TT: Is this math program significantly behind?

[OregonNative]

We are using 4 for my DD(4th grade). By lesson 36 she hasn't even touched multiplication, division and fractions! Her friend in 4th grade public school has learned all of them. Multiplication was covered in 3rd grade. If I was required to test her I have a strong feeling she would do very poorly. Thoughts?

[Riverland]

The general consensus on this board has been that Teaching Textbooks is about 1 year behind other programs.

[oraetstudia]

It does seem to be slower. However, they do teach multiplication and division in TT3 and review it in TT4. So my 4th grader, who has done TT3 & 4 has seen multiplication and division both years.

[zenjenn]

Keep in mind, in public school, most schools have math operating at 3-4 different levels per grade. Seriously. So what someone is learning in "4th grade math" can vary dramatically. Did your daughter's friend learn anything substantial about fractions, or did she just see pizza and pie slices and was introduced to the concepts (because a TT child has been introduced to identifying and adding fractions in TT3, actually.) That your daughter's friend "did fractions" doesn't tell you much, for example.

 

As far as I can tell, TT is on par with what a student would be learning in the average math group in the grade listed on the cover at an average public school. Classrooms will typically have an accelerated math group (or two) that is learning higher level material.

 

My armchair advice to people for TT is this:

 

- an accelerated child should use TT two grade levels ahead

- an average/slightly accelerated child should use TT 1 level ahead

- an average/slightly slow child should use TT on grade level

- a remedial child child should use TT one level behind

 

In any case, you probably want to supplement TT with fact mastery practice outside the program, and conceptual enrichment exercises for average/accelerated kids.

 

But like oraetstudia said, the scope and sequence is a little different too. Concepts tend to be introduced at a very rudimentary level very early, and then reviewed, and then built on later on.

 

I use TT and my kids love it. I don't demonize it but I recognize it for what it is. It is a great tool and allows my kids to learn a lot independently, it really does, and buys me time to juggle independent with instructor-intensive work with my two kids. But, I wouldn't advise anyone accept it at face value and just walk away with from it with no supervision or supplementation.

Edited January 6, 2012 by zenjenn

[OregonNative]

Thank you ladies:001_smile:

I wanted to use TT because I am not good at math, nor teaching it. I've tried w/DD before and she is totally confused when I am done. Having the explanations done by TT seemed like a good way to go. Last year in 3rd we used Horizons and she couldn't grasp that in a double/triple digit subtraction problem like 246-309 the 9 couldn't be subtracted from the 6 and so on.

 

My DD's friend is has actually learned how to add and multiply fractions. Her class is beyond the pizza slice phase.

 

As far as supplementing=any recommendations?

[Momling]

It's easy to compare what other kids are doing, but I'd really suggest trying to focus on whether the program is working for your daughter. Is she learning? Does she get enough practice? Is she feeling successful about her work?

 

If TT is working for your daughter, put your blinders on and ignore what every other child is doing.

 

As for whether TT needs supplementation... my frustration with it was the lack of emphasis on number sense and mental math and place value. It was good at teaching an algorithm -- how to do an operation, it was less good at teaching why it worked and what it meant. If I were going to continue using TT I would supplement with Math Mammoth blue series.

[SnowWhite]

I would just accelerate TT by working on it over the summer or on Saturdays rather than supplement. (unless you want to add Life of Fred for fun as we do).

[Chrysalis Academy]

I don't have a lot of experience, but I can tell you what I see working with TT5 and Math Mammoth 4A side-by-side: TT5 is much, much easier for my dd than MM4 is. She can work TT alone, MM she needs a lot of help, explanation, working problems together on the whiteboard, etc. But she is really *learning!* Her brain hurts, in a good way, when she does MM, whereas she just flies through TT. So, in response to the OP's question, I would say that yes, TT is definitely "behind" MM.

 

I would not rely on TT alone, because as a pp said it is weak on mental math & conceptual understanding. We use TT on the days when I can't work with DD on math. It's great for that.

[jennynd]

I once look at TT, I love how TT present the question and DS loves to work indepently. We didn't use it beacuse mostly it is too expensive. but if you like the prgram just accelerate few grades and supplement like SM cwp/ip

[Ellie]

And yet people have posted here that their dc used TT and did remarkably, commendably well on standardized tests, including the SAT.

 

I hesitate to label any product or publisher "ahead" or "behind." There's too much contrary evidence on both ends.

 

If you want to use TT, you should use it. :-)

[RootAnn]

There are some very adamant parents on this board who insist that TT is "on grade level" and works great (for their kids).

 

Others have seen kids who used it for a year or more , retained nothing, and were (far) behind grade level when they switched away from TT. However, you will always be able to find people who know someone who used a cdertain math program and ended up with issues. YMMV.

 

Just for curiosity sake, did you have your dd take the placement test before deciding on TT4? (My oldest, who is "mathy," took the TT placement tests after finishing Abeka 3 & placed solidly in TT6. That's why I am wondering.)

 

I have seen that some TT users feel like their kid needs more practice than TT provides with certain topics.

 

My words of advice:

I wouldn't worry about the topics she is covering vs. PS counterparts. I'd just make sure she is learning well, retaining what she is learning, able to apply the concept to other math problems that are similar (but not formatted the same), and moving forward at a good pace.

[kiana]

When you put her in TT, did you do a placement test?

 

If she placed into TT4 and is doing well with it and learning, don't worry about it. She'll be okay. You want her in a math class where she can learn and understand what's going on, but she'd probably have placed into 3rd grade in a different program.

 

If you didn't do a placement test but just ordered 4 because that's what the number said, I'd check the placement test now and make sure she's placed appropriately -- and then either start on the level she places into, or continue working on 4 if that's where she places.

 

ETA: I would also notice that there are 120 lessons. At 36 done, you're 30% done with the year. Your dd's friend may be 50% through the year's curriculum or more. I'd work into and through the summer if necessary to keep her on track. If she does TT on level, she'll do Algebra in 9th grade, which is just right for satisfying high school graduation requirements for most universities.

Edited January 7, 2012 by kiana

[happycc]

It is a background math program for us. I don't use it to teach anything but just to review things.

Often times my kids have said I remember learning this in school a few years back but I don;t remember it.

 

So it works perfectly for that. That way I can move forward and work on things they need to work on and not worry too much what they missed while in PS. This works perfectly for the two nine years old. I am a bit more persnicketly when grading. I make sure they write the units down correctly after word problems and such and they spell things correctly.

 

I am trying to determine whether or not I want to use it next year for them though.

 

 

Unfortunately for my 2nd grade she struggles with everything even if it is just review. I want to cry for the both of us and we do cry for the both of us. My 9yrs old are getting really frustrated with her too. She is moving forward though. Just painfully slow.

[Mommy22alyns]

My personal experience is that yes, it's a bit behind. CLE is our main math program and for some reason (it's the WTM way?) I decided we needed two math programs. So I ordered TT 3 and 4. Before starting CLE 300 at all, Rebecca tested out of about 2/3 of TT 3. She's now in TT 4 and the early lessons are pretty much review.

 

I agree with a PP - did you do a placement test?

[zenjenn]

As for whether TT needs supplementation... my frustration with it was the lack of emphasis on number sense and mental math and place value. It was good at teaching an algorithm -- how to do an operation, it was less good at teaching why it worked and what it meant. If I were going to continue using TT I would supplement with Math Mammoth blue series.

 

This is what we do, especially with my accelerated younger daughter who is doing TT ahead of grade level. Usually not actually MM, but just off-the-cuff "white board" time that basically covers topics MM style.

 

So, since you said you do not like math, here's an example of what the issue is here.

 

Teaching Textbooks presents:

 

38

x3

--

 

TT teaches the child:

multiply 8 x 3 = 24

Write down 4, carry the 2

3x3=9 , plus 2 = 11

Answer: 114

 

 

This is really the most rapid algorithm for doing this, but it doesn't really go into:

 

38

x3

--

 

8x3=24

 

30+3=90

 

90 + 24 = 114

 

And then relating that back to the algorithm and explaining to the student HOW it gets to the right answer by keeping an understanding of place value in mind.

 

 

So, my kids do their TT lesson, and I take them aside and show them version 2 on the whiteboard. We have a discussion. I have them do practice problems. If you're not comfortable with this, MM basically does the same thing.

 

I have one mathy kid that retains it all, perfectly, and then uses the shortcuts if it appeals to her, or not. She can do math mentally, she "gets it" with facility. She enjoys TT and it's fun. The fact that TT isn't really mental is OK, because I'm keeping her up to speed on the side and she gets it. She uses TT 2 levels ahead. She occasionally says she isn't in the mood to do TT and we do something more challenging. I expect a time will come where she realizes she's bored with TT and we do something else. Fine!

 

I have one less mathy kid who gets it momentarily, forgets it, and then goes back to the shortcuts because they are a crutch. But she CAN perform, and can be reminded again to keep improving understanding, and the crutch helps her. I really don't think she's be able to keep up or perform as well if she had to have a crystal-clear understanding of what she was doing at all times. Frankly, method #2 would eventually become just another algorithm in her brain, but a longer, harder-to-remember one. She enjoys TT and the fact that it isn't really mental keeps her from being filled with self-loathing and despair about her mathematical skills. She uses TT 1 level ahead.

 

I kind of relate it to my experience taking a Calculus class just two years ago as an adult (something I did out of personal interest). I was taught why the derivative algorithm worked. I did problems the long "true" way before using the algorithms. Yet I cannot honestly say I retained crystal-clear thinking on the calculus at all times as I worked the problems using algorithms, but I could do it, and I understood the concepts, and that was fine. Some people, like my husband, DO retain a crystal-clear comprehension of the calculus, even once they are using the algorithms. I'm not one of those people, but it's also impractical for me to calculate the sum of a limit (or whatever the heck it was. See, I don't even remember) each time I worked a problem. That's just the way it rolls.

 

And I really think the same scenario applies to my 9 yr old and that multiplication problem, honestly.

 

We'll keep discussing the concepts on the side, and if it crystallizes into something meaningful and useful at some point for her, fantastic. If she's a person who just needs to learn how to calculate to get by, that's fine, as long as she can perform. Similarly, some kids will write eloquently, others will just scrape by with the tools to write correctly and clearly and that will suffice.

Edited January 7, 2012 by zenjenn

[shinyhappypeople]

I would just accelerate TT by working on it over the summer or on Saturdays rather than supplement. (unless you want to add Life of Fred for fun as we do).

 

OR, have her do the quizzes until it's clear she's reached her personal challenge level. Then have her do the daily lessons from that point on.

 

As for supplement, I think Right Start games would work well.

[blessedmom3]

Just for curiosity sake, did you have your dd take the placement test before deciding on TT4? (My oldest, who is "mathy," took the TT placement tests after finishing Abeka 3 & placed solidly in TT6. That's why I am wondering.)

 

 

 

:iagree:

 

My son , 8yo, after finishing CLE 3 and Singapore 3 (almost done with 3B) placed in TT 6 !

 

My 7yo , who is autistic and has difficulty with math, placed in TT3 after finishing CLE&Singapore 1.

 

SO I would say, yes, TT is definitely behind most curriculums.

 

Especially considering the new Common Core Standards .

 

My advice ?

Math Mammoth , Singapore or CLE . If you are not so good at math, CLE & Math Mammoth combined would work.

 

I heard Math Mammoth will soon have dvds from gr 4&up so that will help.

[kolamum]

If you look at the Index/Scope & sequence and compare it with ANY other math programme of it's grade it matches. It might be more a matter of taste.

 

We use it. We like it. Both my children placed a grade ahead in the placement tests. I feel there's a LOT of review between one grade and the next, but that's typical no matter which math programme you use. Skip the review if she doesn't need it. :)

[zenjenn]

My son , 8yo, after finishing CLE 3 and Singapore 3 (almost done with 3B) placed in TT 6 !

 

Maybe your son is just good at math (and plus he's been basically doing Math x2!). My daughter, 6 yo, after being only 1/2 through TT3, can place into TT5 easily, and almost into TT6. (I'll probably accelerate her even further at some point, but for now TT3 is good for filling in gaps and making sure she's up to speed on basic math vocabulary, elementary math-related things (like clock-reading), etc.)

 

It's not because those tests are stupid easy or anything. A little behind what *I* consider appropriate? Yeah. But average grade-level nationwide? Those placement tests are about what you'd expect. My daughter is just proficient with division and fractions and word problems at that level, a combination of TT3 and her inquisitiveness and a little bit of fireside enrichment on a white board. My mother was a public school teacher for 20 years and watched both my kids using TT for several days (TT3 and TT4), and she considers them to be "on level" for the grade advertised.

Edited January 7, 2012 by zenjenn

[hsmamainva]

Based on our personal experience, it is about a grade level behind.

 

My youngest son loves TT! He's used it since 4th grade and won't use anything else. He's always worked a grade level ahead. (TT Math 5 in 4th grade, TT Math 6 in 5th grade, etc.)

 

Our plan is for him to use TT Precalc in 11th grade, and then take a math class at the community college in 12th grade.

 

Each level of TT has a decent amount of review at the beginning of each grade level also. So at the beginning of prealgebra, for instance, the first 30+ lessons are a review of basic math (accelerated, of course), but I love that refresher after we've taken a few weeks or months off from school.

[athomemom]

And yet people have posted here that their dc used TT and did remarkably, commendably well on standardized tests, including the SAT.

 

I hesitate to label any product or publisher "ahead" or "behind." There's too much contrary evidence on both ends.

 

If you want to use TT, you should use it. :-)

 

I agree. This is our first year with TT. My boys barely placed into pre-algebra. After much debate we decided to keep them in 7th. I don't reget it. There has been some review, but TT teaches things differently (better IMHO) than Saxon did for my guys. Behind and ahead are all relative.

 

If your dd is doing well and learning, I would leave it alone. We do math all year to keep the "brain juices" flowing. ;) In the end all math programs end up in the same place, but some take a different route getting there.

[VeteranMom]

I switched my dd, 4th grade, to Teaching Textbooks last month. She had been using Saxon 5/4 and was struggling with the concepts. She was getting a lot of answers wrong with Saxon and wasn't grasping basic concepts. Saxon has been great for my boys, but it was too much for my dd. I wanted to make sure she had a firm grasp of the basics, so I made the switch. She scored very well on the TT5 placement test. I did find that TT was at least a grade behind Saxon. For my math-loving boys, it's 2 grades behind.

[Beth in SW WA]

Oregon Native, I would double-up on lessons daily. TT4 as a fourth grader is not enough, imho.

 

My girls did TT 3 in grade 1 along w/ SM 1. It is a year or 2 behind what is traditionally learned in a certain grade. Dd7 is doing TT5 along w/ SM3.

 

Dd8 is finishing up TT Prealg which is a very light prealg program. We will be using TT Alg 1 as our official prealg program (along w/ SM & HoE). I sit with dd8 during every problem and we discuss concepts as needed.

 

My dds love TT for what it offers. They have never complained about a lesson. The 'voice' on the program doesn't bother us. We appreciate the spiral review. I would not use TT alone but in addition to another conceptual-based math program it is perfect for us. We have used TT3 - prealg thus far with success.

 

Oregon Native, if you aren't comfortable with math then TT is a great program to use for your family's math needs. Perhaps bump up the pace and throw in some word problems from Evan-Moor daily word problems. I don't suggest you attempt SM cwps since bar models aren't something that your dc will see on a typical state test.

 

HTH! :)

Edited January 8, 2012 by Beth in SW WA
Typo

[shinyhappypeople]

"Behind" is relative. Behind what? Behind Singapore? Yes, but Singapore is considered "ahead" by many people. I compared the Table of Contents for TT3 to what our state requires and it's very close.

Edited January 8, 2012 by shinyhappypeople

[Heidi @ Mt Hope]

My son struggled in math. He started TT3 halfway through his 3rd grade year and finished it over the summer. He started TT4 mid September. He took the Oregon standardized testing (OAKS) for 4th grade in November and met the 4th grade standards in math with only 2 months of lessons under his belt. He came close to exceeding them. Of course, he also learned to skip count through Classical Conversations, and that has made multiplication easy for him (revolutionary, really). I'm really pleased with TT at this point.

 

My other two sons are working ahead of grade level in TT, though. And we supplement with Critical Thinking Co. workbooks (like Balance Math) and Life of Fred because I want them to be strong in math (and look at math in different ways).

[Heidi @ Mt Hope]

Keep in mind, in public school, most schools have math operating at 3-4 different levels per grade. Seriously. So what someone is learning in "4th grade math" can vary dramatically. Did your daughter's friend learn anything substantial about fractions, or did she just see pizza and pie slices and was introduced to the concepts (because a TT child has been introduced to identifying and adding fractions in TT3, actually.) That your daughter's friend "did fractions" doesn't tell you much, for example.

 

As far as I can tell, TT is on par with what a student would be learning in the average math group in the grade listed on the cover at an average public school. Classrooms will typically have an accelerated math group (or two) that is learning higher level material.

 

My armchair advice to people for TT is this:

 

- an accelerated child should use TT two grade levels ahead

- an average/slightly accelerated child should use TT 1 level ahead

- an average/slightly slow child should use TT on grade level

- a remedial child child should use TT one level behind

 

In any case, you probably want to supplement TT with fact mastery practice outside the program, and conceptual enrichment exercises for average/accelerated kids.

 

But like oraetstudia said, the scope and sequence is a little different too. Concepts tend to be introduced at a very rudimentary level very early, and then reviewed, and then built on later on.

 

I use TT and my kids love it. I don't demonize it but I recognize it for what it is. It is a great tool and allows my kids to learn a lot independently, it really does, and buys me time to juggle independent with instructor-intensive work with my two kids. But, I wouldn't advise anyone accept it at face value and just walk away with from it with no supervision or supplementation.

 

:iagree: Yes. This, exactly.

[shinyhappypeople]

My son struggled in math. He started TT3 halfway through his 3rd grade year and finished it over the summer. He started TT4 mid September. He took the Oregon standardized testing (OAKS) for 4th grade in November and met the 4th grade standards in math with only 2 months of lessons under his belt. He came close to exceeding them. Of course, he also learned to skip count through Classical Conversations, and that has made multiplication easy for him (revolutionary, really). I'm really pleased with TT at this point.

 

My other two sons are working ahead of grade level in TT, though. And we supplement with Critical Thinking Co. workbooks (like Balance Math) and Life of Fred because I want them to be strong in math (and look at math in different ways).

 

Heidi, Thanks so much for sharing your son's experience! We're also halfway through 3rd grade at the moment and I'm mildly panicked about catching up. We do have to deal with state standards and testing, so I can't just ignore them (unfortunately!). Anyway, I'm so encouraged by all the stories I've heard of kids thriving on this program.

[raceNzanesmom]

In the end all math programs end up in the same place, but some take a different route getting there.

 

:iagree:

 

TT has a different S&S, but in the end you'll end up at algebra for 9th grade, which, imho, is where you should be. We used TT for high school and loved it.

[Mommy22alyns]

OR, have her do the quizzes until it's clear she's reached her personal challenge level. Then have her do the daily lessons from that point on.

 

As for supplement, I think Right Start games would work well.

 

This is exactly what we did with Rebecca.

[BatmansWife]

My 8 year old is working through MiF 1B and will soon be doing 2A. Her brother is doing TT and she cried when she found out that she didn't get TT. It's been a couple of months now, and even though we are liking MiF...I told her she could either do MiF or TT next year. She chose TT and can't wait! I'm thinking that because she'll have only completed 2A (first semester of 2nd grade math), that we'd be going with TT3 starting in September.

 

 

Keep in mind, in public school, most schools have math operating at 3-4 different levels per grade. Seriously. So what someone is learning in "4th grade math" can vary dramatically. Did your daughter's friend learn anything substantial about fractions, or did she just see pizza and pie slices and was introduced to the concepts (because a TT child has been introduced to identifying and adding fractions in TT3, actually.) That your daughter's friend "did fractions" doesn't tell you much, for example.

 

As far as I can tell, TT is on par with what a student would be learning in the average math group in the grade listed on the cover at an average public school. Classrooms will typically have an accelerated math group (or two) that is learning higher level material.

 

My armchair advice to people for TT is this:

 

- an accelerated child should use TT two grade levels ahead

- an average/slightly accelerated child should use TT 1 level ahead

- an average/slightly slow child should use TT on grade level

- a remedial child child should use TT one level behind

 

In any case, you probably want to supplement TT with fact mastery practice outside the program, and conceptual enrichment exercises for average/accelerated kids.

 

But like oraetstudia said, the scope and sequence is a little different too. Concepts tend to be introduced at a very rudimentary level very early, and then reviewed, and then built on later on.

 

I use TT and my kids love it. I don't demonize it but I recognize it for what it is. It is a great tool and allows my kids to learn a lot independently, it really does, and buys me time to juggle independent with instructor-intensive work with my two kids. But, I wouldn't advise anyone accept it at face value and just walk away with from it with no supervision or supplementation.

 

I've never heard of that expression. What does that mean?? :001_huh:

[tomandlorih]

Just started TT3 here with DD8(second grade) also currently using MUS Gamma. She likes TT but is a little irritated right now because it is so easy. Thanks to the PP who suggested just doing the quizzes until she reaches her level! She is going to thank you too!!!

 

I plan on using it as a supplement to MUS at least through next year(MUS Delta and TT 4/5) along with probably Evan-Moor Daily Word problems or Critical Thinking Co.'s Mathematical Reasoning workbook (or both=). We also deal with state testing and I love MUS but it does NOT teach math the way the state tests test it!!

 

HTH

[zenjenn]

I've never heard of that expression. What does that mean??

 

Demonize? It's not an expression, just a word.

 

To vilify or severely disparage, so severely as to be rendered demonlike; something hurtful, wicked, and/or vile, to be avoided and/or destroyed.

 

I admit perhaps hyperbolic when used to describe folks' criticism of Teaching Textbooks, but it is used commonly for example, "demonizing the enemy".

[Sheila in OK]

True, the Scope & Sequence may be the same, but the level of difficulty of the problems is much lower than in many other programs. For example, my dd started TT in 5th grade using it on grade level. When the concept of 'percents' was introduced, all of the problems were based on 100. For example, "25 out of 100 monkeys love bananas. What percent of all monkeys love bananas? And obviously the answer is 25%. But the problem is, it never got any harder. Even through grade 6 (as far as I can remember--we don't own those levels any more). So yes, in the S&S, 'percents' are covered. But not to the level that they should be, IMO.

 

Having said all that, I still have my dd in TT. She hates math with a passion and this is the only program I have found that doesn't bring her to tears daily. But you do need to understand that it is behind other programs, and supplement when necessary. I have supplemented with the Key to books in the past, and I know some moms who use Life of Fred.

 

If you look at the Index/Scope & sequence and compare it with ANY other math programme of it's grade it matches. It might be more a matter of taste.

 

We use it. We like it. Both my children placed a grade ahead in the placement tests. I feel there's a LOT of review between one grade and the next, but that's typical no matter which math programme you use. Skip the review if she doesn't need it. :)

[zenjenn]

For example, "25 out of 100 monkeys love bananas. What percent of all monkeys love bananas? And obviously the answer is 25%. But the problem is, it never got any harder. Even through grade 6 (as far as I can remember--we don't own those levels any more).

 

If kids learn more than that about percents in 5th grade in public school, it's news to me. In my schooling that was a middle school/pre-Algebra topic. One could fairly argue that there's no reason many kids CAN'T learn more about percents in 5th grade, but I don't think it's typical? My husband and I once researched the whole scope and sequence of math in public schools because we were commenting on how strange it was that the average student does not get to Algebra until 9th or 10th grade. That doesn't seem necessary. But there it is.

Edited January 7, 2012 by zenjenn

[Sheila in OK]

You may be right. I just remember being frustrated how there were so many problems like that and it never got any harder.

 

But like I said, I like TT overall and am still using it. TT5 taught my dd how to do multi-digit multiplication and long division without the daily tears and head banging we were experiencing with MUS. I just wish they went a little deeper into some of the topics, that's all.

 

If kids learn more than that about percents in 5th grade in public school, it's news to me. In my schooling that was a middle school/pre-Algebra topic. One could fairly argue that there's no reason many kids CAN'T learn more about percents in 5th grade, but I don't think it's typical? My husband and I once researched the whole scope and sequence of math in public schools because we were commenting on how strange it was that the average student does not get to Algebra until 9th or 10th grade. That doesn't seem necessary. But there it is.

[AmyinMD]

My dd did TT 4 after doing MUS Gamma. For my dd it was a complete waste of an entire year. We jumped to Saxon briefly after TT 4 and two months ago we moved back to MUS. A year later she's going to the next level and we'll be working through the next 2 summers to catch her up from TT 4. My dd did not retain much of anything with it and got to the point where she was begging not to do it. This child does not seem to do well with computer based programs though.

 

That said I do like TT okay. I am not a fan of their grade 4 at all. My oldest is using TT Pre-Algebra this year and it is going very well for her. She seems to be retaining the info fine. She also did TT 5 and 6 without any issue. I do not get why TT 4 barely covers division at all. TT 5 and 6 I didn't have much issue with other than they seemed a bit on the easier side which was a good thing for my dyslexic dd who struggles with math.

[zenjenn]

Some friends, my husband, and I were discussing last night.. that none of us really think of ourselves as particularly smart. We think of ourselves as normal. We're often told by random people how smart we are, and our instinct is to think "No, really, I'm not."

 

But the truth is, we ARE smart, in the sense that the average human being is not as intelligent as we are. It doesn't seem like it because of our chosen associations. All four of us sitting at the table know and interact regularly with people who are FAR more intelligent and successful than we are, so we feel average by comparison.

 

I think that is super true on this forum. I think there are a LOT of bright, educated, thoughtful people, that as a matter of course think things should be more rigorous because many things that are normal/average look simple.

 

And sometimes, we are right. For US and for our kids, they might be.

 

But I know I'm also constantly having to guard myself against expecting too much too fast. My youngest for example is just a math natural. I plopped down Math Mammoth 1 in front of her on the 1st day of Kindergarten. There was NO DOUBT in my mind she could EASILY solve those problems!

 

And you know what? She could!

 

She also didn't know how to write numbers. She couldn't read directions capably yet. She didn't have the full lexicon of math vocabulary used in the directions even if she could. She didn't have the attention span to sit down and do a MM assignment.

 

It's tough to balance. I know I am always teetering between "Gosh, am I going easy on them just to avoid their whining and frustration?" and "Gosh, am being too hard on them and expecting too much? They are children after all."

 

I try to aim for challenge without tears, fostering a love of learning, while maintaining measurable progress. :lol:

[mama2cntrykids]

Just wanted to chime in and say thanks to the poster's who have basically said "behind/ahead" is relative. It certainly helps me feel better/more confident, esp. with my 3rd grader who struggles/yells/crys/whines about math.

 

This is what we're doing:

My 3rd grader is doing TT3 and struggles with multiplication and borrowing (he's an Aspie and I've read memorizing is hard for them, which ds is proving true).

 

My 5th grader is doing TT6 and doing pretty well with it. It doesn't come naturally for him or anything and he's certainly had his struggles with it, but he's doing quite well at this point in the game.

 

Now, my Kindergartner??? She's doing McGruffy and we both like it ;)!

[BlueTaelon]

Skipping several pages of replies but I'm willing to bet most are agreeing that its 1 year behind so for a 4th grader you would want TT 5 but a really good place to start is with the free placement tests they offer to buy the level your child needs and not what Jane in public school is doing who may or may not be working at the same level.

[DragonFaerie]

My kids love TT. DS used TT3 last year for 2nd grade and he's using TT4 this year for 3rd grade. DD is in 4th grade and is also using TT4 (she's not quite as "mathy" as DS). I, too, worried that it was "behind," though. So, I have sped up the schedule and they will finish TT4 and move on to TT5 by the end of February. We'll also keep going through the summer so they should be starting TT6 by the new school year in the fall, making two levels ahead for DS and one level ahead for DD.

 

I am also supplementing with MM, grade 4, and they do find that difficult. They don't have trouble with the concepts but sometimes the explanations and the way the problems are presented are hard for them to understand. So, while they run with TT entirely on their own, I help them with MM.

 

Lastly, I also supplement with Daily Math, grade 4 from Evan-Moor and Timez and Division Attack, just to really round things out. Next year, I'll have them doing Daily Word Problems, too.

[Sandy in Indy]

I don't know about the "level" for TT...all I know is that my oldes ds used TT algebra in 8th grade through pre-cal in 11, then went to cc for calculus. (As a high school senior, he got the highest grade in the class.) He got great scores on the SAT which translated into a great scholarship.

 

Youngest ds will use pre-algebra in 7th, and then follow the same course as his older brother. I expect he'll do well, too.

[Shellers]

If you look at the Index/Scope & sequence and compare it with ANY other math programme of it's grade it matches. ......

 

:iagree:

[Sheila in OK]

That's good to know! :) My dd is currently in PreAlgebra and I plan to have her continue with TT throughout high school.

 

I don't know about the "level" for TT...all I know is that my oldes ds used TT algebra in 8th grade through pre-cal in 11, then went to cc for calculus. (As a high school senior, he got the highest grade in the class.) He got great scores on the SAT which translated into a great scholarship.

 

Youngest ds will use pre-algebra in 7th, and then follow the same course as his older brother. I expect he'll do well, too.

[zenjenn]

Interesting. I've lived in 2 states now and haven't come across elementary schools that offer different levels for math. Also, plenty of people here have complained that schools don't offer levels in elementary especially. I don't know that "most" schools operate at various levels per grade. It's one of the reasons I've had to homeschool.

 

It is not "offered". Teachers generally break kids into math groups in the classroom, or more rarely, kids will rotate into different classrooms of the same grade for math and reading, and those groups learn at different paces and with different levels of depth. In some states, they just flat-out level classes. If there are 3 teachers for a grade, one teacher will have the gifted/bright students, one teacher will have average students, and a third will have the slower students. Some states/districts flat out forbid this, however, so the classroom groupings at the teacher level are more common. Sometimes the students are working out of the same book, even, but some groups will do easier problems and work more slowly while others work more quickly and spend time on challenge problems, etc.

 

Especially at the lower levels, teachers are sensitive to how students may feel about being in the "smart math group" or the "slow math group" (or reading group, for that matter) and go to great pains to try to make students and sometimes even parents as unaware of it as possible. Most students figure it out by 4th or 5th grade, if not before.

 

When my daughter was in public her teacher was reluctant to tell me which "level" of group my child was in, even when I pressed her (though ultimately she did admit to it.)

 

And it was done when I was a child, and my mother, a teacher of 20 years, absolutely did it in her classroom. She was a particularly ambitious teacher and sometimes had as many as 5 different levels for math, writing, and reading, because she felt it was necessary to meet all the students' needs. HUGE amount of work, though. 2 or 3 groups is far more common.

Edited January 8, 2012 by zenjenn

[1GirlTwinBoys]

My DD in 3rd is using TT 3 and it's just right for her. I read lot's of reviews about it being at least a year behind, but she's not mathy and there would have been gaps if I would have done that. :) She's learning things that were not covered with what she did last year.

[BatmansWife]

Demonize? It's not an expression, just a word.

 

To vilify or severely disparage, so severely as to be rendered demonlike; something hurtful, wicked, and/or vile, to be avoided and/or destroyed.

 

I admit perhaps hyperbolic when used to describe folks' criticism of Teaching Textbooks, but it is used commonly for example, "demonizing the enemy".

Thanks. I had looked it up online but didn't get any other definition that what you'd expect that word to mean. I was like: :confused:

 

:lol:

[VeteranMom]

Interesting. I've lived in 2 states now and haven't come across elementary schools that offer different levels for math. Also, plenty of people here have complained that schools don't offer levels in elementary especially. I don't know that "most" schools operate at various levels per grade. It's one of the reasons I've had to homeschool.

 

Just wondering about this. Maybe I've been very unlucky.

This has been my experience, too. My kids were in public school for 3 years. When I had a teacher tell me she had to "teach toward the middle" during math lessons, I knew my son would be better off at home. I saw teachers divide kids up into different levels during reading groups, but never saw it done for math.

[Sneezyone]

My DD's school has walk-to-math starting in grade 1 which groups kids for math instruction. "Walk-to" kids work a year ahead. Typical students stay in their assigned homeroom and kids slightly behind go to the class that's a year behind (to review prior concepts). Most elementary teachers here have a strong reading/writing/language arts background and can differentiate more easily so walk-to-reading, while possible, is less common in our schools.

[NanceXToo]

Here's a thread I started a while back when my daughter had to take her first standardized test after her first year of using Teaching Textbooks. It shows how her math scores dramatically improved, and a bunch of other people said the same. So as far as I'm concerned, TT works great for us!

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=259625&highlight=teaching+textbooks+standardized+test

[shinyhappypeople]

Here's a thread I started a while back when my daughter had to take her first standardized test after her first year of using Teaching Textbooks. It shows how her math scores dramatically improved, and a bunch of other people said the same. So as far as I'm concerned, TT works great for us!

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=259625&highlight=teaching+textbooks+standardized+test

 

I'm so glad you posted that thread when you did way back when. I read it last week, and it gave me the confidence to give TT3 a try (it also helped that I was able to borrow the CDs from a friend :D). We're doing our 2nd lesson today. Anyway, GREAT thread.