Can someone please explain why MUS isn't rigorous enough?

[SewLittleTime]

I'm at the point I need to consider where ds is headed. He is one one year away from logic stage, and I sense a need to make sure I have him prepared for that. We currently use MUS, and we've enjoyed it. But I have that nagging feeling of if it is going to prepare him. I read about so many people that say it's not rigorous and has gaps. Can someone explain this?

Edited June 13, 2011 by SewLittleTime

[Mrs. A]

:lurk5:

 

we are starting out with MUS so I'm interested to hear others' thoughts...

[Crimson Wife]

Don't worry about whether other people feel that MUS (or any other program) isn't rigorous enough for their individual children. What is perfect for one child may be too hard or too easy for another. I know folks who have done MUS all the way through HS and their children are now successful in college.

 

MUS isn't my cuppa for a primary program because I don't care for the one topic per level aspect. But I wouldn't hesitate to use it for a child who needed additional practice on a particular topic and who didn't care for MM "blue".

[truebluexf]

Yes, that. LOL

 

We have used RS and loved it til mid-C, then used Singapore, which, after almost 3 workbooks, turned into an epic fail. It was awful. Math shouldn't be crying (him) and yelling (me.) MM made him cry too, he hated it. MUS, though, has made him LIKE math again!!! So, honestly, while SM might just be the bees' knees, it isn't if my kid cries when it comes out. I don't want him to be scared of math or hate it, so MUS is right for him at this point in time. It is a solid program, and the focused work works for him. There is just enough review involved to keep skills honed. If I feel a need to supplement at some point, I will, but he sure understands multiplication a heck of a lot better than he learned with SM. He actually has time to practice it in this program vs constantly moving on and jumping around in SM. I'm not concerned about holes. I really think this is teaching him well, and if he's missing some small thing somewhere, we'll cross that bridge when we get there. Most "holes," IMO, are easily filled. (Not enough measurement? Practice with the real thing! Not enough time telling? Get some clocks! lol)

 

I think the critics don't think MUS uses hard enough word problems like SM does. If you are one of them, that is easily fixed with SM's CWP. It would also be very cheap and easy to get some MM topic books to use alongside MUS if you wanted a little different approach added in. Personally I think we will be able to go through Delta very quickly next year, and if that's the case, we can practice with MM at the end or move onto the next level and get "ahead."

[SewLittleTime]

I appreciate your responses. My ds is doing well with MUS, my middle is doing fair with it. He is just a different kind of learner. And I may get him something else, but I just don't know at this point. He'd like a little variety. But I really feel like MUS does a good job at really teaching those basic skills.

 

Any one else want to chime in?

[Harriet Vane]

The real question is for WHOM is it rigorous or not rigorous enough?

 

For my dd, MUS was a life saver. She was really, really struggling with Singapore, and MUS changed everything. My dd's strengths are in language arts and every career that she finds appealing has to do with reading, writing, foreign language, or teaching. It's obvious that she will never be in a math related career. MUS is perfect for her--it teaches all that she needs to know in a way that she understands.

 

Dd takes the Iowa standardized tests every year, and she has scored at grade level for math each year.

 

My ds is the opposite of dd. His strengths are with math and science, and he struggles with anything language arts related. He uses MUS, and his scores have always been above grade level. He is whipping through the curriculum quickly. It's easy to see that unlike dd, ds will be taking calculus and trig someday. Ds can do something more challenging, so after Zeta he will switch to a harder program.

 

If my kids were in public school, they would be tracked differently. Ds would be in honors math, and dd would not. Dd would be in honors English; ds would not. The tracking is a reflection of their unique abilities.

 

MUS is rigorous enough in general. Your child will learn all that is needed to prepare for college. However, yes, there are other programs that are more rigorous, and some that are less rigorous. Choose the program that reflects your child's ability in this area.

[angela in ohio]

Most of us aren't going to touch that one with a ten and a half foot pole. :D

 

MUS is one of those certain curriculums that inspires incredible devotion in its users. ;)

[ColoNative]

I agree with Strider. There are some kids that do very well with MUS. There are other kids who are on a different track and do need "more" than it offers. I've compared lots of math currciulums because my oldest son wants to go to the Air Force Academy - we are starting this fall with Pre-Transitions math from UCMSP. It's a rigorous program and will ge through Calculus by the end of high school. MUS, IMHO, did not go into the depth I was looking for in middle/high school grades....

 

My second son, on the other hand, does much better with a hands on approach and will probably NOT be on a math/science track anytime soon, but he's young so we'll wait and see.

[JudoMom]

Most of us aren't going to touch that one with a ten and a half foot pole. :D

 

MUS is one of those certain curriculums that inspires incredible devotion in its users. ;)

 

:lol: I always knew you were wise, Angela. :lol:

[Stellalarella]

Well, MUS is plenty rigorous for my dd7. But NOT for my other kids. For my other small dc, I am teaching them numbers using what I have learned from teaching MUS Alpha and I am pleased with that. My littles are now coming along so fast, and enjoying math SO MUCH, that I am supplementing with Singapore. DD10 gets her MUS supplemented with MM and LOF.

 

I have really been humbled in the area of teaching math this year. For some reason I had it in my head that if only I was the best teacher, if only I had the "best," "right" curriculum then my kids would learn. But no--there is a third factor for learning as well, the particular child. I have one child who just couldn't "get it." MUS helped her a lot and I still don't see her wanting or needing anything else. It would be torture for both me and her if we tried to supplement with anything else.

 

Yes, MUS does inspire some serious devotion. :001_smile: I've wondered if that was because it was such a different approach, but also because there is only one place it can be purchased. It's built around one fellow--Mr. Steve. And man, you have to love it to embrace the poor quality videography for years and years of school. I almost feel like I have to love it and defend it because the books are expensive (as compared to MM or LOF).

 

But all that aside, I'm a better at teaching math because of MUS. And I am going to love it when that big box finally, finally arrives today.

[Stellalarella]

Most of us aren't going to touch that one with a ten and a half foot pole. :D

 

MUS is one of those certain curriculums that inspires incredible devotion in its users. ;)

:lol:

[WTMCassandra]

MUS, IMHO, did not go into the depth I was looking for in middle/high school grades....

 

Could you be more specific? What does it lack?

 

I can sympathize with Angela in Ohio and others who are not wanting to anger true MUS believers, BUT, people like me with inquiring minds really want to know. :bigear:

 

I'm not a MUS user, but I help people with curriculum a lot, and I have a friend who has heard the same vague thing I have that MUS is not rigorous enough in the upper grades, and we are both trying to quantify or verify or refute this statement. So, please, even if you have to PM me, PLEASE spill the beans!

 

Is it rigorous enough for someone considering an engineering career? If not, what does it lack?

 

:bigear::bigear::bigear:

[SewLittleTime]

Most of us aren't going to touch that one with a ten and a half foot pole. :D

 

MUS is one of those certain curriculums that inspires incredible devotion in its users. ;)

:lol:

[SewLittleTime]

Could you be more specific? What does it lack?

 

I can sympathize with Angela in Ohio and others who are not wanting to anger true MUS believers, BUT, people like me with inquiring minds really want to know. :bigear:

 

.... heard the same vague thing I have that MUS is not rigorous enough in the upper grades, and we are both trying to quantify or verify or refute this statement. So, please, even if you have to PM me, PLEASE spill the beans!

 

Is it rigorous enough for someone considering an engineering career? If not, what does it lack?

 

:bigear::bigear::bigear:

 

:bigear::bigear::bigear::bigear:

[Satori]

Most of us aren't going to touch that one with a ten and a half foot pole. :D

 

MUS is one of those certain curriculums that inspires incredible devotion in its users. ;)

 

MUS really didn't work out for us, and it was the first curriculum that made me decide I'll try my best never to be too negative on the forums about another program.

[Donna T.]

I thought I'd just cut and paste the following that I received today through the MUS email list.

 

Behind the Booth

 

While working at the Math-U-See booth and answering questions, I have been asked if Math-U-See is rigorous enough for the upper levels (Algebra 1 through Calculus). Thank you for asking. We seem to have acquired a reputation for making math too easy, which I like. I want math to be doable and understandable.

 

 

I believe that in teaching concepts- and teaching them concretely- we are providing students with an incredible foundation which will prepare them for further upper level classes. You may not know that my first two teaching positions were at the high school level, teaching geometry, algebra, and trigonometry.

 

 

What I observed in the classroom shaped a lot of my thinking. I found that these subjects were not difficult, IF YOU HAD A STRONG FOUNDATION IN THE BASICS. Sorry for the CAPS, but I need to make this point. So when I began writing books, the first book was entitled Foundations. (It was later revised and expanded into Alpha, Beta, and part of Gamma).

 

 

If you continue in Math-U-See through high school, I believe you will be very satisfied. I will let some of our happy customers share their stories with you.

 

 

Have a Super Summer,

 

Steve

 

From Happy Customers in our Upper Levels

 

I just wanted to pass along a conversation I overheard at our local used book sale. A mom of a graduating senior was lamenting high school math with her son. She said they had used MUS through 8th grade but switched in HS because she heard MUS was too easy. Her son confessed more than half way through the first year that he was just memorizing things and not understanding with his new curriculum. They switched again but still struggled. The other mom concurred that HS math was hard.

 

 

I decided after hearing this conversation, that we will never switch from MUS. Why make it hard? If it is working (and it is) why change?

- Dana D.

 

 

I am a homeschooled senior and have used Math-U-See my entire scholastic career. I love math and science and I believe that Math-U-See has helped to foster that love and enabled me to excel in these subjects as well. Next week I will be completing Pre-Calculus which marks my completion of every Math-U-See book you have authored. To prove that this course has been successful, I would point to my acceptance to Purdue University’s School of Engineering after just three years of high school. Purdue requires excellence in every subject, but it requires its students to go above and beyond any state requirements for math during high school. Not only was I admitted to Purdue, but they have awarded me with substantial merit based scholarships, and I know that, at least in part, I owe thanks to you for that. So, thank you Mr. Demme. You’ve never met me, but you have been a significant influence in my life.

- Luke M.

 

 

 

We've used MUS exclusively with our 4 children, now ages 6 thru 16. My oldest one scored in the 99th percentile on the PSAT in all areas and wants to pursue Theoretical Physics. Thank you for making math understandable and majestic all at the same time.

- Farryl M.

 

Dear Steve, one of your students - Matthew N. - won the 2009 Google SketchUp Kid's Digital Design Contest and was honored by the Howe brothers - Popular Science's 2009 Inventors/Invention of the year.

 

 

Your Math program contributed to his success.

 

 

In 7th grade he got so bogged down by ______ Math's overkill review and drill he spent over 2 hours a day per lesson and slid farther and farther behind. We finally listened to some friends and ordered your intro DVD. Math U See's program fit our family perfectly. We happily "re-taught" Fractions and PreAlgebra.

 

 

 

 

Because your program teaches math skills in a logical, natural progression without the fluff and overkill drill - he finished Algebra Honors in one semester freeing up valuable time. With that time he toured Howe and Howe Technologies, interviewed with the Howe brothers, spent 160 hours using a CAD program - building the skills needed to win the Google SketchUp competition.

 

 

Math U See is directly assisting Matthew in pursuing his dream of becoming a mechanical engineer.

- Debbie N.

 

 

One of the reasons that we choose MUS was because it was recommended in The Well-Trained Mind. We did alot of research and talked to alot of families in our homeschooling group and also visited some MUS reps. at a convention. We heard many glowing recommendations, so we decided to try it. It was an immediate hit and we have been very happy with it. My oldest son has used Alpha through Epsilon. My youngest has used Primer through Beta. Both of my sons are very bright and are doing great with MUS. I frequently read on this board that it's not enough and then I go moaning to my husband who keeps telling me that it is enough. He really likes MUS and he loves math. Both of his brothers are engineers and both have looked at MUS and like it. But, I do think that "where there is smoke, there is fire", I'm sure those who believe it isn't enough have some basis to their thinking. We plan to stay with MUS through HS and supplement if we need to. My husband really believes in making Math real and a part of their daily lives. I trust him and as long as he is happy with MUS, we will continue to use it.

 

I just keep wondering why Susan and others would recommend MUS at all if it's not going to prepare our children for college level math. I have read all of her reviews in her books and she has not indicated that it is not a sufficient program. She does mention that it has a different scope & sequence and how that plays out in HS but she didn't neglect to continue to recommend it.

 

I don't know... I'm probably ruining the kids :001_smile:. My 3rd grader did pick up Life of Fred fractions and begin using it recently. He has only worked through Beta but is able to do the beginning lessons in LOF.

[Quad Shot Academy]

I guess I am one of those devoted followees. :lol: I am sure MUS just doesn't work with some kids, but usually those with major concerns were using one of the old versions. I got Singapore's challenging word problems to supplement with because I kept hearing that MUS had word problems that were too easy. My son found CWP to be the same level as MUS, so we dropped it. We supplement with these booklets starting in Gamma for 2 years. We do the fractions, measurement, problem solving and geometry booklets. I do start Alpha in K, so the kids run about a year "ahead." Both of my kids test very high in math. I plan on using it all the way through, but may supplement with AOPs in highschool.

Edited June 14, 2011 by Quad Shot Academy

[SewLittleTime]

I guess I am one of those devoted followees. :lol: I am sure MUS just doesn't work with some kids, but usually those with major concerns were using one of the old versions. I got Singapore's challenging word problems to supplement with because I kept hearing that MUS had word problems that were too easy. My son found CWP to be the same level as MUS, so we dropped it. We supplement with these booklets starting in Gamma for 2 years. We do the fractions, measurement, problem solving and geometry booklets. I do start Alpha in K, so the kids run about a year "ahead." Both of my kids test very high in math. I plan on using it all the way through, but may supplement with AOPs in highschool.

Thank you for your reply. We started Alpha in K too. My oldest will move into Epsilon for 4th.

 

Thank you for your thoughts on CWP. I have thought about that a lot, but I frankly don't want to spend money on anything that is just going to be more work. I'm trying to simpify!!!!:tongue_smilie:

[wapiti]

I'm at the point I need to consider where ds is headed. He is one one year away from logic stage, and I sense a need to make sure I have him prepared for that. We currently use MUS, and we've enjoyed it. But I have that nagging feeling of if it is going to prepare him. I read about so many people that say it's not rigorous and has gaps. Can someone explain this?

 

Here are some threads about MUS at the high school level. HTH :)

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151865&highlight=mus

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108498&highlight=mus

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=154567&highlight=mus

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=149375&highlight=mus

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=91493&highlight=mus

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26591&highlight=mus

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=142042&highlight=mus

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=274849&highlight=mus

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2180923&highlight=mus#post2180923

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1660175&highlight=mus#post1660175

 

ETA, oops maybe I misunderstood - are you looking for reassurance on the elementary levels that you've already done, or on high school levels to come? (I tend to lump middle in with high school - prealg and up)

Edited June 14, 2011 by wapiti

[truebluexf]

LOL...some people really LOVE their curricula!!! ;) It happens with so many, not just MUS. I think I'm the only one who dares talk negatively about WP! ;) :P Different strokes for different folks!!! SM has megafollowers, and it didn't work for DS AT ALL. DD1 has done well with first grade in SM. Who knows? All the kids are different, and as mentioned above, it TOTALLY depends on what your child's strengths and weaknesses are, and learning style, etc. I think we each know if our child needs to study something deeper, kwim? And that goes for any subject, really. I LOVE FLL, but we have to switch this coming year bc it's just not the best fit anymore...DS needs more independence, so we are going to CLE (workbook based, *gasp!* LOL!!) We'll probably go back to ALL the following year. Honestly, I stayed away from MUS for a long time bc of the same subject for a whole year, reviews of it not being in depth enough, etc, and then it literally saved us this year. You just never know what you are going to *need*!!! :)

 

*I hope no one is taking from this that I'm a MUS groupie, lol!!!*

[Donna T.]

 

*I hope no one is taking from this that I'm a MUS groupie, lol!!!*

 

:D

[ElizabethB]

 

Is it rigorous enough for someone considering an engineering career? If not, what does it lack?

 

:bigear::bigear::bigear:

 

I personally don't think so, and I have an engineering degree.

 

IMO, it does not teach as deep an understanding of math as you would get from something like Singapore or Right Start.

 

I switched from MUS to Singapore and have been very happy with the change and how much deeper my daughter is understanding math.

 

Read Liping Ma and compare it to something like Singapore or RS and see what you think. (Although you really have to look closely at Singapore or use it for a few months to see the difference...things are taught and approached several different ways, but on the surface it looks similar to any other math program.)

 

It does teach the basics at least, unlike many of the fuzzy math programs, and I do like their manipulatives, I kept those.