Do you like Singapore Math 2 better than 1?

[poetic license]

I'm asking because for some reason I'm just not feeling the love with SM1A/1B... I am liking the MEP/Miquon combo better. I remember reading some comments about Singapore getting better in grade 2--any comments on this? I feel like that for the long run, I will be sticking with SM (esp since Miquon is only 3 years) and I don't want to jump into it too late since it has its own unique problem solving style.

[Tress]

Definitely!

 

SM 1A/B felt very uneven, SM 2 and 3 are much better!

[EKS]

I can't stand SM 1AB. I think it is the weakest level in the program by far. 2-5 are excellent. I found 6 to have some of the qualities of 1 in that it alternated between being too easy and requiring large conceptual leaps.

[Beth in SW WA]

Definitely!

 

SM 1A/B felt very uneven, SM 2 and 3 are much better!

 

:iagree:

I don't care for 3B though.

[Tress]

I don't care for 3B though.

 

Beth, what did you dislike about 3B?

 

We have just started it, have done the chapter on length and I'm having a bit of a mental block spending the time on learning American units (yards, feet, inch), because I'm not American ;). Did you have the same, but with the kilometers&meters&centimeters? Or was it something different?

Edited December 12, 2011 by Tress
typo

[Spy Car]

Maybe in part because we also used Miquon and MEP (which filled their own voids brilliantly) I liked Primary Mathematics Standards Edition 1A/B.

 

Sure there are ways in which both MEP and Miquon were more interesting/cognitively challenging that the core Singapore books, but I like PM 1A/B for the systematic introduction of a Math Model that continues to build upon as we move along.

 

The strengths of each of these programs is different. The strength of Primary Mathematics is its methodical nature. And for that I think 1A/B served us well.

 

Bill

[SophiaH]

I do not like SM 1. My ideal math curriculum would be RS B, then onto SM 2. Unfortunately, having four children makes using RS very difficult, so right now I'm making do with MM1 using the abacus, part-whole circle concept for +/-, and other math language from RS.

[EKS]

My ideal math curriculum would be RS B, then onto SM 2.

 

This is what we did (after a bad experience with SM 1) and it was perfect!

[poetic license]

Thanks for the replies. Bill, the reason you mentioned is why I did get SM 1 and we have been using mainly the HIG to get a hang of Singapore's methods. I wondered if the subsequent levels got better or not, so I feel a little relieved that I'm not the only one who dislikes level 1.

 

So far we're doing the MEP 1B and Miquon Red and I cull topics from SM1B as needed. We have RS B on the shelf so I think I may do some of that before we go to SM 2A.

[Spy Car]

Thanks for the replies. Bill, the reason you mentioned is why I did get SM 1 and we have been using mainly the HIG to get a hang of Singapore's methods. I wondered if the subsequent levels got better or not, so I feel a little relieved that I'm not the only one who dislikes level 1.

 

The HIGs do help attend to one of the biggest deficiencies in 1A/B if just used as is, and that is a lack of hands-on work with manipulatives, activities, and games.

 

As I said, we had much of this covered from doing Miquon and MEP, plus elements of RS. And I got sort of nutty inventing Math Lab ideas of my own to make 1A/B (and everything else) more round. I can see how that could skew my perspective relative to others. If what came in the core 1A/B books was all there was in our math mix I might be more critical. But what "is" in 1A/B I like. And the HIGs are helpful (aside from the suggestion all the math facts need to memorized, which I found developmentally off).

 

I don't want to speak for others, but part of the reason I think people are more satisfied with 2 and up is that the lack of built-in "concrete stage" learning in 1A/B presents fewer problems as the children are maturing and are becoming better about learning through the pictorial representations in the books.

 

Bill

 

 

 

 

 

So far we're doing the MEP 1B and Miquon Red and I cull topics from SM1B as needed. We have RS B on the shelf so I think I may do some of that before we go to SM 2A.

[Spy Car]

Thanks for the replies. Bill, the reason you mentioned is why I did get SM 1 and we have been using mainly the HIG to get a hang of Singapore's methods. I wondered if the subsequent levels got better or not, so I feel a little relieved that I'm not the only one who dislikes level 1.

 

The HIGs do help attend to one of the biggest deficiencies in 1A/B if just used as is, and that is a lack of hands-on work with manipulatives, activities, and games.

 

As I said, we had much of this covered from doing Miquon and MEP, plus elements of RS. And I got sort of nutty inventing Math Lab ideas of my own to make 1A/B (and everything else) more round. I can see how that could skew my perspective relative to others. If what came in the core 1A/B books was all there was in our math mix I might be more critical. But what "is" in 1A/B I like. And the HIGs are helpful (aside from the suggestion all the math facts need to memorized, which I found developmentally off).

 

I don't want to speak for others, but part of the reason I think people are more satisfied with 2 and up is that the lack of built-in "concrete stage" learning in 1A/B presents fewer problems as the children are maturing and are becoming better about learning through the pictorial representations in the books.

 

So far we're doing the MEP 1B and Miquon Red and I cull topics from SM1B as needed. We have RS B on the shelf so I think I may do some of that before we go to SM 2A.

 

Cross fertilizing all these worked well for us. The over-all whole-parts math approaches are similar, but the "looks" are different enough to see a basic concept through fresh eyes, and I think it is very helpful.

 

Bill

[lorisuewho]

This is what we did (after a bad experience with SM 1) and it was perfect!

 

I'm glad to hear this. I stopped with Singapore 1a, and switched over. We just completed RSA. I plan to start RSB in January, and then hopefully go right over to Singapore 2a. I wasn't sure if I would have to backtrack and do any of the singapore 1.

[Roadrunner]

I don't want to speak for others, but part of the reason I think people are more satisfied with 2 and up is that the lack of built-in "concrete stage" learning in 1A/B presents fewer problems as the children are maturing and are becoming better about learning through the pictorial representations in the books.

Bill

 

I think this is right on. We did 1a and 1b last year with my older boy (now repeating with his younger brother) and I did have to actually teach it. We used beans, spaghetti etc as manipulatives. Now comes 2a and 2b, which the kiddo is finishing up in 6 months. Year 2 has been a smooth sail. Once a child can add/subtract up to a 100, it's not that hard to explain the same up to a 1000. Multiplication and division were introduced in 1b, so grade 2 really was not new conceptually, just memorization of some facts. I feel like I have done no teaching in 2a and 2b (except measurements units that we drilled) and HIGs were only used for mental math. And the biggest factor of all - he will be turning 7 in 3 months. Age does make things easier.

[Crimson Wife]

I'm glad to hear this. I stopped with Singapore 1a, and switched over. We just completed RSA. I plan to start RSB in January, and then hopefully go right over to Singapore 2a. I wasn't sure if I would have to backtrack and do any of the singapore 1.

 

You may need to go over the subtraction in Singapore 1A/B depending on the student because RS B has almost no subtraction work. A cheaper way of filling that gap might be the Math Mammoth single-topic "blue" workbook Addition and Subtraction 2A.

 

I'm finding that I really like the 1A/B Intensive Practice books. The combo of Right Start B and the Singapore IP books seems to be working really well for my DS.

[Beth in SW WA]

Beth, what did you dislike about 3B?

 

We have just started it, have done the chapter on length and I'm having a bit of a mental block spending the time on learning American units (yards, feet, inch), because I'm not American ;). Did you have the same, but with the kilometers&meters&centimeters? Or was it something different?

 

I can't quite pinpoint it. I just didn't care for it. How's that for a vague, useless answer? :tongue_smilie:

 

We were on a roll with fractions and wanted to get more practice elsewhere. Dd8 did length, weight, capacity, area in TT so we did selections of 3b last summer as review. She did all of level 3 cwp.

 

Dd7 will do most of 3b since she needs much more review and practice. I bought 3b SE this time around. If I get tired of metric measurements we will move on. :auto:

[lorisuewho]

You may need to go over the subtraction in Singapore 1A/B depending on the student because RS B has almost no subtraction work. A cheaper way of filling that gap might be the Math Mammoth single-topic "blue" workbook Addition and Subtraction 2A.

 

I'm finding that I really like the 1A/B Intensive Practice books. The combo of Right Start B and the Singapore IP books seems to be working really well for my DS.

 

Thank you for this advice. . .and for the initial help on making the switch to rightstart. I am very pleased with that decision. The abacus and my son totally clicked! Thank you for the suggestion of MM; however, I do already own singapore 1A/B and the intensive practice workbook. . .so I guess I'll see how I can start fitting some of that into our math work when we start RSB next month.

 

I'm so pleased to hear that this combo is working well for your DS! I really couldn't love math anymore than what I do right now!