My shield is ready for the firing squad. Singapore math folks, where's the results?

[BethG]

I've been on a math crusade of late and have read more threads than I care to admit to in recent weeks. A common theme I've noticed is that the Saxon folks claim results -- that their upper level kids are good at math as manifested by ability/interest/and test results (standardized). I haven't seen this as much with other programs (from Singapore camp either). Sure, I read how well the kids like it and how a "mathy" kid really excels with it, etc. and of course there's the "look at the country of Singapore" and how much better their kids do in math than Americans. (Can we try to control for the Asian work ethic variable for a moment?...there's a reason some of the Asian kids are playing Mozart concertos at age 4 people and that you CANNOT find a piece of bubblegum on a sidewalk in Singapore).

Anyway...back to the issue. Has Singapore just not been out as long for their to be the PROOF that I read from Saxonites? Where's the PROOF that it works? Does Singapore even go up to upper levels?

Again, I just haven't read of folks use of it in uppers and I haven't heard from people who's kid has just scored fabulously on standardized testing (in math) attribute it to Singapore. What's the deal with this? Clarification needed please.

[Whereneverever]

Oooooh, those are so bold questions!

 

I think that Singapore is interesting. We started with it- and despite having a mathy, smart kid, it wasn't right. I think that the general culture and expectations have a lot to do with Singapore's success in mathematics.

 

For what it's worth, my DD has been able to accelerate with Saxon. Last year we tested and she scored perfectly on the standardized test- she didn't miss a single question.

 

I'm in the minority, it seems, though.

[Mommamia]

:bigear::lurk5:

[wapiti]

There was a poll recently on this board asking about Singapore and standardized tests.

 

We don't use Singapore, but I'd be careful about using standardized test results to demonstrate the superiority of one math program over another. For one thing, standardized tests are generally not the best test for depth of mathematical understanding - the time is too short. For another, a lot of parents of mathematically-inclined kids, and math-accelerated kids in particular, choose Singapore, which may skew results.

 

Singapore does have math programs for the secondary level, but they are integrated (search DM and NEM; Saxon is also integrated at the secondary level). There are a lot of choices when it comes to secondary math - people like me choose non-integrated programs because going to school for high school is part of our plan. In addition, for us, it's not particularly useful to choose an elementary program based on the same publisher having a secondary program. There's nothing wrong with changing to something else after the end of elementary math.

 

I'd look closely at what and how different programs help teach math, and how that corresponds to the needs of the particular student and parent/teacher, rather than thinking of them as "black boxes" that spit out certain levels of achievement (here, I am not equating achievement as measured by standardized tests with understanding of math concepts). Saxon and Singapore are organized very differently, and that alone may affect which one meets your needs, let alone the style of teaching.

[BethG]

Oooooh, those are so bold questions!

 

I think that Singapore is interesting. We started with it- and despite having a mathy, smart kid, it wasn't right. I think that the general culture and expectations have a lot to do with Singapore's success in mathematics.

 

For what it's worth, my DD has been able to accelerate with Saxon. Last year we tested and she scored perfectly on the standardized test- she didn't miss a single question.

 

I'm in the minority, it seems, though.

 

What do you mean by "I'm in the minority, it seems, though."

I saw that it was quite common for Saxon users to claim great math success on standardized testing.

[hsbeth]

We use Singapore through 5B and then move to Life of Fred for the upper levels. Our oldest studied through 6B, but then used Saxon Alg. 1/2 and Alg. 1 before we found LOF. We've seen great results.

 

Our oldest is inherently mathy, but in 10th grade she is doing LOF Trig (their pre-calc course). She did very well on her PSAT even last year as a ninth grader and always scored in the 90-95th percentile on her CATS. She competes on math team that is mostly comprised of 11th and 12th graders and more than holds her own.

 

Our second dd is studying Geometry in 8th grade and also scores in the 90th percentile on her CATS in both computation and mathematical reasoning.

 

Our third dd is in fourth grade and scored in the 99th percentile for mathematical reasoning and in the 97th percentile for computation last year.

 

A couple of caveats, we do supplement Singapore with fact drill in 1-3 grades. We do daily addition facts, subtraction facts, and then multiplication tables. We use the US edition Singapore texts and the Intensive Practice Workbooks (not the regular ones). One day per week we work through the Challenging Word Problem books. Our first and third children are naturally strong in math, but our second is more of a humanities kind of gal. Her results aren't as dramatic, but are still good.

[Alte Veste Academy]

My kids are not old enough for me to be singing from the rooftops about our results. That said, last month I gave DS8 the 3rd grade TAKS that kids normally take here in late Spring (toward the end of the year, whereas DS was just beginning the year) and he scored 100%.

 

I also wonder if the Saxon folks talk about test results more because there can be an anti-Saxon climate here and they might feel the need to defend their use of the program. This should not be necessary, of course, but it is possible.

Edited October 9, 2011 by Alte Veste Academy

[BethG]

We use Singapore through 5B and then move to Life of Fred for the upper levels. Our oldest studied through 6B, but then used Saxon Alg. 1/2 and Alg. 1 before we found LOF. We've seen great results.

 

Our oldest is inherently mathy, but in 10th grade she is doing LOF Trig (their pre-calc course). She did very well on her PSAT even last year as a ninth grader and always scored in the 90-95th percentile on her CATS. She competes on math team that is mostly comprised of 11th and 12th graders and more than holds her own.

 

Our second dd is studying Geometry in 8th grade and also scores in the 90th percentile on her CATS in both computation and mathematical reasoning.

 

Our third dd is in fourth grade and scored in the 99th percentile for mathematical reasoning and in the 97th percentile for computation last year.

 

A couple of caveats, we do supplement Singapore with fact drill in 1-3 grades. We do daily addition facts, subtraction facts, and then multiplication tables. We use the US edition Singapore texts and the Intensive Practice Workbooks (not the regular ones). One day per week we work through the Challenging Word Problem books. Our first and third children are naturally strong in math, but our second is more of a humanities kind of gal. Her results aren't as dramatic, but are still good.

Thanks....this is what I want to read more of.

I just didn't see as many of this type of post from the Singapore mathers.

[Whereneverever]

What do you mean by "I'm in the minority, it seems, though."

I saw that it was quite common for Saxon users to claim great math success on standardized testing.

The minority on this board. There's some pretty loud, influential people here who knock on Saxon pretty hard.

[pdalley]

My youngest - who really understands and is good at math - prefers Singapore to Saxon. My other two get the best results from Math U See.

 

I tried Saxon with my youngest and he didn't like the repetition and quite frankly he didn't need it. He knows all of his tables and can even do double digit multiplication in his head. I consider him the exception though and not the rule.

[Krista in LA]

Several years ago, there were 4 school districts in Maryland that used Singapore math. They found that the students in those schools did better on the standardized tests than students at the schools who didn't use it. Unfortunately, they decided to discontinue using it because it didn't line up with their standards. :confused: If you google singapore math maryland schools, you should be able to find some articles about it.

[Snowfall]

To clarify one minor point, the reason there is no gum on the streets in Singapore has nothing to do with their work ethic or anything even remoty like what I think you are suggesting. A few decades ago, they had big problems with that, so they banned the import of chewing gum and imposed heavy fines for inappropriately disposing of gum. THAT is why there's no gum on the streets, not because they have such better ethics about spitting their gum where you might step in it. It was only a few years ago that they lifted the ban, but only for "therapeutic" purposes in small amounts, and you still have to pay a heavy fine for spitting or sticking gum somewhere. Even travelers into the country are limited to bringing two packs per person. Totally unrelated to math, but important when it's being used as some proof of superior social responsibility or something. ;)

[charlestonmom03]

For research on Singapore Math, I would take some time over at Cassy Turner's blog. She helps schools implement Singapore in the classroom:

http://singaporemathsource.com/curriculum/research/

 

The Kitchen Table Math blog is helpful too.

[Bluegoat]

To clarify one minor point, the reason there is no gum on the streets in Singapore has nothing to do with their work ethic or anything even remoty like what I think you are suggesting. A few decades ago, they had big problems with that, so they banned the import of chewing gum and imposed heavy fines for inappropriately disposing of gum. THAT is why there's no gum on the streets, not because they have such better ethics about spitting their gum where you might step in it. It was only a few years ago that they lifted the ban, but only for "therapeutic" purposes in small amounts, and you still have to pay a heavy fine for spitting or sticking gum somewhere. Even travelers into the country are limited to bringing two packs per person. Totally unrelated to math, but important when it's being used as some proof of superior social responsibility or something. ;)

 

I think the implication was that a society that has such well defined order and rules and expects people to toe the line is also likely to have children, teachers, and schools that do these things, with good test results as a result. Not necessarily because of the math program itself.

[LizzyBee]

We use Singapore, and my kids have always done well on standardized tests. My oldest used SM through NEM 1, then went to public high school. She is taking AP Calculus this year and plans to major in Math in college. My middle child is mildly dyslexic. We used some other things for her, but SM more than anything else. She always scored well in math. My youngest is severely dyslexic and loves SM. When she was using the Early Bird books, she told me that when she grows up, she is going to write math books. On standardized tests, she has always scored low because of her dyslexia, but last year, she made 18 months progress in math in 12 months time.

 

I think one reason my kids have tested so well even though SM doesn't follow the standard US scope and sequence is because SM teaches them to apply math, not just to solve a set of problems that all look alike. They teach a method, then throw in some problems that can't be solved unless the student can apply what they've learned beyond following the algorithm. It is sometimes challenging to the point of tears, but it's effective.

 

I agree that SM curriculum isn't the sum total of the math program in SM. It's my understanding that they do quite of bit of work in addition to the curriculum, such as drill and additional problem solving.

Edited October 10, 2011 by LizzyBee

[Crimson Wife]

The Singapore books have been around for a long time- I'm 99% sure they were included in the first edition of TWTM that was published back in the late 1990's.

 

Many HS who use Singapore Primary Math do switch to a more traditional sequence for secondary math. However, there are a number of folks on this forum who have used Singapore NEM at least up through the 3rd book. I can't recall ever reading anything about NEM 4 or the post-NEM Discovering Additional Mathematics books here; however that could just be a factor of not spending much time on the high school sub-forum.

[AngieW in Texas]

Most people leave Singapore after 6B to use other programs. The middle school levels of Singapore are nothing at all like the elementary level.

 

Singapore was a fabulous program and definitely prepared my two older girls well for high school math.

 

My youngest is dyslexic and didn't do as well with Singapore. I have yet to find a program that really works well for her.

[Laura Corin]

Calvin used Singapore from Earlybird to around 5A. We switched at that point because I wanted to align his learning with UK standards, not because Singapore was lacking. I used to give him Texas TAKs tests to do (to pacify the grandparents) and he regularly got very high marks two grades ahead of the number on the front of the Singapore book. He's not a mathy child, but Singapore was good for him.

 

Laura

[sewingmama]

FWIW I don't believe Asian countries do well in Math due exclusively to the curriculum they use. If you only knew how many hours those kids spend doing after school tutoring type classes. I taught English in Korea and the last class at our school finished at 10 pm - the oldest students in the school were 12 years old.:001_huh: The 6yos finished up about 6pm.

 

Every single High School student does extra math tutoring after school - 3-5 days a week -not because they are behind but because they want to stay ahead. The kids start English school at 2yo. I don't know about anyone else but I would rather my kid had a life then to be in classes every day till 10 pm. I remember teaching 8yo's who fell asleep in class because it was 9pm and I used to sneak pizza into my late classes because the kids were always starving -none of them ate dinner till they got home after 10 :001_huh:

 

As for the chewing gum on the street -well I didn't see any of that in Korea either - but we never wore our shoes in the house because you couldn't take a step without standing in a pile of phlegm ;)

Edited October 10, 2011 by sewingmama

[Supertechmom]

Singapore user through NEM 2 when we jumped into high school math. I discovered that you really can't judge it until you get through book 4 or so. The scope and sequence is so different that the standardized testing leaves you :confused: That said, my kids still scored 80 -99 percentile in all the subsets each year. And the oldest first SAT attempt in 7 th grade gave him a 650 on it. So not too shabby.

 

I think it's hard to get scores because Saxon is a program used in American schools and thus large bodies of info is out there to use and run stats on. Singapore doesn't have that same pool of info as few schools have picked up and run with singapore en masse like they did with Saxon. You could probably find in every state schools, entire districts, if not most of the state using Saxon on all levels at some point in the past but you won't find that same wide pool with Singapore. But that's just my guess.:D

[khall]

You also need to remember that standardized tests are based on a typical US scope and sequence. Saxon follows that scope and sequence, so it's not too surprising that students using Saxon are doing well on standardized tests. SM does not follow a typical US scope and sequence, and so a standardized test may not be a very reliable indicator of math ability. People comment all the time that the science and social studies portions of standardized tests aren't reliable indicators of achievement for homeschoolers who aren't studying the same concepts on the test. Maybe using SM is like studying earth science and then taking a standardized test that assumes biology was covered that year?

 

If you look at threads about NEM on the high school board, there seems to be great success in high school and college level classes from students who have used SM.

 

Disclaimer: I don't use Saxon or SM, so I don't know what I'm talking about! :lol: We use MEP and the plan is to switch to SM NEM after MEP year 6.

[Candid]

We've had good results with Singapore in our household. We must test and math is above the 80th percentile early on and as my kids got older it went to the above the 90th.

 

We are now using NEM 4A and will use DM Additional when 4A is completed. I have a ninth grader. He is not a mathy child nor am I a mathy mom although I was good in math and did some grad level stat classes in college inside my major.

 

My younger has just started on NEM 1 this year.

 

I think the shock and awe value of NEM or even all Singapore upper level maths is over-rated. YOU can do them. If anything I've found NEM easier to teach and understand and do than the complex word problems in the late primary levels.

 

The other thing I've grappled with is the nonstandard sequence, but my ninth grader is doing trig and pre-calc topics (remember I'm not mathy so I'm mostly relying on others for that level evaluation). He did get started a year earlier than some because he has a fall birthday so if you like you can compare that to tenth grade. That nonstandard sequence didn't dawdle but pushed through a lot of material.

 

Further I absolutely loved the way geometry and algebra were integrated. You learned geometry while using your algebra. It was amazing.

[Miss Marple]

One of the difficulties in comparing standardized test scores, especially for the high school level maths, is that Singapore math has a different sequence than the American curricula. While the Singapore camp may be able to solve some algebraic problems in the elementary years, most standardized tests don't test that.

 

FWIW, my anecdotal evidence is this: all 4 sons used Singapore Primary through 6B (not American version). Oldest son used NEM through 3B/4A and then went to the university to take concurrent courses (college algebra, trig, and calculus). Second son transitioned into Lial's then concurrent enrollment. The last 2 boys are currently using DM3A. All scored in the 98-99 percentile through elementary grades on math. DS#2 did this using test a year ahead of grade level. All but #3 score highest in the math portions on the ACT or SAT.

 

Another problem you may have when comparing programs is that many kids who are just naturally good at math are put into Singapore math because it is one of the few programs that will challenge them (that's my experience). These same kids would have probably done well in ANY program. However, when we looked at Saxon (and I tutored some homeschooled students in Saxon) it just about caused us to get hives! It was NOT the program for us although the boys would have scored well with it. One of the problems I see with accelerating a student through a program is that the program may be too easy for that student. Whereas, if the student can accelerate through ANY program (or a standardized test level), then the student is truly accelerated, IMO. My boys were going through the ABeka math program (early years) at the rate of 2 books/levels per semester so I was in the market for something that was more challenging. Singapore offered that challenge. While they accelerated a bit, I was happier to have them move at a slower clip with a deeper level of understanding through a challenging program.

 

My experience with the primary level of Singapore was many years ago so it is possible that the Americanized version has taken into account the sequence thing and made it more standard for the US. In any event, I think it may be difficult to find comparisons unless one compares a public/private school that uses Singapore to a similar school that uses Saxon.

[BethG]

FWIW I don't believe Asian countries do well in Math due exclusively to the curriculum they use. If you only knew how many hours those kids spend doing after school tutoring type classes. I taught English in Korea and the last class at our school finished at 10 pm - the oldest students in the school were 12 years old.:001_huh: The 6yos finished up about 6pm.

 

Every single High School student does extra math tutoring after school - 3-5 days a week -not because they are behind but because they want to stay ahead. The kids start English school at 2yo. I don't know about anyone else but I would rather my kid had a life then to be in classes every day till 10 pm. I remember teaching 8yo's who fell asleep in class because it was 9pm and I used to sneak pizza into my late classes because the kids were always starving -none of them ate dinner till they got home after 10 :001_huh:

 

As for the chewing gum on the street -well I didn't see any of that in Korea either - but we never wore our shoes in the house because you couldn't take a step without standing in a pile of phlegm ;)

 

 

This is what I was getting at. If Singapore Math is a good program in and of itself -- then that's fine, but to say that it is b/c of the Asian work ethic/drive is not a good reason. Take any kid, with ANY program, and have them put in the hours/time that an Singaporian child does and you'll have fabulous results in all likelihood.

[Momling]

This shows some studies using singapore math programs. They weren't apparently eligible to be included in the "What Works Clearinghouse", but you might find some interesting data if you check out the references.

 

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/intervention_reports/wwc_singaporemath_042809.pdf

[Parker Martin]

Another problem you may have when comparing programs is that many kids who are just naturally good at math are put into Singapore math because it is one of the few programs that will challenge them (that's my experience). These same kids would have probably done well in ANY program.

 

:iagree:

 

There are kids who blow the tops off of standardized tests and use random public school math textbooks.

 

Homeschoolers who have kids like that are going to be more likely to choose Singapore.

 

That said, I think Singapore is excellent.

 

I'll be interested to scour some of these links for studies.

[mcconnellboys]

My kids both used Singapore through sixth grade. I only switched to something else for higher level maths because I needed more handholding than the NEM series provided. Mine always scored very well in math on standardized testing and my older son did well with ACT testing in high school, too.

 

If there were more detailed explanations, solutions, etc. available for NEM I would have been happy to stay with it - but I didn't remember enough about math to teach it if the problems didn't follow the examples exactly....

[BethG]

This shows some studies using singapore math programs. They weren't apparently eligible to be included in the "What Works Clearinghouse", but you might find some interesting data if you check out the references.

 

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/intervention_reports/wwc_singaporemath_042809.pdf

 

 

Thanks for this link. Per this review, Singapore did not make their "cut". However, this same site/review on Saxon Math K-3, the report said that it was proven successful FWIW.

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Topic.aspx?sid=9

[Candid]

Thanks for this link. Per this review, Singapore did not make their "cut". However, this same site/review on Saxon Math K-3, the report said that it was proven successful FWIW.

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Topic.aspx?sid=9

 

The link originally provide does not say that Singapore did not make their cut for an effective math program, but rather it says no studies have been done on it that make whatever standard they have decided to use to compare programs.

 

The link you provide does not go to a study but just a summary page with a lot of studies. Can you provide a more direct link?

[Jen500]

Anyway...back to the issue. Has Singapore just not been out as long for their to be the PROOF that I read from Saxonites? Where's the PROOF that it works? Does Singapore even go up to upper levels?

Again, I just haven't read of folks use of it in uppers and I haven't heard from people who's kid has just scored fabulously on standardized testing (in math) attribute it to Singapore. What's the deal with this? Clarification needed please.

 

Are you looking for well-designed studies showing the effectiveness of Singapore over other math programs? Or hearing from individual families about their success w/Singapore?

 

Even the results of a well-designed study will not predict the success of your own child...just choose whatever program you have actually looked at and evaluated and decided is the best for your family.

[boscopup]

Even the results of a well-designed study will not predict the success of your own child...just choose whatever program you have actually looked at and evaluated and decided is the best for your family.

 

:iagree: I don't think I use any curriculum that has been formally studied. I don't care either. ;) Singapore is clearly successful with many students, as are many other math programs commonly used in homeschools - studies or not. And while Saxon has been studied, my son does better with another program. That doesn't make Saxon bad. It just means it's not the right fit for him, even if it has been studied and shown to be decent. Likewise, I use Math Mammoth, which definitely hasn't been studied and most likely will never be studied (it's not meant for schools), but I can see in my own child that it is effective. So clearly, it's a better choice for him than Saxon was, even if MM hasn't ever been studied and Saxon has.

 

There are so many good programs out there. Don't get hung up on finding what has been verified by studies. You're going to miss out on some great homeschool curriculum if you do that. I don't know about you, but my kids aren't being taught the way things are taught in public schools, so the studies really don't matter that much. I'm also not teaching my children to pass a standardized test, which is what those studies are probably going to use as proof of success. If a child can use a program and pass a standardized test, but can't solve problems in the real world, that's a problem, ya know? (and I'm NOT saying any particular math program does that - just making an illustration)

[radiobrain]

I don't know, I think you are asking a weird question. ;)

 

Singapore and Saxon are very different. People choose one over the other for different reasons.

 

I can tell you that Saxon would have made my whole family cry and cry and cry for hours upon hours. Singapore made math just another subject. It was the better choice for my family. Really, they do the same exact thing in totally different ways. They teach math. Addition. Subtraction. Multiplication.... etc. No big deal. :D

 

Another thing is that I think that the people who would use one might have different expectations (and therefore want to know about "results") than the other camp.

 

You need to look at what you want, and then look at your teaching style, and your kid's learning style (all of which can change, BTW). Then make your own choice. Statistics and studies can often be manipulated, or mean something a bit different than you might think. I could really care less, and I think many people who like Singapore might not care about that either, KWIM?

 

FWIW, I have used Singapore since Earlybird up to 6A, and I have never doubted my math decisions. Personally, I can't understand why you would need a thick textbook for elementary math. :confused:

 

I will vouch for my results using Singapore, my kids do great on standardized tests (but I would argue that that means nothing), understand math very well, and rarely embarrass me when asked to estimate the weight of a guava in Kg.

[Sneezyone]

In April, DD6 took the math MAP/NWEA test at school and her score was in the 88th percentile, a relative weakness for her. When I got the score in May, I ordered Primary Math 1B Standards Edition (after using the placement test). We started using the curric. in earnest in June. Last Tuesday, about four months later, DD took the math MAP again. This time her score was in the 97th percentile. I haven't used Saxon since our district mandates Everyday Math and enforces pacing but I cannot complain with these results. DD will be ready for 2A in January and is incredibly proud of what she now knows/can do. The scores are only a representation of that. I feel like I finally know exactly what her strengths and weaknesses are and am empowered to fill in any remaining gaps.