Formal Math before age 10

[cozyfamily]

Hi Everyone,

First let me say that I'm new here and am planning to follow to attempt classical ed. in the Fall with my two dc.

 

Here's my question today:

I have a dd, age 8.5 and in 2nd grade, who struggles with math. Or rather, she struggles with abstract math. We had her enrolled in a private school for K-1 and when we brought her home for 2nd grade we realized that she was not ready for abstract math. The school she'd been in was rather advanced in this area.

 

Not being a math person myself, it's taken me most of this year to figure out that I chose the wrong math program for her learning style. She's very tactile, very visual, and prefers to move her body.

 

I scrapped her curr. mid-year and instead we sang songs, tossed bean bags while skip counting, and played games. I've been poised and ready to purchase Rightstart Math for the Fall. However, I ran across an article from the Bluedorns which suggests not even starting formal math until age 10 or so. Likewise, I read another article online regarding a professor back in the 1930's who "experimented" with not introducing formal math to a group of children until 6th or 7th grade. Their math skills ended up being superior to their peers. Methinks this might be the approach my dd needs. It just feels like I'm suggesting a bungie jump off Hoover Dam. Yikes.

 

So. Have any of you adopted this kind of approach? I'd sooo appreciate your thoughts on this.:blink:

[Kimber]

I'd cross post this on the K-8 curriculum board. I'm having similar thoughts about my 5 year old, but I don't think I can do it. I'd probably follow-up with the text every now and then to determine where he is. But the idea is intriguing.

 

Kimberly

[Karen sn]

No advice - but thank you because your post makes me feel better about how "behind" we are!....in everything.

I think it's important to UNDERSTAND it on a deeper level than just to add it or multiply it on a blackboard.

I see so many kids who are sooooo lost because they just don't get it. They don't understand the what or why of what they are calculating.

 

We are "behind" here in some ways....but I will tell you this, my dd has perfect penmanship and we love studying science and our local history. We are going to work on math alot this summer.

 

 

Check out this website that my best friend in the whole wide world uses......

http://www.redshift.com/~bonajo/mmathadd.htm

[nmoira]

No firsthand experience, but I'd recommend checking out the Living Math site.

[Ellie]

although not on purpose :-) I never found a publisher I liked (we started hsing in 1982). Both dds took college-level algebra 1 at the community college, followed by Alg. 2 and statistics, and they aced all three classes.

 

I wish I'd known about the "experiement" in New York; I would gladly have followed that plan. As it was, we just sort of mushed around. I guess it worked out, though, and that's all that matters:)

[cozyfamily]

Thanks for the feedback! I've been to the Living Math site before - I'll poke around a little deeper. Glad to hear that some of you have the same feelings or have had similar experiences. Makes jumping a little easier. I'll crosspost this as soon as I can, too. Thanks for the recommendation.

 

Jacque

[Jen500]

I love the Living Math website!! I've gotten a lot of good math reader ideas and we can find some of them at the library. We do a lot of 'hands-on' math to break up the workbook stuff. Measuring with rulers, yardsticks, a small scale, and also cooking. I also have a clock with hands (not digital). Several calendars hanging on the walls.

Jen

[Harriet Vane]

I really, really disagreed with what they had to say. (I went in with an open mind--I really did!)

 

They gave two main reasons why they felt math should be delayed:

 

1. The child's brain is not physically, developmentally ready to cope with math.

 

2. Other, ancient societies didn't do math until kids were older.

 

On the first point, I do not remember the specifics, but I did think at the time that some of their information about the physical features of the brain were both incorrect, and/or that certain facts were taken out of context and misinterpreted. It has been a couple years since I heard this seminar--I am sorry I cannot be more specific than that. I would advise you to do your own research, or even chat with a doctor about this. (My doctor homeschools plus he is very, very open to any discussion, so this was very easy for me to do.)

 

Also on the first point, my own, purely anecdotal observation refutes this. My ds is really, really good at math. When he was just barely five years old he angrily informed me that he was done with his "stupid, baby math books" (pre-school shapes and counting type things) and wanted to do some real math. He has since galloped through as much math as I can throw at him, and prints off Calculadder sheets to do for fun in his spare time!!! He is also able to grasp fairly non-concrete concepts intuitively--trust me, his brain is more than able to handle math!:blink:

 

My other anecdotal observation is my dd, who is the polar opposite of my son. She does NOT grasp math easily. In her case, I would have said that she is comfortable with concrete math concepts, but NOT abstract. So for her I would say that she will likely grow in her ability to understand abstract math concepts in the logic years. This is different from what the Bluedorns would assert.

 

On the Bluedorns second point: It doesn't make sense to me to pattern education after people who lived in a totally different time, culture, context. I heartily embrace classical education as a philosophy even as I recognize that the APPLICATION of that philosophy will vary depending upon the context and people to which it is applied. People at other times in history and cultures had a multitude of reasons why they structured their lives the way that they did. I felt that the Bluedorns assessment, therefore, of why these cultures started math instruction later was simplistic and did not account for other possibilities of why that people group might have chosen that method.

 

With regard to you child in particular:

 

My dd struggles mightily with math. In her case, playing math games and reading math literature, as well as heavy reliance on manipulatives, has helped her enormously. I applaud you for doing games and so forth with your daughter. I do have a friend whose similar child has thrived with RightStart, so I would encourage you to go ahead and take a look at it. I would NOT, however, stop math instruction. Rather, I would take encourage you to take math as you have so far--in a way that makes sense to your child, and at HER pace.

[angela in ohio]

The Bluedorns recommend, in Teaching the Trivium, that you do a LOT of math before age 10, just not in a workbook.

[Maria/ME]

I could've wrote this post!

 

My dd, who is now 10, has always struggled with math. She could sometimes recite but she had no conception of practical application. Abstract ideas were very difficult for her. My best friends son, who is a year younger than my daughter wrapped his head around abstract ideas at age four! He was multiplying without knowing it when he was five! So I think much depends on the child. If they love math, then go for it!

 

I read up on delayed math (and not just by the Bluedorns...google delayed academics and you can find more...) and felt like it really made sense for us. I purchased RightStart and at age 7 we started going through the book a bit at a time. We did lots of manipulative's. She did fine to a point, but then seemed to really "blank" out, so we've put math up for a while. Meanwhile, I incorporated math with her various interests. When she wanted to learn to tell time, we worked fractions in a bit and counting by fives and tens..it made sense because she saw the application...when she wanted to buy a kitten, we started working with money. She struggles still with the abstract, and perhaps always will, but we will be picking Rightstart up again this fall as I see some signs that she is ready to tackle some more abstract ideas little by little.

 

Hope this helps somewhat...while not a strong proponate of delayed academics (I'm too eclectic to be a strong propionate of anything!) I know that she'll catch up pretty quick when she is older.

 

I have my thoughts for our family on math HERE on my blog. If you are interested, scroll down to the heading: Math. I have a few links that might be helpful, too.

 

Do not despair! I don't think you and your daughter are alone!

[siloam]

If you have the freedom to do that, and are comfortable with it, then go for it. Here I have to do testing in 3rd grade, so it is a no go, but if you do decide to do math, Right Start is a great approach.

 

Heather

[Cindyg]

Personally, I'd be much more comfortable choosing a light, hands-on, not-advanced-paced math curriculum and proceeding slowly with short lessons rather than postponing math until she's 10. I agree with Cadam that there's no way I'd miss these years for memorizing math facts.

 

I don't have a specific recommendation for which curriculum is light and easy, except to say that I love both RightStart and Math U See for being concrete. And when your daughter is ready to learn fractions, Life of Fred is delightful. I can hardly keep my son from working ahead! But LOF is not concrete--no manipulatives. The first book in the series (Fractions) is probably a 4th or 5th grade level.

 

So, I vote for doing something rather than nothing, even if it's far below grade level.

 

Good luck to you.

[Reya]

It's better to do no formal math at an early age than BAD math that gets a child trapped in meaningless algorithms. But good math will be better, every time, hands down.

[prairiegirl]

Somehow I missed this the first time around. My dd sounds alot like yours. We started with a formal curriculum and she just wasn't ready for it. But I didn't know about living math back then and I forged ahead. This was a huge mistake. I now have a math phobic on my hands.

 

We still use a curriculum--RightStart but we also use living math ideas as well. This combo has helped a great deal in changing my dd's attitude towards math. I think RS is the best choice for my dd. It presents math in a hands on way. This works for her.

 

Based on my experience with my oldest, I have decided not to use a curriculum with my youngest. This is not to say that we aren't going to be doing math. We will be doing it every day but we just won't be using worksheets and a schedule. I have gone through RS A twice now so I feel confident that I can teach math the RS way without actually using the book. If our K year turns out well, then I will proceed to do this for the next year as well.

 

Julie at the Living Math site has written lesson plans that have a living math feel to them. I am thinking of doing these for next year. This would be a supplement for my oldest two in addition to doing RS.