MEP ? for Spycar or SatoriSmiles or Anyone Else...

[SEGway]

While doing research, I looked back for threads on MEP, and it seems as though you both liked/used MEP for a while and then both ended up with Singapore as your primary math.

 

What does SM have that MEP lacks? What made you switch? Do you still have a good opinion of the program having dabbled in more options since then?

 

TIA, you guys seem to really know your stuff.

Sarah

[Jen500]

We tried MEP in grade 4 (after using SM through 3rd grade) for a month or so and then went back to SM. My boys enjoyed MEP a lot...it was like doing puzzles for them. I did not like having to print all the pages, and I had a hard time teaching MEP compared to SM. I had a hard time seeing what the main idea was for each lesson. Maybe SM is more mastery than MEP, I can't really remember. It was easier for us to accelerate through some sections of SM. Also, my dc could easily look back through the SM text when needed.

[stripe]

I'm using MEP. I know nmoira is too. I like the activities and puzzles more than Singapore. My son seemed to have a superficial understanding of numbers. I found y1 a to be great. That's my favorite semester. Even if you want to do another program, I think you should do that. Y1b, we found a bit tedious and repetitive. But y1 -- genius.

[cmarango]

I really enjoyed MEP Reception with my dd, but when I tried Year 1 we ended up ditching it after a week. The beginning of Year 1 had a lot of finishing patterns and writing numbers in very small boxes that frustrated my dd. Singapore is much more visually pleasing for her and there is little frustration with the amount of writing required. Also, Singapore makes more sense to me...it is how I think.

 

With that being said, we use a Singapore/Rightstart/Miquon combo.

[stripe]

I didn't have my son do much writing in the MEP pages and bought the Kumon numbers 1-30 book. It was quite helpful and went from fairly simple writing to the numbers.

[mommyagain]

:bigear:

[Spy Car]

While doing research, I looked back for threads on MEP, and it seems as though you both liked/used MEP for a while and then both ended up with Singapore as your primary math.

 

What does SM have that MEP lacks? What made you switch? Do you still have a good opinion of the program having dabbled in more options since then?

 

TIA, you guys seem to really know your stuff.

Sarah

 

I really like MEP. I only wish we could continue to all or most of it rather than only "some." The almost constantly challenging aspects of this program appeal to me and my son likes it.

 

But, you are correct I am using Singapore as our primary math program. Part of the reason is that Primary Mathematics is sort of a "safety blanket" for me. I totally get the Singapore Model Method, I can see where it is going and easily comprehend the incremental steps and stages we are going through.

 

With MEP I can see the same whole-parts math, but I don't get the same "big picture" sense of the method. This style of mathematics is not one I was raised with (understatement alert) so I like feeling on solid ground. The Singapore materials are very sympathetic with the orderly side of my nature but sometimes I prefer the more unruly flavor of MEP.

 

I think if I had two children (and I only have one) I would try teaching the second using what I had gained as a teacher from using Singapore and bringing that to MEP. This might be the ideal scenario (for me).

 

As it is Singapore gives me the confidence of helping me systematically lay strong foundation and then I can throw in other elements to add some chaos and extra challenge.

 

I guess I see the selection of Singapore as a conservative choice compared to MEP. But using Singapore as our math spine was my plan all along. We used Miquon as an introductory program in Pre-K and K along with MEP and Primary Mathematics (Singapore).

 

I have nothing but positive feelings about MEP. My only discontent is there are not enough hours in the day and I am forced to choose. I'm not saying I made the "best choice," but have a strong feeling of security using Singapore as our spine and supplementing off of it.

 

I would not want to discourage anyone from using MEP. Especially full-time home schoolers who have the time (and dedication) to do the Lesson Plan activities in their entirety. This was always tricky for me while after-schooling and the future looks for us to be busier and busier.

 

My 2 cent.

 

Bill

[Poke Salad Annie]

We use MEP as our primary math program, but have dabbled in others as well (Singapore, CSMP, and Strayer-Upton). We plan to continue with MEP, and are very happy with what we have seen in using it so far. No complaints.

[FO4UR]

I like MEP, the main drawback for one of my dc is the page lay-out.

 

When we do it orally and on the board, it goes well...but it's very time-consuming to do it all orally and on the board.

[Ariston]

I didn't have my son do much writing in the MEP pages and bought the Kumon numbers 1-30 book. It was quite helpful and went from fairly simple writing to the numbers.

 

I agree--I skipped all of the blatant handwriting practice (i.e. numbers in the box) and would often have my son dictate answers to me and I would write them down. I wouldn't let that aspect of the program deter anyone.

 

We are loving MEP. I was raised by a mathematician who tried to encourage creative thinking and problem solving in us, so I love those aspects of the program. My dad always says that we need more mathematicians who can think creatively.

 

Don't have any experience with Singapore but I admit I am always tempted...its hard to keep hearing that a program is 'the best' and not want to try it! I've thought of getting the workbooks and using them as review in the summers or something like that.

 

The first quarter of the year of 1a I was a little nervous...I could tell that even though my son was getting the answers, he wasn't really 'getting it'. It was so fun to watch as the concepts would circle back around and he would start getting it more and more each time and his understanding would grow deeper, without any overt instruction from me....neat!

[redsquirrel]

I have one son who is about to start Singapore 6. I have another son who would be starting Singapore 1 this year.

 

Last year I did MEP reception with my younger son. We also did Singapore Earlybird 1 and 2. My son did so well with MEP. I just love it! We did have a lag where he was done with reception but not quite ready for MEP 1. Well, maybe I was being over protective. It is possible he would have done just fine. Anyway, we started MEP 1 last spring and he has done very well. We have continued on and off during the summer. I am almost done with MEP1. I will finish it up and then start with Singapore 1b.

 

Why not just keep going with MEP? Well, I know Singapore. I have done it already. I know my son will do well with it. Sometimes, once week, I have no idea what MEP is asking of me. Fine, no problem, I just skip that question. But, I suspect it will happen more often as we work our way through.

 

All that said, I might change my mind and just keep going with MEP.

 

It is a hard decision. I think reception and year 1 have been wonderful!

[NilaGroveSchool]

cmarango stated an obvious problem in the printing of the MEP Practice Book, which is the fact that you have to shrink the pages from UK paper size A4(8.27in. x 11.69in.) to US paper size (8 1/2in. by 11in.) and that results in itty bitty answer boxes and incorrect measurement problems (because of said shrinking).

 

We were using regular 8 1/2in. by 11in. paper to print out the Practice Books. However, we switched to A4 paper (ordered from Amazon). Printing the material as intended (A4 size) gave us bigger answer boxes and correct measurement problems. This improved the program for my and dd6's taste. I then 3 hole punched the A4 paper and placed the book in a US sized D-ring zip binder which accomodated the A4 sized paper and the various manipulatives included with MEP.

 

I found the paper size difference to be crucial for me and dd, but understand that others will definitely not have the same hang ups that I do ;)

[stripe]

I print without shrinkage, and just lose the page number at the bottom.

[Spy Car]

cmarango stated an obvious problem in the printing of the MEP Practice Book, which is the fact that you have to shrink the pages from UK paper size A4(8.27in. x 11.69in.) to US paper size (8 1/2in. by 11in.) and that results in itty bitty answer boxes and incorrect measurement problems (because of said shrinking).

 

We were using regular 8 1/2in. by 11in. paper to print out the Practice Books. However, we switched to A4 paper (ordered from Amazon). Printing the material as intended (A4 size) gave us bigger answer boxes and correct measurement problems. This improved the program for my and dd6's taste. I then 3 hole punched the A4 paper and placed the book in a US sized D-ring zip binder which accomodated the A4 sized paper and the various manipulatives included with MEP.

 

I found the paper size difference to be crucial for me and dd, but understand that others will definitely not have the same hang ups that I do ;)

 

I went to the trouble (and when I say trouble, I mean trouble) of printing non-measuring pages "shrunk-to-fit" and printing pages where measuring was important in full size (which meant some stuff when outside the printing "crop"). the cropped material was usually inconsequential, but the whole thing was a PITA.

 

A4 paper would be a lot more elegant solution.

 

Bill

[NilaGroveSchool]

I had the same "trouble" as Spy Car; my former printing attempts with MEP may not have been kind to the trees. I tried all (and I mean "all") the different variables that I could with my printer to print the best "non shrink" US paper version of MEP, but the page numbers and some of the last problems were always chopped off. Those things did bother me... perhaps they shouldn't have...

[Sweetpeach]

I've said it before here and I'll say it again . . . MEP is not a "do it half-way" math program. MEP demands all in, roll up your sleeves and have at it.

Re: YR 1 -- I found it way to repetitive, too much mindless printing etc and it didn't impress me either. I have my children complete the Miquon math program and then we jump into MEP 3. After completing MEP 6, my oldest is jumping into AofPS Alg 1. I think he's ready.

 

T

[Zoo Keeper]

We have used a Miquon/MEP/Singapore combo for the past two years; for this coming year, the budget could only handle me buying/printing one math ( I have all of Miquon already on the shelf). And the winner was...

 

MEP. :) Why?

 

 

• Less expensive than buying SM (I was going to upgrade to Standards Edition)
  
• Fewer books to juggle--just the student pages and the Lesson Plans
  
• just one workbook page, and I think MEP's less is more
  
• I really, really like how MEP forces the student (and this teacher, who am I kidding...) to think about math, explore relationships, and find more than one way to do the work.
  

I am adding in Singapore's CWP, because I can see how the "bar method" is good, especially for a visual learner. It is great to help them see what they do know, and what needs to be figured out, and how they relate.

 

I would love to continue to do both Singapore(all of it) and MEP, but push has come to shove.

[SEGway]

Thanks for all the responses!

 

I feel terribly unobservant having not noticed the printing quandry that seems to have frustrated several. I suppose I'll fiddle with that aspect when we get to pages that really need the bigger image. So far, oblivious has worked for both me and DD.

 

I guess I'll just add that we tried a bit of Math Mammoth 1A (sloooooow speed) and Miquon Orange (a bit more consistently than MM) last year for Kindy. DD seems to have grasped and retained some things, mainly the idea of number bonds/addition/subtraction for numbers <10 fairly well. The C rods have been a perfect manipulative with which to start (thanks for the glowing recommendations, Spycar!)

 

However, even after reading through the teacher materials for Miquon and "getting" what they seemed to be after, I did a poor job of presenting the material, I think. The things I should have stepped back to let her discover were getting frustrating for her, so I explained more than was actually helpful. The things I should have clarified, I went the other way and let her get the right answers without knowing that she understood why. So, the things that already made sense to DD were more enjoyable in the Miquon style, and the things that she actually needed to learn didn't click well.

 

I think backing up a bit to the beginning of MEP Y1 will be beneficial because I've created lots of gaps. Explaining and practicing with patterns and using different words to explain counting/less than-more than/even-odd, reviewing left/right and other relational/positional words have already been "lightbulb" moments for her.

 

The lesson plans make sense to me (so far), and the things I worried would be too babyish for her are some of the elements she most enjoys (e.g. making up stories about the posters and clap counting the animals in the pictures...go figure.)

 

All that to say, with as impressed as I am by the program, I haven't gone through Singapore at all in person. With what seemed like so many people appreciating MEP and then ultimately choosing Singapore, I wondered if there were additional components that made it superior, or if it was mostly a style preference.

 

Your replies have been really helpful. Many thanks!

 

Feel free to chime in with more. :001_smile:

[stripe]

You should use the copymasters if the boxes are too small in the student's book -- they're nice and big.

[Spy Car]

I guess I'll just add that we tried a bit of Math Mammoth 1A (sloooooow speed) and Miquon Orange (a bit more consistently than MM) last year for Kindy. DD seems to have grasped and retained some things, mainly the idea of number bonds/addition/subtraction for numbers <10 fairly well. The C rods have been a perfect manipulative with which to start (thanks for the glowing recommendations, Spycar!)

 

This is no small thing. I'm glad the suggestion of C Rods was helpful!

 

However, even after reading through the teacher materials for Miquon and "getting" what they seemed to be after, I did a poor job of presenting the material, I think. The things I should have stepped back to let her discover were getting frustrating for her, so I explained more than was actually helpful. The things I should have clarified, I went the other way and let her get the right answers without knowing that she understood why. So, the things that already made sense to DD were more enjoyable in the Miquon style, and the things that she actually needed to learn didn't click well.

 

Sometimes direct instruction is for the best if "discovery" isn't working. Not teaching for understanding is obviously not the best idea, but you've figured that out. She's young :D

 

I think backing up a bit to the beginning of MEP Y1 will be beneficial because I've created lots of gaps. Explaining and practicing with patterns and using different words to explain counting/less than-more than/even-odd, reviewing left/right and other relational/positional words have already been "lightbulb" moments for her.

 

One activity I made up with rods really helped my son be ready for MEP. It involved laying down two rods and asking him to say (going from left to right) either 5 is greater than 2, or 2nd less than 5 depending how the rods were arranged. And often I weighed them after I got an initial correct response.

 

Then (after some sessions) I added a index card that I had drawn an inequalities symbol on (>) that he could flip to the correct orientation AND say less than or greater than.

 

Then (after a few more sessions) last step of this activity was to ask "how much more" or "how much less."

 

This last was particularly helpful in getting him ready for the MEP-style inequalities that contain the "difference" in small script.

 

The lesson plans make sense to me (so far), and the things I worried would be too babyish for her are some of the elements she most enjoys (e.g. making up stories about the posters and clap counting the animals in the pictures...go figure.)

 

My son always enjoys stories and active elements.

 

All that to say, with as impressed as I am by the program, I haven't gone through Singapore at all in person. With what seemed like so many people appreciating MEP and then ultimately choosing Singapore, I wondered if there were additional components that made it superior, or if it was mostly a style preference.

 

As I said, for me it has just been the methodical clarity of the Singapore Model that has tipped the balance for me. I sometimes second guess myself and think I'm sacrificing a somewhat more creative math program for one that is more practical for me to see. Do try to add in a good deal of outside things to keep up the mentally challenging aspect of our math program.

 

I dislike the terms but the "mastery" topic-based approach of Singapore appeals to the orderly side of my nature more than the spiral of MEP. But I have the other "Dionysian" side of my natural too, and it sometimes finds Singapore too structured. So I try to find a balance.

 

Both these are top notch programs!

 

Bill

[SnegurochkaL]

My daughter has been using MEP last 2 years and she really likes it. Some of the puzzles we found more challenging than Singapore IP books were offering. We skipped 1a level because it was too simple for my child and started with 1b. We use it as a supplement to SM and Russian math. We use MEP for variety reason, one of which is an earlier introduction of the metric system.

[Zoo Keeper]

You should use the copymasters if the boxes are too small in the student's book -- they're nice and big.

 

This is what we do. One of my boys would doodle all over his student page, so the copymaster was where he actually had room to think (about the math problem...) :lol:

 

Another son has fine motor delay, so he needs a bigger space to write.

 

I also wanted to reassure the OP that both programs are great. Either one you choose is going to give a solid math foundation. Singapore's materials look more "normal", and the HIG's give more hand-holding than MEP, and that may be what clicks for you and yours. But, I have found MEP's differences to be its strength--it has forced me out of my comfort zone (as a teacher), and made me think differently about how I teach "simple" math. Miquon has done that as well. That extra push has been good for my boys, too, even though they don't always think so. Singapore pushes, too, but I find MEP's nudges to stretch a little more.

[Syllieann]

We have used a Miquon/MEP/Singapore combo for the past two years; for this coming year, the budget could only handle me buying/printing one math ( I have all of Miquon already on the shelf). And the winner was...

 

MEP. :) Why?

 

• Less expensive than buying SM (I was going to upgrade to Standards Edition)
  
• Fewer books to juggle--just the student pages and the Lesson Plans
  
• just one workbook page, and I think MEP's less is more
  
• I really, really like how MEP forces the student (and this teacher, who am I kidding...) to think about math, explore relationships, and find more than one way to do the work.
  

I am adding in Singapore's CWP, because I can see how the "bar method" is good, especially for a visual learner. It is great to help them see what they do know, and what needs to be figured out, and how they relate.

 

I would love to continue to do both Singapore(all of it) and MEP, but push has come to shove.

 

Are you using the same level cwp as mep level or are you going with 1 level lower on cwp than where you are in mep?

[happycc]

but it has been temporarily placed on hold for my three kids. I am not sure why. The binders are sitting there waiting for me and calling out.

 

I find it harder to implement right now with my screaming annoying toddler and also being pregnant. I makes me think too hard in terms of figuring out what they are exactly asking for sometimes. Plus I have to look up answers online sometimes and then it has all these extra posters/pages etc.

 

Too many components in too many places.

 

I know we will be back at it soon.

[Zoo Keeper]

Are you using the same level cwp as mep level or are you going with 1 level lower on cwp than where you are in mep?

 

Both boys are using the same level CWP as MEP (both in a year three/year four combo).

 

Many folks DO use CWP behind a year.

[my2boysteacher]

My 4year old is working through Reception year. I downloaded it onto my IPad, and can easily zoom in on each section to give her lots of room to work. It seems like that would help those kiddos who don't like the crowded pages....

[blondeviolin]

Math isn't just about arithmetic. So often that's most of what's covered in the early grades. For year one, the main focuses of SM is getting the child to be able to learn the number bonds to ten, and then taking that information and applying it to adding and subtracting within 100. MEP, however, managed to be more challenging for my daughter in the first year than SM, and the numbers were kept within 0-20. I appreciate the scope and sequence of MEP, I guess.

 

Math comes very easily to me. While I wasn't TAUGHT the process of "making tens" or adding tens and ones mentally or the bar method, these are things that I learned/noticed/figured out on my own.