age of 35 I am beginning to understand conceptual math. Its like that light has gone on and I think to myself" Oh, wow, so that's what my teachers were talking about." I'm no mathematical genius but I'm beginning to understand more now as an adult. With that said there are young children who can understand math this way as children. That's wonderful and awesome, but you can't force a child who doesn't understand math that way to understand it until they are ready.

All you will get is a child that hates math and thinks they are bad at it.

 

Enough said.

[amsunshine]

I did try Singapore for a short time with my 2nd daughter. I didn't have the manual so I can't comment on it. But it was so short lived because it frustrated her so badly. She needed more repetition.

 

 

 

From what I've seen, this is one of the problems people seem to have with Singapore -- the misconception that it doesn't have enough repetition. However, often the reason people have this idea is because they don't buy the manual, and they don't get all the other component parts, i.e., Extra Practice, Tests, CWP/IP. There is plenty of drill/repetition in Singapore if one needs it. However, it's not particularly fair to make an assertion about a program if only part of it is used.

 

I realize there are some who are able to use just the textbook/workbook combination with success, or just the text/IP, etc. Regardless, these do not constitute the full Singapore program.

[Penelope]

I am surprised to hear of Singapore getting done in 20 or 30 minutes. There have been lessons that were that short for us. Like a unit on time or measurement where there wasn't anything he didn't already know. But if math really only took 20 minutes per day, every day, I'd think that we might be missing something, or could go a little deeper or do more.

 

But I do make my child do lots of review throughout the year, and periodic practice with problems that he already knows how to do. I'm mean that way. :lol: I think there is something to be said for the Saxon emphasis on developing automaticity.

[nmoira]

From what I've seen, this is one of the problems people seem to have with Singapore -- the misconception that it doesn't have enough repetition. However, often the reason people have this idea is because they don't buy the manual, and they don't get all the other component parts, i.e., Extra Practice, Tests, CWP/IP. There is plenty of drill/repetition in Singapore if one needs it. However, it's not particularly fair to make an assertion about a program if only part of it is used.

I was under the impression that the IP and CWP books were originally marketed for use out of schools, not in? I don't know about the EP books.

 

I don't know when the previous poster tried Singapore or what manuals were available (HIG vs TMl, US vs Standards Edition), but while some kids will be fine with the text/workbook combination, others definitely need the scaffolding and the skill building and comprehension activities contained in the HIG/TM. The HIG's also contain mental math drill sheets and schedule them into the lesson plans. I think it's a fair thing to say of oneself "I need a program with everything built in, so ____ is a better fit" but quite another to say it's the fault of the program (this isn't a direct response to TracyR, but is a criticism I've seen of Singapore). If one doesn't use the HIG, doesn't incorporate the mental math drills, doesn't utilize other resources for drill if necessary, it's not surprising that the kids might not get their facts nailed.

[JustGin]

(ooops I didn't spell Singapore correctly in the thread title.....)

 

It seems that while doing my math program research (trying to decide as we begin K in fall), that among Saxon users there is little supplementation

TO the Saxon. With the Singapore/MiF/RightStart/other programs, there seems to USUALLY be supplementation with other programs/materials more often. Saxon seems more "self-sufficient" as users in their post (and signatures) list it alone more often. What's up with this?

 

I used Singapore for all three of my dc through 5th grade and we did not supplement, if by that you mean using another program or "beefing" it up in some way. I used some manipulatives with middle dd who has special needs, but the only thing other than the workbook/textbook we used was the Singapore Primary cd-rom games for re-enforcement. In my own experience SM was a complete and excellent math program all by itself.

[Guest Cheryl in SoCal]

NOT saying that this is the case for all or even most Saxon users - just the ones I know. For the ones I know, their primary concern is test scores. None of them spend time on forums like this or talk about math as much as the people I've met here. None of them have heard of Liping Ma or show much of any interest in contemplating these arguments about methods and conceptual understanding. Saxon is familiar and long tested tried and true (in their experience).

 

That said, the only people I know in real life who use Singapore don't supplement either. No one I know off these forums does so, whatever they use.

 

This is not true. Evidently you aren't part of the Saxon Math board on Yahoo. Its a large group and guess, what? We talk about math there. And its a pretty large group with over 1,000 members.

 

Saxon doesn't need to be supplemented because everything is just all inclusive. Meaning its all put together. You have your manual, which is scripted if you need to use it that way. You have the drill sheets in the program, you have your worksheets. The manual is very self explanatory and it guides you step by step. Its not cluttered with math theory ( that's what books on that topics are for). It gets to the nitty gritty of math. That is why there is no need to supplement Saxon. Its all there.

 

Now with other math programs like Singapore , drill isn't included. You have to include that yourself. I used Bob Jones with my oldest when I first started homeschooling. Went with the concept math is better theory. One problem was that drill wasn't included in the program. It wasn't all there infront of me. So it got skipped quite often. Looking back that was a HUGE mistake. My oldest understands math concepts but her computation is poor at best. So now that she understands how to do math. It takes her forever and she makes to many simple mistakes because of it. I did try Singapore for a short time with my 2nd daughter. I didn't have the manual so I can't comment on it. But it was so short lived because it frustrated her so badly. She needed more repetition.

This would be another difference. Saxon math is repetitive. Some children need that. My 2nd , 3rd and 4th need that kind of repetition. My oldest does not. I can show her how to do a math problem and she understands the first time. Also breaking up the math like it does in Saxon totally and completely frustrates her. This year she is using Saxon at her private school and Saxon is just killing her. She can't wrap her brain around it. But it works well for my 2nd 3rd and 4th.

I personally like Christian Light better though than Saxon. Its like Saxon but from a Christian company. It includes many of the conceptual math ideas that many talk about, and try to say aren't in the program.

 

In the end what is important is to 1. Use what you can afford and what makes sense to you as your child's teacher. If you don't have the time to pull together all of the resources, or to use multiple math programs. 2. To use what works for your child. This is the most important thing of all and the most important thing people tend to forget in the homeschool circles. We like to focus on what other people are using and people will always boast that what they are using is more superior than the next person. But please don't forget the big picture. You homeschool to use what works for Your child. Not what works for everyone else.

 

Next there are plenty of people out there that have used Saxon math and have turned out just fine and working mathematical based jobs. Just because they weren't taught using Liping Ma doesn't mean that they are any less superior or intellectual than the next person. I'm most sure that there are plenty of mathematicians out there that never learned using Liping Ma's idea of how math should be taught.

 

I bet there are many Saxon users that have heard of Liping Ma. I have. So to say that Saxon users have never heard of or maybe read of Liping Ma is just plain rude. The thing that Saxon users know is they are using something that is making sense to their child at that moment in time of their life. Conceptual learning of math CAN come later in life. I was taught math conceptually as a child and I now , as an adult HATE math. It made no sense to me. It wasn't until I was in high school in my 11th grade year , when I had a teacher that taught just like Saxon does ( we didn't use Saxon math books though). I passed his class with a B and it was the only time I ever understood math. Now at the age of 35 I am beginning to understand conceptual math. Its like that light has gone on and I think to myself" Oh, wow, so that's what my teachers were talking about." I'm no mathematical genius but I'm beginning to understand more now as an adult. With that said there are young children who can understand math this way as children. That's wonderful and awesome, but you can't force a child who doesn't understand math that way to understand it until they are ready.

All you will get is a child that hates math and thinks they are bad at it.

 

Enough said.

I'm not sure why you are jumping all over her; she makes it very clear in the post you quoted that she isn't talking about all people who use Saxon (or even most people that use Saxon), just the ones she personally knows.

[Critterfixer]

Since I am actually looking to supplement Saxon over the summer I had a talk with my sister last night. She was home-schooled from K through 12, was top of her classes in math in college and is now an accountant. So she learned her math. Many of her friends were also home-schooled K-12 too, so she does have some perspective on how her math training compared to theirs. Back then Singapore wasn't around.

Barb had Abeka Math--heavy, heavy drill from what I've heard for first through fifth grade. After that, she was changed to Saxon curriculum for Pre-Algebra, Algebra and so forth. She felt that the background of strong math facts was useful in giving her confidence. She loved Saxon for explaining things so well when she got to higher math.

 

 

As far as the Saxon fact sheets go, I will say that once my boys work a problem they will not work it again if it appears on the sheet. They simply look up and copy the answer. I wouldn't mind if that meant they learned it. However, they don't seem to remember it on the next worksheet! Little stinkers.:tongue_smilie:

[Guest]

As far as the Saxon fact sheets go, I will say that once my boys work a problem they will not work it again if it appears on the sheet. They simply look up and copy the answer. I wouldn't mind if that meant they learned it. However, they don't seem to remember it on the next worksheet! Little stinkers.:tongue_smilie:

 

:lol: We had this going on, too.

[Testimony]

I just wanted to tell you that I have done Singapore entirely for my older son. I did start to supplement for 6th and 7th grade. I did the Challenging Word Problems. I regret not doing this program sooner. My younger son supplemented Singapore Math with Life of Fred. My older son finished NEM 1 from Singapore Math. We found Saxon Algebra 1/2. My older son started doing it. He is up to lesson 34. He has gotten every single problem correct so far. He has found Saxon so far sooo easy. We are going to use Saxon Algebra 1. He took the placement test and he tested into Algebra. I hope that this curriculum is not too easy. Singapore was so hard and offered so much. I hope that Saxon will offer just as many challenges. I wanted to go with a different math program because Singapore did not have enough solutions (the way I want them). I notice that Saxon is a lot of drill and problems. I personally feel that with all those problems;the child wouldn't want to do any supplements. Singapore is a stronger critical thinking math program. It truly forces the child to think about what is being asked.

 

Blessings,

Karen

http://www.homeschoolblogger.com/testimony

[zaichiki]

I bought a Singapore Complex Word Problem book for dd to work through this year a grade level lower than her Saxon...doing Saxon 76 so I bought 5th grade Singapore because I had heard Singapore seems a little ahead for each grade. She does the problems on her own easily once we've covered the practice problems in each section.

 

I think that's probably a good match up -- Saxon 7/6 and Singapore PM 5. When ds was just finishing up 4B I used the Saxon placement test, b/c I was thinking about using Saxon the next year, and he tested into 7/6.

 

Is Complex World Problems the new word problems book? I haven't seen them, but if they're like the older CWPs that I have the teaching is done in each section and then the kids can do the practice problems following the models that were given.

 

I'd love to see the new CWP. (I'd also be interested in taking a closer look at Saxon.)

[Spy Car]

We have used Saxon exclusively and I can confirm that 2 hour number with my eldest who is now in 5/4 Math.

 

It is stunning that a math program could be so grossly inefficient.

 

But let me be clear: if your math lessons only last 20 minutes, your dc is not learning math.

 

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

One of the most laughable statements I've ever heard on this forum.

 

The reason saxon takes long is that the curriculum follows a standard progression that emphasizes comprehension. The K-3 lessons start with a physical manipulative to demonstrate a concept and then the abstractions are slowly made so that the child can manipulate the abstract symbols all the while being reminded of the physical manipulations they represent. If you don't see this, then you are shortening lessons, skipping material, and cheating dc out of an excellent math program.

 

Trust me Miquon and Singapore, especially used in combination, do this too. As do many other of the fine options available. And I can assure you it does not take 2 hours a day to get these ideas across to K-3 aged children.

 

I'll stick with highly efficient methods and give my child the extra hour and a half a day to play and have a life. :banghead:

 

Further, repetition is the only way to really learn and internalize math.

 

This is simply not true. Repetition is not "the only way" to learn math. It is the way Saxon attempts to teach math, but there are other (and better) ways to inculcate mathematical thinking that invoke methods other than 2 hours a day of repeated math drill.

 

 

Will DC complain all the way through K-3? Our first DS certainly did. But now in 5/4 he knows his basic math. Doing math gives him confidence because he really knows it.

 

I can tell you my son not only doesn't complain about math, but he loves the subject. But he loves riding his bike too, and playing with friends. Two hours a day on math would crush his spirit, and darn right he would complain. Rightfully so. What a waste!

 

In the meantime he is excelling beyond my wildest expectations, so I know the pronouncement that your way is "the only way" is hollow and false. There are other (better) ways to teach math than having them repeat problems for two hours a day. And I'm far from the only person on this forum that understands that.

 

Bill

[lewelma]

I really think it depends on the student. I was a high school math teacher in a previous life, so I have seen it all.

 

I have a math wizz kid (ds10), and a math far-above-average kid (ds7). We used SM for ds10 who finished it at age just 9 and moved to AoPS intro algebra. There is NO WAY he could have used saxon. I tell people it is like proof reading a phone book, you might have good intentions, but there is just no way you can do it.

 

Now, my 7 year old. He will start Singapore 4a at 7 3/4, and I have strongly considered Saxon for him. Saxon would be independent for my child, and would give very good review and variety. It would also give him a sense of the "ease" of math and improve his confidence, which is low. These things are lacking in Singapore for MY son.

 

Saxon is a good strong program that should be supplemented with word problems. Singapore is a good strong program that should be supplemented with speed drill. Shore up the weaknesses. This is our job as parents regardless of the subject.

 

Ruth in NZ

[Nestof3]

K-3 Saxon lesson may take 1-2 hours. We have used Saxon exclusively and I can confirm that 2 hour number with my eldest who is now in 5/4 Math.

 

I've used Saxon on three boys (5/4 specifically three times as my youngest is in 5/4), so I'm just throwing this at here as a fellow user.

 

I used Saxon 2 and 3 (K and first I just taught them through games and such), and it took about 30 minutes. We did not do the temps every day. I also omitted certain problems and assign them every few days. My boys just never needed that much review. I view the problems that come with a program to be a guideline which you are free to adapt to the child. There is no way I would have a young child spend 1-2 hours on any subject. 1st grade alone would never take two hours in our house. LOL

 

It takes me about five minutes to teach a concept to Nathan and Ben (6/5 and 5/4). Often, I will ask them how they would approach a problem in a new lesson because I like to see if they are able to solve problems a different way or if they can figure it out on their own.

 

Nathan, who is in Saxon 6/5, takes about 20 minutes to complete 75% of the 6/5 problems. Ben takes longer, but he has focusing issues. If I am not on my treadmill, I sit with him during his math to spur him along (after I teach his lesson). I have never, even up to Alg 2/Trig, had math take two hours. Our eldest was a little slow, but later on in life, he admitted that he would often just stare off into space and think of other things.

 

I do sit with each of them during corrections. We talk about why they didn't do the problem correctly, and I come up with a new way to explain something if necessary.

[Nestof3]

There are other (better) ways to teach math than having them repeat problems for two hours a day. And I'm far from the only person on this forum that understands that.

 

Bill

 

In my opinion, the repetition is there for those who need it. I hand-pick my boys' problems. One more thing you should understand about Saxon is that they present a problem in many different way.

 

For example, they might say:

 

Forty-two is how much greater than the decimal number three and sixty-four hundredths? Use words to write your answer.

 

Then there may be three problems involving adding and subtracting decimal numbers. I will choose the sample above and one more but certainly not all four. If my son showed repeated mistakes with decimals, I would reteach the topic, give him some more practice and look for progress the next day.

 

Two hours may be the folks doing every single problem. I also let my kids do easy, visual problems orally with me after I teach the lesson. For instance, a problem about lines of symmetry are just so easy that I just have Nathan do one orally with me every now and then.

 

Math is really not a time-consuming subject for us. My kids don't love math. They don't like grammar. In fact, they'll both say they don't like it. Ben says he doesn't like any of school except when I read aloud to him. LOL Nathan doesn't like most of school because he wants to be totally independent. He hates being read aloud to now. LOL He'd rather study a subject and make a youtube documentary about it.

 

Honestly, they'd much rather play. :lol:

[Jen500]

In my opinion, the repetition is there for those who need it. I hand-pick my boys' problems. One more thing you should understand about Saxon is that they present a problem in many different way.

 

Two hours may be the folks doing every single problem. I also let my kids do easy, visual problems orally with me after I teach the lesson. For instance, a problem about lines of symmetry are just so easy that I just have Nathan do one orally with me every now and then.

 

Math is really not a time-consuming subject for us. My kids don't love math. They don't like grammar. In fact, they'll both say they don't like it. Ben says he doesn't like any of school except when I read aloud to him. LOL Nathan doesn't like most of school because he wants to be totally independent. He hates being read aloud to now. LOL He'd rather study a subject and make a youtube documentary about it.

 

Honestly, they'd much rather play. :lol:

 

I think it's great that you are willing and able to adapt Saxon to your individual dcs needs. OTOH I've read some very adamant posts proclaiming that in order for Saxon to be effective, NO problems should be skipped.

 

All of my dc enjoy math. I really think a BIG part of that is that I enjoy math and bring that attitude to our lessons. That's one reason why I 'supplement' (not necessarily just with other math programs), and don't mind gong on math bunny trails and encourage discussion during our lessons...... definitely not a just Get er done subject.

[Nestof3]

I think it's great that you are willing and able to adapt Saxon to your individual dcs needs. OTOH I've read some very adamant posts proclaiming that in order for Saxon to be effective, NO problems should be skipped.

 

All of my dc enjoy math. I really think a BIG part of that is that I enjoy math and bring that attitude to our lessons. That's one reason why I 'supplement' (not necessarily just with other math programs), and don't mind gong on math bunny trails and encourage discussion during our lessons...... definitely not a just Get er done subject.

 

I really like math, and I was an English major. LOL I think it's fun, and I am very light-hearted and try to be enthusiastic and fun when teaching. I think I'm a great teacher of all subjects and interact a ton with my boys, but Ben would still much prefer playing on Lego Digital Designer and Nathan would be far happier playing Axis and Allies against himself. ;)

 

I too have read the "do every problem" thing, and I don't agree with it. I also skip several of the first chapters each year b/c it's your typical public-school review.

 

I have added in word problems, Timez Attack, Times Tales, wonderful math videos and other things because I am never able to stick to just one thing. I cannot even stick to a science or history textbook. There are just so many great resources out there.

 

Oh, and I also had an old Singapore Challenging Word Problem book that I used with Nathan when he was younger. I got it at a local homeschooling store. Then, I found out they were out of print (a couple of years ago). I cannot remember if I used it over the summer or what. I also use iphone apps. :)

[texasmama]

All of my dc enjoy math. I really think a BIG part of that is that I enjoy math and bring that attitude to our lessons. That's one reason why I 'supplement' (not necessarily just with other math programs), and don't mind gong on math bunny trails and encourage discussion during our lessons...... definitely not a just Get er done subject.

 

My dc enjoy math, too, and although I don't personally love it, I have learned to find it intriguing and interesting and multi-faceted in terms of looking at problems from more than one angle. We, too, engage in a lot of discussion about "how" we each solved a problem. I solve them mentally right along with my dc, and we will each say how we arrived at the answer. That serves two purposes - to look at the problems from different perspectives and different ways of solving them and to reinforce the algorithms because in order to explain this to me, the kids need to understand it themselves and break it down into a step by step explanation, which is very reinforcing.

 

I'm pretty convinced that my 8 year old is a statistics and probability genius. He explains things that I cannot follow but somewhere in the depths of my brain, I understand what he is getting at.

[PollyOR]

Haven't read most of the replies.....

 

I used Saxon for 2nd dd (K-54). I think the K-3 program is just like any other program in that everything is there whether your child needs it or not. It is very thorough but will be overkill if you use EVERY thing. It did take us hours because I hadn't learned that it is okay to pick and choose.

 

Once we got to Saxon 54 I thought it would take less time. Nope. DD was in tears daily due to the amount of time it took to get through a lesson.

 

I was in TEARS when I started using it with 3rd dd. I could...not...do...it! :ack2:

 

We now use Rod & Staff. You couldn't pay me to go back to Saxon. Great program but too painful for me. I wish I had the guts to use Singapore, but Rod & Staff works :)

[texasmama]

Dawn, do tell about iPhone apps! (On my iPhone right now and can't figure out how to quote that part of your post. :D)

[Snowfall]

Two hours a day on math would crush his spirit, and darn right he would complain. Rightfully so. What a waste!

 

For real. If some kids want to do math for 2 hours a day, then great. If some kids or parents don't want to do math for 2 hours a day, but are still able to use, learn from, and enjoy Saxon, that's great too. But for anyone to suggest that a 5, 6, 7, or 8 year old kid needs to be spending 2 hours a day on math or they'll never learn it? That's unbelievable.

 

My dd has definitely never spent 2 hours a day on math. She's never spent 2 hours on math in any day, and yet, having just turned 7 and finishing up first grade, she's able to add 2 digit numbers with carrying of tens and hundreds, subtract with regrouping, add 3 and 4 digit numbers with regrouping on paper, tell time to 5 minutes, multiply any number up to 11 by 1, 2, or 3 with automaticity (she figured this out on her own), measure using standard and non-standard measurements, use a calendar, count money, and many other things. In fact, she's more advanced than she would be if we had used Saxon, which doesn't cover some of this stuff in the 1st grade level. And I wouldn't even call her mathy! That's just what you can accomplish in 30 -45 minutes a day when you use a good curriculum.

 

Rrr! To avoid offending anyone or giving the wrong impression, let me qualify and requalify and requalify again...lol. I'm not saying Saxon isn't good. I've never seen Saxon, other than what's available for viewing online, which isn't much. I'm just saying that you don't need to do math for extended periods if you're using a good curriculum and it works for you. I don't think that Saxon is not as good just because it doesn't cover some of that stuff. I'm only saying that if we'd done Saxon K and 1, doing all the problems, taking 1 or 2 hours per day, she wouldn't even know the stuff she does now, and she'd probably hate math. That just isn't for us. Maybe other people, but not us. An hour is too long for us, although there have been some lessons that have taken that long on occasion. It was torture.

Edited May 22, 2011 by Snowfall

[melmichigan]

Are these two hour estimates limited to Larson? Are the older grades commonly taking this long? I think this is some of the problem when you lump Saxon into one "group" since you have Larson Saxon and Hake Saxon, to me they are very different.

 

My older DD using Saxon takes about 45 minutes and I think that is reasonable, she does review with me, I teach the new lesson, and she does all the problems. Is this not the norm? I would have a real big problem with a lesson taking two hours.

[The Governess]

Dd6's classical school uses Saxon, so we slog through it. :D Singapore is our main program. I have first hand seen the difference (with my dd at least) with comprehension between these two programs. I try to keep pace with Singapore so that the concepts she is covering in Saxon have already been covered by Singapore by the time she gets there. The times that Saxon has introduced a concept before we have arrived there in Singapore, she has had a hard time mastering it. There just isn't enough conceptual discussion before they switch over to the one-practice-problem-a-day review. But once we have caught up and covered the material in Singapore, she starts getting it right consistently on her Saxon worksheets.

 

To me, it seems like an incremental vs. mastery issue. Saxon assumes that kids will "eventually" get a concept, and so they introduce something knowing that it won't be mastered right away, and will be reviewed in depth the following year. About the first 40% of every Saxon book (well, at least Saxon 1 and 2, which I have experience with so far) seems to be review of last year's new concepts. So it appears that these topics are introduced the first time with the understanding that the child will have to review them in the next grade before they really "get it." Singapore, however, introduces each topic with the assumption that it will be learned to mastery, and the next time the topic comes up there is only a quick review of previous concepts before they are built on with new material. So, I think Singapore actually needs less review, and thus becomes the more efficient program. It is also much less frustrating for a child who doesn't like to be introduced to a topic and only become proficient at it 6 months later. But I get that all kids won't have an issue with this.

 

Additionally, I'm not sure that Saxon's review process is necessarily all that great either. For example, dd learned all of her subtraction math facts at the end of kindergarten with Saxon 1. But Saxon 2 has NO subtraction math facts review, at all, until February or March. :confused: So if we weren't using Singapore, dd would not have done a single subtraction problem, other than a few easy, manipulative-based word problems, for nine months. Maybe there is a reason for it, but I just don't understand this approach.

[lulubelle]

I think math debate should be banned! :D It really brings out the ugliness in many! :001_huh:

[gimli]

It is stunning that a math program could be so grossly inefficient.

 

 

I confirmed the 2 hour number as an upper limit for the entire lesson. That includes meeting book, quizzes, the actual lesson and both sides of the homework sheet. That was only for a handful of lessons. There were many lessons that we completed in under an hour. Especially when Saxon introduces new multiplication facts. But if you do it properly then there will be some that take two hours.

 

One of the most laughable statements I've ever heard on this forum.

 

 

You simply can't learn math in 20 minutes a day. I have read so many people on this forum state that they would skip the meeting book, skip the first 35 lessons or so, and then two years later they would have to go back and repeat or at least supplement with another program. That confirms my thesis.

 

Trust me Miquon and Singapore, especially used in combination, do this too. As do many other of the fine options available. And I can assure you it does not take 2 hours a day to get these ideas across to K-3 aged children.

 

 

That's the great thing about Saxon. You never need to supplement. It is all encompassing. And like I have observed, yes there are a few meeting book, quiz, lesson, homework combinations that take two hours but these are few and far between.

 

 

I'll stick with highly efficient methods and give my child the extra hour and a half a day to play and have a life. :banghead:

 

 

Sometimes, the process of data gathering, plotting, and observation combined with the meeting book really does take that long. Most of the time we broke each lesson over two days. Day 1: homework sheet from the previous lesson, meeting book, (skip counting, clock, money, word problem, etc) and quiz. Day 2: lesson and homework sheet side A. If we saw a big lesson coming we would break it over a three day stretch instead of two.

 

 

This is simply not true. Repetition is not "the only way" to learn math. It is the way Saxon attempts to teach math, but there are other (and better) ways to inculcate mathematical thinking that invoke methods other than 2 hours a day of repeated math drill.

 

 

There is actually very little drill in Saxon. The only drill we did was the flashcards before a quiz. We certainly never did two hours of repeated drill.

 

I can tell you my son not only doesn't complain about math, but he loves the subject. But he loves riding his bike too, and playing with friends. Two hours a day on math would crush his spirit, and darn right he would complain. Rightfully so. What a waste!

 

 

Sigh, there is always going to be sometimes when dc complain. We like Saxon because there is 90% review and 10% new material in each lesson. The review builds up confidence in dc so that they are encouraged and up to the task of learning a new topic.

 

In the meantime he is excelling beyond my wildest expectations, so I know the pronouncement that your way is "the only way" is hollow and false. There are other (better) ways to teach math than having them repeat problems for two hours a day. And I'm far from the only person on this forum that understands that.

 

 

In my original post, I affirmed the value of Saxon. I never placed value on this or that approach or this curriculum or that curriculum. If dc is in the public school they are already doing more than 20 minutes a day and if you supplement then you are approaching the 1 hour mark already. I only stated that math cannot be properly learned on 20 minutes a day.

[Guest Cheryl in SoCal]

You simply can't learn math in 20 minutes a day.

I very much disagree. I would not say that all children can learn math in 20 minutes per day but many can and do. It very much depends on the child and the curriculum. I would agree that you can not learn math in 20 minutes a day with Saxon, and agree that those who use Saxon need to use it as directed or choose a different curriculum for math.

[Jen500]

I confirmed the 2 hour number as an upper limit for the entire lesson. That includes meeting book, quizzes, the actual lesson and both sides of the homework sheet. That was only for a handful of lessons. There were many lessons that we completed in under an hour. Especially when Saxon introduces new multiplication facts. But if you do it properly then there will be some that take two hours.

 

 

 

You simply can't learn math in 20 minutes a day. I have read so many people on this forum state that they would skip the meeting book, skip the first 35 lessons or so, and then two years later they would have to go back and repeat or at least supplement with another program. That confirms my thesis.

 

 

 

That's the great thing about Saxon. You never need to supplement. It is all encompassing. And like I have observed, yes there are a few meeting book, quiz, lesson, homework combinations that take two hours but these are few and far between.

 

 

 

 

Sometimes, the process of data gathering, plotting, and observation combined with the meeting book really does take that long. Most of the time we broke each lesson over two days. Day 1: homework sheet from the previous lesson, meeting book, (skip counting, clock, money, word problem, etc) and quiz. Day 2: lesson and homework sheet side A. If we saw a big lesson coming we would break it over a three day stretch instead of two.

 

 

 

 

There is actually very little drill in Saxon. The only drill we did was the flashcards before a quiz. We certainly never did two hours of repeated drill.

 

 

 

Sigh, there is always going to be sometimes when dc complain. We like Saxon because there is 90% review and 10% new material in each lesson. The review builds up confidence in dc so that they are encouraged and up to the task of learning a new topic.

 

 

 

In my original post, I affirmed the value of Saxon. I never placed value on this or that approach or this curriculum or that curriculum. If dc is in the public school they are already doing more than 20 minutes a day and if you supplement then you are approaching the 1 hour mark already. I only stated that math cannot be properly learned on 20 minutes a day.

 

Gimli, you wouldn't be related to Art Reed, would you? Serious question.

[zaichiki]

You simply can't learn math in 20 minutes a day.

 

Could you flesh this out a bit? Do you mean that one person cannot learn math if they only spend 20 minutes 5X a week on it? Do you mean that NO person can learn math in short bursts? Do you mean that ONE entire concept cannot be learned in 20 minutes? Are you basing this on your experience with your own children? Have you seen varying degrees of "mathy" children? Children with high IQs? Children who have a near-photographic memory?

 

We use Singapore. We sometimes spend 15 minutes a day. We sometimes spend an hour. Ds5 usually spends 10 minutes. Dd9 usually spends about 30 minutes. Ds12 usually spends about 45. The time they spend changes depending on their age, the specific topic/lesson (some are quicker/easier), and the amount of focus they have going on that day. We tend to use the curriculum about 4 days a week. I aim for 5, but 4 works.

[nmoira]

You simply can't learn math in 20 minutes a day. I have read so many people on this forum state that they would skip the meeting book, skip the first 35 lessons or so, and then two years later they would have to go back and repeat or at least supplement with another program. That confirms my thesis.

Maybe you can't learn Saxon math and stay on schedule in 20 minutes a day, but others here have told you that yes, based on their experience, a child can learn math in 20 minutes a day. No one is making the claim that every child only needs 20 minutes a day, but you seem to be making the claim that none can.

 

Sigh, there is always going to be sometimes when dc complain. We like Saxon because there is 90% review and 10% new material in each lesson. The review builds up confidence in dc so that they are encouraged and up to the task of learning a new topic.

My eldest would have a fit if I asked her to do a program which is 90% review. It's the worst approach I could take with her. As I said previously Right Start is too incremental for DD the Elder.

 

I only stated that math cannot be properly learned on 20 minutes a day.

I am stating that you are wrong. Since some children do well with 20 (30, 40) minutes a day, that it is not true that no child can learn math in 20 (30, 40) minutes a day. Edited May 22, 2011 by nmoira
clarity

[nmoira]

Could you flesh this out a bit? Do you mean that one person cannot learn math if they only spend 20 minutes 5X a week on it? Do you mean that NO person can learn math in short bursts? Do you mean that ONE entire concept cannot be learned in 20 minutes? Are you basing this on your experience with your own children? Have you seen varying degrees of "mathy" children? Children with high IQs? Children who have a near-photographic memory?

And have you examined math programs other than Saxon or explored differences in how math is taught on a cross-cultural basis?

 

We use Singapore. We sometimes spend 15 minutes a day. We sometimes spend an hour. Ds5 usually spends 10 minutes. Dd9 usually spends about 30 minutes. Ds12 usually spends about 45. The time they spend changes depending on their age, the specific topic/lesson (some are quicker/easier), and the amount of focus they have going on that day. We tend to use the curriculum about 4 days a week. I aim for 5, but 4 works.

You, like I, are doing it wrong. :tongue_smilie:

[mhg]

I wrote to a friend of mine who taught physics, chemistry and upper level maths at our high school(back in the 90s) for many years before his retirement. During his retirement he volunteers with an online tutoring service for kids of all ages and he says many of their clients are homeschooled kids. Since I highly respect his opinion, I emailed him this week about this issue, namely Saxon vs. other math programs and I thought his writings on the subject were interesting enough to share, so here it is for what it’s worth. He stated he was quite

familiar with Singapore, Math Mammoth, CLE, etc, that he hands-down suggested I go with (and STICK with) Saxon.

He wrote,

"We learn things by repetition spaced over time, whether it is writing, piano, violin, history, or math, or true love, or matching colors. Repetition spaced over time requires more time and effort, so some will claim they can do it easier and faster by clustering the concepts (mastery) and mastering them firmly in a shorter time. I even saw an advertisement for learning languages in one easy session. They are capitalist pigs.

Why some homeschoolers go the other route? They think they can beat the work needed to learn by repetition spaced over time: Learn it in one group of lessons clustered together (mastery approach). A child can learn the concept and get the answers right in the short-term, but this isn't how it STICKS in the brain of a child. It has a distinct organic (physical brain development) component ---- the brain makes "pathway" if you will in the areas specific to math skills that are "carved out" over time. (This is a simplification of the brain’s hippocampus, but you get my drift). You can't learn math skills this way ---- they just will not STICK in the long haul. Practice (repetition) is the only way to master, and the practice has to be spaced over time. Many homeschooler moms are living in a delusional world of their own making, and you can't do anything about it. We learn by repetition spaced over time. If the kid can handle Saxon, stay with it. Life is not easy. Saxon is slow in the earliest years FOR A PURPOSEFUL reason, but Saxon gets more enjoyable as the years go by and I've yet to meet a single mom/dad who, having stuck with it K-12, looked back and had anything but praise for Saxon. You won't either if you start and STICK (in the tough early years) with it."

Now...I know this'll calm everyone down a bit-----;) (hey...it's just ONE MAN'S OPINION!!! so simmer down and :chillpill::chillpill::chillpill:)

[nmoira]

Why some homeschoolers go the other route? They think they can beat the work needed to learn by repetition spaced over time: Learn it in one group of lessons clustered together (mastery approach). A child can learn the concept and get the answers right in the short-term, but this isn't how it STICKS in the brain of a child.

I absolutely agree. But reinforcement need not mean incrementalism and repetition. I think the best reinforcement is use. If a concept is taught which isn't used, whether in subsequent units, higher level math, or "real" life, I think it's fair to ask why it's being taught in the first place. :001_smile:

[kalanamak]

I

 

 

Now...I know this'll calm everyone down a bit-----;) (hey...it's just ONE MAN'S OPINION!!! so simmer down and :chillpill::chillpill::chillpill:)

 

But if he were a retired Singaporean, he might well be singing a different tune. ;)

Edited May 22, 2011 by kalanamak

[Embassy]

Why some homeschoolers go the other route? They think they can beat the work needed to learn by repetition spaced over time: Learn it in one group of lessons clustered together (mastery approach).

 

:confused:

 

Math skills build upon each other. Once you learn it you keep practicing it through more difficult math tasks.

[The Governess]

I absolutely agree. But reinforcement need not mean incrementalism and repetition. I think the best reinforcement is use. If a concept is taught which isn't used, whether in subsequent units, higher level math, or "real" life, I think it's fair to ask why it's being taught in the first place. :001_smile:

 

Exactly. In a mastery program, the review many times consists of building on prior concepts. Just because you are no longer drilling 0-20 math facts when you get to multiple-digit addition and subtraction doesn't mean you aren't using these skills anymore. And just because you move onto a new topic like measuring or money doesn't mean that past skills are no longer applied. In every new chapter, mastery of previous topics is assumed and they are integrated into the new material. This provides a very natural review.

[Tammyla]

Years ago...I began using Saxon on Susan Wise Bauer's recommendation in The Well Trained Mind. Our experience here with Saxon Math goes from K-Algebra 2. My two are one girl who is not a math wired, and a boy who is wired for math and all things engineering. They've both been very successful; neither have needed more than an hour for their lessons. Ds has participated in a local Math Challenge group, and a young engineers summer course through one of our local colleges. They both score very well on those dreaded standardized tests:tongue_smilie:. (We have to take them in our state.)

 

We have lots of local home school friends and peers who use a number of different math programs, especially in the Math Challenge group. Some kids are going to need to work harder than others regardless of the program, and some will just get it with very little effort.

 

I try not to bother worrying what everyone else is using or who loves and is 100% devoted or 100% opposed to any given program; my belief has always been that the daily work...does the work;).

Edited May 23, 2011 by Tammyla

[nmoira]

Many homeschooler moms are living in a delusional world of their own making, and you can't do anything about it.

I thought I'd let this one go earlier, but his missive obviously didn't otherwise calm me down enough to let go completely. :tongue_smilie:

 

I would ask your friend to consider that parents of children competent in math, whether homeschooled or otherwise, generally don't seek out tutors. Does he characterize the parents or teachers of publicly or privately schooled children who need math tutoring as delusional?

[mhg]

I thought I'd let this one go earlier, but his missive obviously didn't otherwise calm me down enough to let go completely. :tongue_smilie:

 

I would ask your friend to consider that parents of children competent in math, whether homeschooled or otherwise, generally don't seek out tutors. Does he characterize the parents or teachers of publicly or privately schooled children who need math tutoring as delusional?

 

I think by delusional he was referring to anyone who thinks that a kid can master math without the use of the repetition spaced over time, so my guess is that he'd say any teacher whether home-teacher, public or private school teacher, who feels that the repetition is not necessary would be in that category.

[Guest]

I wrote to a friend of mine who taught physics, chemistry and upper level maths at our high school(back in the 90s) for many years before his retirement. During his retirement he volunteers with an online tutoring service for kids of all ages and he says many of their clients are homeschooled kids. Since I highly respect his opinion, I emailed him this week about this issue, namely Saxon vs. other math programs and I thought his writings on the subject were interesting enough to share, so here it is for what it’s worth. He stated he was quite

familiar with Singapore, Math Mammoth, CLE, etc, that he hands-down suggested I go with (and STICK with) Saxon.

 

He wrote,

"We learn things by repetition spaced over time, whether it is writing, piano, violin, history, or math, or true love, or matching colors. Repetition spaced over time requires more time and effort, so some will claim they can do it easier and faster by clustering the concepts (mastery) and mastering them firmly in a shorter time. I even saw an advertisement for learning languages in one easy session. They are capitalist pigs.

Why some homeschoolers go the other route? They think they can beat the work needed to learn by repetition spaced over time: Learn it in one group of lessons clustered together (mastery approach). A child can learn the concept and get the answers right in the short-term, but this isn't how it STICKS in the brain of a child. It has a distinct organic (physical brain development) component ---- the brain makes "pathway" if you will in the areas specific to math skills that are "carved out" over time. (This is a simplification of the brain’s hippocampus, but you get my drift). You can't learn math skills this way ---- they just will not STICK in the long haul. Practice (repetition) is the only way to master, and the practice has to be spaced over time. Many homeschooler moms are living in a delusional world of their own making, and you can't do anything about it. We learn by repetition spaced over time. If the kid can handle Saxon, stay with it. Life is not easy. Saxon is slow in the earliest years FOR A PURPOSEFUL reason, but Saxon gets more enjoyable as the years go by and I've yet to meet a single mom/dad who, having stuck with it K-12, looked back and had anything but praise for Saxon. You won't either if you start and STICK (in the tough early years) with it."

 

 

Now...I know this'll calm everyone down a bit-----;) (hey...it's just ONE MAN'S OPINION!!! so simmer down and :chillpill::chillpill::chillpill:)

 

Nooo... this is not just one man's opinion trying to support his own biased views! :lol:

[nmoira]

I think by delusional he was referring to anyone who thinks that a kid can master math without the use of the repetition spaced over time, so my guess is that he'd say any teacher whether home-teacher, public or private school teacher, who feels that the repetition is not necessary would be in that category.

But he clearly (mis)characterized a mastery approach as lacking sufficient repetition to learn math as if concepts are learned in isolation and have no relationship to each other. This is our delusion, that this approach can work.

 

ETA: And the whole idea of delusional homeschooling moms is something that raises my hackles.

 

They think they can beat the work needed to learn by repetition spaced over time: Learn it in one group of lessons clustered together (mastery approach).

 

I don't think he knows as much about these "mastery" programs as he thinks.

 

I also take issue with his characterization of people choosing other programs looking for an "easier" way to do it. Sure life isn't easy. Singapore isn't easy. CWP isn't easy. MEP isn't easy. AoPS isn't easy. Who said anything about easy?

Edited May 23, 2011 by nmoira

[kalanamak]

 

I also take issue with his characterization of people choosing other programs looking for an "easier" way to do it. Sure life isn't easy. Singapore isn't easy. CWP isn't easy. MEP isn't easy. AoPS isn't easy. Who said anything about easy?

 

Perhaps the tutorees he meets have deluded mothers who thought that something like SM was a way to "get out of work". Didn't work out that way, sent kid to tutor.

 

OP used Saxon math as a teen. OP wants to use it for her kid. OP wants to make sure her decision is right, posts polls, tries to figure out about this big undertaking called homeschooling (all very understandable). OP can't believe everyone doesn't agree, asks Is it Just Me or ...., and emails her old teacher who used (surprise) Saxon. Old teacher agrees, but some of us think he sounds like an old crank who even seems a bit anti-homeschool.

 

The "wreckful siege of battering days" softens the black/white views of most people, but if it doesn't (or until it does), my knickers are only twisted because I am :lol: at the whole thread. Naughty me!

[nmoira]

Perhaps the tutorees he meets have deluded mothers who thought that something like SM was a way to "get out of work". Didn't work out that way, sent kid to tutor.

 

OP used Saxon math as a teen. OP wants to use it for her kid. OP wants to make sure her decision is right, posts polls, tries to figure out about this big undertaking called homeschooling (all very understandable). OP can't believe everyone doesn't agree, asks Is it Just Me or ...., and emails her old teacher who used (surprise) Saxon. Old teacher agrees, but some of us think he sounds like an old crank who even seems a bit anti-homeschool.

 

The "wreckful siege of battering days" softens the black/white views of most people, but if it doesn't (or until it does), my knickers are only twisted because I am :lol: at the whole thread. Naughty me!

 

But, but, but, but... someone is wrong on the Internet!

 

:lol:

[zaichiki]

Exactly. In a mastery program, the review many times consists of building on prior concepts. Just because you are no longer drilling 0-20 math facts when you get to multiple-digit addition and subtraction doesn't mean you aren't using these skills anymore. And just because you move onto a new topic like measuring or money doesn't mean that past skills are no longer applied. In every new chapter, mastery of previous topics is assumed and they are integrated into the new material. This provides a very natural review.

 

And THIS is why I love Singapore Math. The review is IN the math.

[nmoira]

 

The review is IN the math.

Now that's a slogan!

[zaichiki]

I don't think he knows as much about these "mastery" programs as he thinks.

 

 

I agree. You might ask him how, if mastery programs do not work, Singapore managed/manages to consistently rank at the top of the TIMSS (international math test) for so many years.

[Guest]

ETA: And the whole idea of delusional homeschooling moms is something that raises my hackles.

 

I don't think he knows as much about these "mastery" programs as he thinks.

 

I also take issue with his characterization of people choosing other programs looking for an "easier" way to do it. Sure life isn't easy. Singapore isn't easy. CWP isn't easy. MEP isn't easy. AoPS isn't easy. Who said anything about easy?

 

:iagree: but hey, he has a right to his own opinion ;). I just wish someone would send his comments to all those moms whose kids he is tutoring :D. I am sure they would appreciate his view of them!