S/O

[DragonFaerie]

In another thread, there was discussion about Singapore Math vs MM vs TT. It seems to be common consensus that TT is behind grade level while Singapore is significantly ahead. So, if that's the case, which math programs are "on" grade level? I'm thinking about supplementing TT with something else but I don't really know what. My kids and I have been really happy with TT and I already have it for using next fall. However, I don't want to do my children a disservice by not providing them enough. So, what would ya'll suggest for supplements? Or do you think it necessary? FWIW, both my 3rd grader and my 4th grader will use TT4.

Edited July 8, 2011 by DragonFaerie

[WishboneDawn]

I use Singapore and tried, but didn't like, TT.

 

However, I think you could worry yourself crazy about this.

 

I think the most important thing is to find a program that works for you and the kids and that keeps them progressing. Honestly, even if TT is a bit behind grade level but your kids have a good understanding of the material it covers then they're likely ahead of a lot of the kids in school.

 

It's a good solid program that works for a lot of the people here. If it's not broke, don't fix it. :)

[Spy Car]

I don't agree that Singapore is "significantly" ahead of grade level, unless one lives in a state with low math standards and is using those as the standard of measure.

 

TT has the reputation on this forum of being very far behind. No first-hand expecting there.

 

Bill

[WishboneDawn]

I don't agree that Singapore is "significantly" ahead of grade level, unless one lives in a state with low math standards and is using those as the standard of measure.

 

:iagree: I used to think it was ahead until I took a good look at our provincial standards. A little maybe but the scope and sequence is quite a bit different so it's hard to compare.

 

TT has the reputation on this forum of being very far behind. No first-hand expecting there.

 

 

My daughter tried TT6 in grade six (review here). Just reread the review I linked to and it seems I did find it quite a bit behind in terms of what I was expecting and what Catherine was capable of. Despite what the post says Catherine dropped it not too long after and tried ALEKS math (we were still doing Key to and Singapore I believe) and she found that much more challenging and fun.

 

ANyhow, my reading comprehension skills just kicked in. You want supplementation, not a replacement. I'd go with MM for sure. The books are labeled by subject, not level, making them very easy to use when your child needs reinforcement in a particular area. They're uncluttered in design and heavy on understanding concepts. One last bonus is that Maria Miller is easy to contact and always willing to help.

[Farrar]

Isn't there an argument about whether Singapore is ahead of grade level or not at least every other week? With Bill arguing that it isn't, of course.

 

For a lot of this ahead and behind stuff with specific curricula, isn't it just splitting hairs? When people point out the differences, it always seems pretty small in the grand scheme of things.

[DragonFaerie]

Thanks, ya'll. I think I just panicked for a minute there. I'm sticking with TT. Both my kids are pretty good with math so I don't think they'll suffer for it. And if I do find something that they have trouble with, I can look for supplemental materials then.

[Spy Car]

Isn't there an argument about whether Singapore is ahead of grade level or not at least every other week? With Bill arguing that it isn't, of course.

 

For a lot of this ahead and behind stuff with specific curricula, isn't it just splitting hairs? When people point out the differences, it always seems pretty small in the grand scheme of things.

 

Since the Standards Edition of Primary Mathematics (which is ahead of the US Edition sequentially) conforms to the California Math Standards (and why it is called the "Standards Edition) it is on grade level here in California.

 

It may be a better and deeper way of teaching that some other options that also meet the Standard (which I believe) but in is not "significantly" ahead.

 

Bill

[EKS]

I don't think that Singapore is ahead. It is fairly equivalent Saxon, though Singapore tends to have some harder problems thrown in.

[kolamum]

I disagree that TT is behind. I think it's a matter of what you compare it to. If you compared it to say.. Saxon, it would appear to be behind. I can only compare it to this because it's what I have first hand experience in.

 

Saxon, imho, is a bit whacky. I do love the programme, but the K level is, imho, preschool work not Kindy work. Grade 1 is reasonably for a K & 2nd grader to a degree. Their 2nd grade work has children working on multiplication and I disagree with that theory.

 

I think children need time to adjust to each new thing they are taught and not be raced forward. That said, we used Saxon for K-2ish. I eventually ditched the curriculum because my kids were going bonkers with it. We did "living math" for two years and I waited quite a bit to teach my eldest multiplication, but once I did we had no issues. No stumbling nothing. We learned single multiplication in a week or two and have all ready progressed, quickly and easily to triple digit multiplication.

 

 

As for TT, I decided to use it this year incase I'd created any caps in not using a curriculum. I chose TT for a variety of reasons. It's not without it's faults, but I think it's reasonable. I suspect the reason people see it as "behind" is a road with many paths.

 

1. It has more review then any programme I've ever seen. For instance.. Saxon reviews the precious year for the first 20-25 lessons or so. TT has it going on for about 50 some odd lessons. Not only is that DOUBLE, but it leads me to point 2.

 

2. TT has a lot less lessons then most math programmes! It only has something like 114 at grade 3 and maybe 117 or something at grade 4. If you do 180 days of school and anticipate a math lesson each day that's PLENTY of time to sneak in review work, hands on applications, and so on because there's so many LESS lessons of TT. In short, based on #1 just under half your time is spent reviewing what you learned last year. This can be good if you take a LONG break in the summer. silly if you don't.

 

 

Another factor taken into account might be for those who do standardised testing. If TT moves at a slightly slower pace then most curriculums then people might fear their children can't succeed with those tests. At the same time several Mamma's here attested to children using the curriculum and doing very well on tests all the way up through ACTs and so on.

 

As for WHAT programme is spot on in regards to grade level? Probably none unless you used something like Math On The Level. There is no grade level with it, you teach your child what they are mature enough to grasp, understand, and do. Make sense?

 

When we did living math we basically did the same thing. I focused on one thing I wanted my kids to learn while keeping them busy using and exploring things we'd all ready done. It was good and my kids made great progress. They had no issues with grade level tests either! :D

 

I can not, however attest to Singapore as I've never seen or used it. As for Math Mammoth, I haven't used the sets made for specific grades, but we do own many of the blue books. I'm not as keen on it because I don't like the entire method they use for teaching certain things.

 

I also didn't like when she taught the kids measurement and they pulled out a ruler there was no exact measurement for cm or mms yet the book was specifically made for metric measurement and the ruler in the book stated they had exact measurements. It drove me insane. :lol: I'm being nit picky though I'm sure..

[DragonFaerie]

Thanks for all the great information! I appreciate the perspective.

 

How does MEP fit into the grand scheme of things? Anyone use that?