Official Beast Academy guinea pigs thread!

[Barb_]

Saying "We do this because this is the convention that people decided on in years past, not because of any logical reason" is perfectly acceptable IF IT IS TRUE.

 

So are you saying the Order of Operations is completely arbitrary and has no foundation in Logic? I don't believe anything in Mathematics is arbitrary. Everything has a reason.

 

For example, why do we use a horizontal line for subtraction, and why are exponents written as small superscript numbers? These are arbitrary.

 

But their meanings aren't arbitrary. We are communicating something logical and meaningful with those symbols.

 

Again, no one is saying that conventions don't exist in Math. Of course they do. But all Mathematical conventions have reasons.

 

There is no logical reason why they need to be the way they are, and to say that we do multiplication/division first to avoid larger numbers makes no sense at all. The order of operations does not determine what the expression is; it just determines how we write it.

 

That's like saying Grammar doesn't determine the meaning of a sentence. Of course it does! Word order in English is important (let's not begin talking about inverted order for reasons of emphasis because by definition we're turning convention upside down). The expression is in fact determined by agreed-upon order in both Mathematical Grammar and English Grammar. Here you are just wrong. Mathematical rules are just not based on randomness. They are a way of bringing order out of chaos.

Edited March 21, 2012 by Barb F. PA in AZ

[nmoira]

The expression is in fact determined by agreed-upon order in both Mathematical Grammar and English Grammar. Here you are just wrong. Mathematical rules are just not based on randomness. They are a way of bringing order out of chaos.

Do you think that Order of Operations affects our ability to comprehend and describe the fundamentals of mathematics (as opposed to arithmetic, ETA: and beyond beyond convenience) in a way similar to that which grammar can both shape and place limitations upon meaning and understanding? Edited March 21, 2012 by nmoira

[Barb_]

The fact that the magnetic north pole is north does not explain why north is placed at the top of a map or globe--there is nothing "up" about magnetic north--it is an arbitrary convention.

 

I would love to discover a true logic behind order of operations, but I do agree with your particular argument as a reason that order of operations must be as it is.

 

Tell me this, have you tried to wrap your mind around the idea of a different order of operations? Let's say we reverse them. As someone else said, all it would do is change the way we write a particular expression. So if you want to show 5 groups of 3 apples plus 2 more you could write: (5*3)+2 --does that not satisfy your need to show which numbers are grouped through multiplication? 5*3+2 would then mean you have 5 groups of 5 objects.

 

Dude, you're giving me a headache here. :lol:

 

Yes. Yes I can imagine a world in which North was actually considered down (hey, the fact that Nile river flows from the South to the North...that rocked my world). Calling North "up" is likely arbitrary. Or maybe the convention has something to do with the fact that in English speaking countries water flows from North to South. There are almost always reasons. Arbitrary is a perfectly acceptable reason for convention, but not as the first response. Not without trying to tease out the reasons first. And definitely not in Math.

 

I can also imagine a world in which the grouping symbols were different. But they are not. That is my point. There is a reason they are not. The natural order of things is to do the more complicated operations first. I believe that is why it is done the way it is rather than in your second example. People began adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing with objects first. You have to crawl into the minds of people who have no concept of algebra. The Order of Operations was invented by people to communicate concrete ideas with symbols, not abstract ones.

Edited March 21, 2012 by Barb F. PA in AZ

[Barb_]

Do you think that Order of Operations affects our ability to comprehend and describe the fundamentals of mathematics (as opposed to arithmetic) in a way similar to that which grammar can both shape and place limitations upon meaning and understanding?

 

Yes. Exactly.

 

But you may have to define the term fundamentals if you are going to disagree.

[garddwr]

But their meanings aren't arbitrary. We are communicating something logical and meaningful with those symbols.

 

 

What do you understand by the word arbitrary? There is nothing in the symbol + that itself implies addition or positiveness, nothing in the symbol - that implies subtraction or negativity. We have assigned those meanings to those symbols in an arbitrary way--the symbol for addition could equally well be a crescent or an octagon (wouldn't that be fun to draw out every time!) or the two could be reversed - to mean addition and + subtraction. The connection of symbol to meaning is arbitrary--but we all agree to it so that we understand each other.

[Barb_]

I can't stick around, but I'll be back ;)

[nmoira]

Yes. Exactly.

 

But you may have to define the term fundamentals if you are going to disagree.

I disagree, but I don't feel strongly enough about OoO to argue: I see it as arbitrary, something that evolved into the most "convenient" or "efficient" means of writing expressions. I was just trying to understand your position.

[garddwr]

I can't stick around, but I'll be back ;)

 

We're off to cello lessons.

 

I get the feeling though that somehow we are using terms (such as arbitrary) in a different way--so we're not quite understanding each others meanings. I'm not sure I have more time for this discussion, but it has made me think some things through more carefully so thanks!

[zarabellesmom]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I was really enjoying reading everyone's experiences with BA so far. My daughter isn't quite ready, I don't think (though I'm debating as we finish Singapore 2A and start 2B). So, can I just say...

 

Back to our regularly scheduled programming? :D

[garddwr]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I was really enjoying reading everyone's experiences with BA so far. My daughter isn't quite ready, I don't think (though I'm debating as we finish Singapore 2A and start 2B). So, can I just say...

 

Back to our regularly scheduled programming? :D

 

Well, my experience of BA so far is that resistance is futile--I held off on ordering for an entire week after it came out, but reading through this thread in the midst of an insomnia attack last night broke down my best defenses. Beyond that I won't be able to say much until after my package arrive!

[Rivka]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I was really enjoying reading everyone's experiences with BA so far. My daughter isn't quite ready, I don't think (though I'm debating as we finish Singapore 2A and start 2B). So, can I just say...

 

Back to our regularly scheduled programming? :D

 

Yes please! Someone should start a spinoff on the order of operations issue, but it's probably not very helpful to people who are trying to decide whether and/or how to use BA.

[stripe]

Yes please! Someone should start a spinoff on the order of operations issue, but it's probably not very helpful to people who are trying to decide whether and/or how to use BA.

 

C'mon, this is my biggest success thread!

 

Seriously, do we need to talk any more about it??

[Rosie_0801]

C'mon, this is my biggest success thread!

 

Seriously, do we need to talk any more about it??

 

Yeah, you want Regentrude to weigh in. I swear there was a similar conversation on the logic or high school board a few months back but I can't find it to link.

 

Rosie

[slackermom]

Our books arrived today! We used media mail, and live on the east coast.

 

DD spent about an hour looking through the guide books. She really likes them, but hasn't taken a look at the practice books yet, since she has a bunch of homework to finish.

 

I need to take a look through the BA books myself before I make a decision about when to get started, and how much time DD can devote to them as afterschool material.

 

DD is still working through the Zaccaro Challenge Math books at the rate of 2-3 chapters per week, and is using Kahn Academy, FirstInMath.com, and has weekly math circle.

[Sahamamama]

Yes please! Someone should start a spinoff on the order of operations issue, but it's probably not very helpful to people who are trying to decide whether and/or how to use BA.

 

C'mon, this is my biggest success thread!

 

Seriously, do we need to talk any more about it??

 

:iagree:Enough about PEMDAS, please.

[Dana]

I got to look at a friend's copy of the books today. My son is finishing up Singapore 4B... but I'm leaning towards grabbing the BA books anyway. :glare:

 

Resistance is futile...

[ErinE]

After looking through Beast Academy 3A & 3B, I'd say this would not be a core spine, even for a particularly (but not exceptionally) mathy child. Almost right away, many of the concepts require a good understanding of elementary math fundamentals that can be found in a traditional math sequence, but not in BA. I can see why AoPS chose to introduce the third-grade sequence first; concepts like smallest weight possible given two weights require a level of abstract thinking that most children will not be able to meet in first and second grade without good coaching. BA 3A&B are truly intended as an in-depth exploration for children already familiar with elementary math (before exponents).

 

I may get shouted down by the others on the Hive, but I see BA as filling a niche within the math schooling community but not becoming core curriculum. Children using BA3 will already understand basic operations gleaned elsewhere and enjoy the play aspect of BA. In my view, BA3 is intended as a depth curriculum. If your child has mastered third-grade level arithmetic, you should add BA to increase understanding of math concepts.

 

Given all of the above, my kids, both the third grader and kindergartner, love BA. DS9 (SM 4A) has read ahead and is excited to try out the other games. I'm thrilled because we had lost a bit of his math spark as we moved ahead in Singapore. DD6 (SM1B) is jealous and follows Beast Academy discussions closely as also she enjoys the guide book and practice worksheets. I highly recommend BA3A & 3B as supplements, but not as the core spine.

Edited March 22, 2012 by ErinE

[HollyB]

I finally ordered the books tonight! We will be finishing up MM 3B in a couple of weeks, so I hope they get here by then. My daughter will begin stalking our mail carrier by Friday. We're both pretty excited!

[Alte Veste Academy]

After looking through Beast Academy 3A & 3B, I'd say this would not be a core spine, even for a particularly (but not exceptionally) mathy child. Almost right away, many of the concepts require a good understanding of elementary math fundamentals that can be found in a traditional math sequence, but not in BA. I can see why AoPS chose to introduce the third-grade sequence first; concepts like smallest weight possible given two weights require a level of abstract thinking that most children will not be able to meet in first and second grade without good coaching. BA 3A&B are truly intended as an in-depth exploration for children already familiar with elementary math (before exponents).

 

I may get shouted down by the others on the Hive, but I see BA as filling a niche within the math schooling community but not becoming core curriculum. Children using BA3 will already understand basic operations gleaned elsewhere and enjoy the play aspect of BA. In my view, BA3 is intended as a depth curriculum. If your child has mastered third-grade level arithmetic, you should add BA to increase understanding of math concepts.

 

Given all of the above, my kids, both the third grader and kindergartner, love BA. DS9 (SM 4A) has read ahead and is excited to try out the other games. I'm thrilled because we had lost a bit of his math spark as we moved ahead in Singapore. DD6 (SM1B) is jealous and follows Beast Academy discussions closely as she enjoys the guide book and practice worksheets. I highly recommend BA3A & 3B as supplements, but not as the core spine.

 

Fair. It reminds me of the following exchange earlier in this thread.

 

In looking through it I sure don't see much addition work. In MM3 my ds did extensive amounts of 3 digit adding and subtracting.

 

Thank goodness. My younger son would rather poke his eyeball out with a pencil that to keep doing that over and over again. I mean, once you can add/subtract with borrowing/carrying isn't doing it with 2 digit number essentially the same thing to do it to 10 digit numbers (excluding mental math techniques)?

 

Snickerdoodle, I didn't perceive this as grumpy at all, maybe because this exactly reflects my problem with all the other math programs I've tried. With DS9, once he got a concept (place value, addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, fractions, etc.) that was it. It. The end. Any further instruction was boring as sin to him. He needed more. More thinking. Heavy-duty thinking, which even the CWP and IP couldn't necessarily quench his thirst for. Whether he was adding tens or billions was irrelevant. He just got it and practicing the skills/knowledge at a relatively shallow level put his love and inherent gift with math on the fast train to dread.

 

So, Erin, again I say that your review is fair enough. :D (And a similar thought was touched on earlier by Bill, I think, when he said that he didn't necessarily feel that BA would be competitive with SM in the area of place value understanding. Maybe that will extend to basic instruction in operations as well.) I definitely won't shout you down. :tongue_smilie: However, I will say that I feel all of our reviews (whether accolades, expressions of disappointment, or somewhere in between) are premature. I suspect we won't be able to review the program well until a whole year is released (and perhaps even until the entire set of grades 2-5 are released). And SM is still in the cupboard. ;)

[stripe]

Thank goodness. My younger son would rather poke his eyeball out with a pencil that to keep doing that over and over again. I mean, once you can add/subtract with borrowing/carrying isn't doing it with 2 digit number essentially the same thing to do it to 10 digit numbers (excluding mental math techniques)?

 

I missed this brilliant post of yours. You are now my beastest friend ever. Let me tell you, I wish you'd told this to my elementary math teachers. I have the homework to prove it -- seriously, I should post it on here sometime! -- my teachers just gave me more and longer numbers to add.

 

I have been mulling over BA and I tend to agree with Erin E. I will be studying the situation more closely now that I have retrieved book 3 A from my son.

[wapiti]

So, Erin, again I say that your review is fair enough. :D (And a similar thought was touched on earlier by Bill, I think, when he said that he didn't necessarily feel that BA would be competitive with SM in the area of place value understanding. Maybe that will extend to basic instruction in operations as well.) I definitely won't shout you down. :tongue_smilie: However, I will say that I feel all of our reviews (whether accolades, expressions of disappointment, or somewhere in between) are premature. I suspect we won't be able to review the program well until a whole year is released (and perhaps even until the entire set of grades 2-5 are released). And SM is still in the cupboard. ;)

 

FWIW, BA3 assumes "a solid understanding of place value." It'll be interesting to see what BA2 looks like - I might still have a dc young enough to wait for that - it'll be close... In the meantime, I think it makes sense to carry on with more than one program in whatever bits and pieces work.

[Roadrunner]

Fair. It reminds me of the following exchange earlier in this thread.

 

 

 

 

 

Snickerdoodle, I didn't perceive this as grumpy at all, maybe because this exactly reflects my problem with all the other math programs I've tried. With DS9, once he got a concept (place value, addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, fractions, etc.) that was it. It. The end. Any further instruction was boring as sin to him.

 

 

This has been exactly our experience. We didn't know what to do.

BA is certainly shaking things up, slowing us down and reaching depths unexplored by SM at that level.

[ErinE]

However, I will say that I feel all of our reviews (whether accolades, expressions of disappointment, or somewhere in between) are premature. I suspect we won't be able to review the program well until a whole year is released (and perhaps even until the entire set of grades 2-5 are released). And SM is still in the cupboard. ;)

 

I don't disagree at all. My son hated and still hates the rote calculation of easy math concepts. He has grasped the fundamentals and I don't require pages of drill for the basics. It's the higher level, pre-algebraic concepts, like finding the closest product for multi-digit division and calculating the lowest common denominators for unlike fractions, that cause him difficulty. He knows his multiplication facts but his fluency is poor, which shows in his work. I'm grateful for BA because it allows us to play with the basics while working on his fluency.

 

I ws careful in my review to only talk about BA 3A&B and a generally mathy child. I could see a profoundly-gifted math child working through BA without need for a core, but a profoundly gifted child is very uncommon. For parents wishing to rush out and purchase Beast Academy as a core spine, I wanted to sound a note of caution. I love the BA books and I'm over the moon about them, but I don't think, as currently printed, they replace a core spine.

[Spy Car]

I may get shouted down by the others on the Hive, but I see BA as filling a niche within the math schooling community but not becoming core curriculum. Children using BA3 will already understand basic operations gleaned elsewhere and enjoy the play aspect of BA. In my view, BA3 is intended as a depth curriculum. If your child has mastered third-grade level arithmetic, you should add BA to increase understanding of math concepts.

 

 

You won't be shouted down by me, I tend to think you may be right. I'll just happily take it as "depth curriculum." I've never seen anything like it. My son is very enthusiastic about using it. But he was near finished with Primary Mathematics 3 when we started BA so the nuts and bolts had been covered.

 

I just think having something so interesting that children are begging to do it (at least mine is) is priceless.

 

Bill

[Alte Veste Academy]

FWIW, BA3 assumes "a solid understanding of place value." It'll be interesting to see what BA2 looks like - I might still have a dc young enough to wait for that - it'll be close... In the meantime, I think it makes sense to carry on with more than one program in whatever bits and pieces work.

 

Oh, yes, by third grade I would expect that for sure. I was pondering what 2nd grade BA would be like, although obviously PV understanding begins with Kindy teaching and increases in first grade. I have to wonder why 2-5? Do they assume people will use the Kitchen Table Math for K-1? I imagine most people won't be comfortable enough with that as a program. I have high hopes that they will eventually do something with a guidebook/practice book for K-1 as well. I will definitely carry on with SM. Eventually. Right now I'm letting the math love come back. :) Based on BA love though, I can see moving into AoPS for a full program as soon as we are able. I had fears of DS beginning prealgebra next year, just so he would finally have something challenging enough for him. Having BA now, I feel I can take a more leisurely pace.

[Alte Veste Academy]

I ws careful in my review to only talk about BA 3A&B and a generally mathy child. I could see a profoundly-gifted math child working through BA without need for a core, but a profoundly gifted child is very uncommon. For parents wishing to rush out and purchase Beast Academy as a core spine, I wanted to sound a note of caution. I love the BA books and I'm over the moon about them, but I don't think, as currently printed, they replace a core spine.

 

Oh, sorry. I know you were only talking about 3A/3B. That was my brain floating around in space. :lol: I have spent too much time imagining what is laid out in grade 2, what leads up to the part we're seeing now, and then what will come in 3C/3D, 4, and 5. Maybe there is more basic instruction than we're getting a glimpse of now. Or maybe not. My point was that only time will tell. :)

[ErinE]

You won't be shouted down by me, I tend to think you may be right. I'll just happily take it as "depth curriculum." I've never seen anything like it. My son is very enthusiastic about using it. But he was near finished with Primary Mathematics 3 when we started BA so the nuts and bolts had been covered.

 

I just think having something so interesting that children are begging to do it (at least mine is) is priceless.

 

Bill

 

I'm grateful to BA3 for coming out at this time for the bolded reason. We've been working on fluency as we slog though SM4 and my ds was getting tired. From the moment we cracked open BA, he perked up. The combination of play and math has engaged his interest. Today he was pointing out all the isosceles, obtuse, and acute triangles he could find. Dd6 was listening to my son and I read BA and she wants the practice books; BA may become family math time.

[Alte Veste Academy]

I'll just happily take it as "depth curriculum." I've never seen anything like it.

 

I just think having something so interesting that children are begging to do it (at least mine is) is priceless.

 

:iagree: This is how I feel about it. I won't use MCTLA as my only LA but I doubt I will ever leave it. In the same way, I might not use BA as my only math but I can't imagine ever leaving it. They might not be complete, but for us they are too good to be missed. They are the art in the science.

[Spy Car]

I'm grateful to BA3 for coming out at this time for the bolded reason. We've been working on fluency as we slog though SM4 and my ds was getting tired. From the moment we cracked open BA, he perked up. The combination of play and math has engaged his interest. Today he was pointing out all the isosceles, obtuse, and acute triangles he could find. Dd6 was listening to my son and I read BA and she wants the practice books; BA may become family math time.

 

I'm with you. While I certainly place a high value on how well Primary Mathematics has build my son's facility with numbers there has been a certain fall-off in interest/passion of late.

 

With Beast Academy he is coming to me begging to do more. There is an excitement that has been restored. So yes, *grateful* is the word I'd use too.

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

:iagree: This is how I feel about it. I won't use MCTLA as my only LA but I doubt I will ever leave it. In the same way, I might not use BA as my only math but I can't imagine ever leaving it. They might not be complete, but for us they are too good to be missed. They are the art in the science.

 

It's funny but my pile of BA books are sitting on top of a pile of MCT books. Just looking at these programs and knowing what a different experience they will afford my child makes me smile. Why be mundane? :D

 

Bill

Edited March 22, 2012 by Spy Car

[boscopup]

I got to look at a friend's copy of the books today. My son is finishing up Singapore 4B... but I'm leaning towards grabbing the BA books anyway. :glare:

 

Resistance is futile...

 

:lol: We've been doing Singapore 4B (early part with the decimals, doing 2 lessons a day because they were a concept already basically understood). This week we're doing BA, and it has been challenging for my son. Love it! :D

 

As far as whether this would be a "full program" or not... I'll have to wait and see how it works with a child that hasn't been introduced to these topics yet. It's HARD for a child that has been introduced to them already, but what we've done in BA so far (angles, triangles, quadilaterals) have been well taught in the book, and I think my son would have been fine learning them for the first time from this book, BUT I don't know that, since he has learned about those things before.

 

I suspect that this program was designed with the very mathy student in mind (as the upper math levels are), so I'm curious to see how it works for the average math student.

 

Like others, once my son learned 2-digit operations, he could do those operations on any number of digits. So yes, I'm happy that there aren't pages upon pages of 3-digit addition/subtraction problems. It's expected that the child knows how to do those coming in.

[garddwr]

You won't be shouted down by me, I tend to think you may be right. I'll just happily take it as "depth curriculum." I've never seen anything like it. My son is very enthusiastic about using it. But he was near finished with Primary Mathematics 3 when we started BA so the nuts and bolts had been covered.

 

I just think having something so interesting that children are begging to do it (at least mine is) is priceless.

 

Bill

 

Hi Bill,

 

Off topic, but I've been wondering: I know your son is in school, is he in 2nd grade? What does he do for math at school? I'm guessing he is in a gifted program--is he able to work at school at the same level he does at home?

--Sarah

[garddwr]

After looking through Beast Academy 3A & 3B, I'd say this would not be a core spine, even for a particularly (but not exceptionally) mathy child. Almost right away, many of the concepts require a good understanding of elementary math fundamentals that can be found in a traditional math sequence, but not in BA. I can see why AoPS chose to introduce the third-grade sequence first; concepts like smallest weight possible given two weights require a level of abstract thinking that most children will not be able to meet in first and second grade without good coaching. BA 3A&B are truly intended as an in-depth exploration for children already familiar with elementary math (before exponents).

 

 

Could someone please enlighten me as to the proposed sequence for BA? A link to information on their site would be fine--am I correct in understanding they will bring out BA3, 4, and 5, then eventually BA2? Will there ever be a 1? BA5 will be enough preparation for pre-algebra?

 

I'm thinking if they eventually create lower-level books those will address the place value and addition/subtraction computation ability that are BA3...What is the expected timeframe for development?

 

--Sarah

[nov05mama]

As far as whether this would be a "full program" or not... I'll have to wait and see how it works with a child that hasn't been introduced to these topics yet. It's HARD for a child that has been introduced to them already, but what we've done in BA so far (angles, triangles, quadilaterals) have been well taught in the book, and I think my son would have been fine learning them for the first time from this book, BUT I don't know that, since he has learned about those things before.

 

Like others, once my son learned 2-digit operations, he could do those operations on any number of digits. So yes, I'm happy that there aren't pages upon pages of 3-digit addition/subtraction problems. It's expected that the child knows how to do those coming in.

 

I have to admit that it does a pretty good job. My DS has only completed SM through 2A at the moment (almost completely through 2B) and he hasn't had much exposure to angles other than basics of knowing the differences and specific 'rules' for triangles, rectangles, squares. The angles chapter presented basically brand new material for him and he picked it up right away. DS is an extremely 'mathy' kid, but I do still give some credit to BA in how the material is presented.

Our biggest frustration with SM has been the pages and pages of 'next level' addition/subtraction. Like you mentioned, once he "got" 2-digit operations, the others were almost a given for him. He adores BA...for him, each lesson/practice page is a puzzle for him to unlock. Singapore, while it's great for those operational foundations, it's not a puzzle at all.

[ErinE]

Could someone please enlighten me as to the proposed sequence for BA? A link to information on their site would be fine--am I correct in understanding they will bring out BA3, 4, and 5, then eventually BA2? Will there ever be a 1? BA5 will be enough preparation for pre-algebra?

 

I'm thinking if they eventually create lower-level books those will address the place value and addition/subtraction computation ability that are BA3...What is the expected timeframe for development?

 

--Sarah

 

I haven't seen a firm schedule for 4, 5, & 2, but on Facebook, the schedule for 3C is summer, with 3D coming in the fall.

 

ETA: Correction, the Facebook post said each new pair will come every four months after the release of 3D (found in the comments section on the March 17th post).

 

http://www.facebook.com/beastacademymath

Edited March 22, 2012 by ErinE

[NotAVampireLvr]

Without reading the whole thread - Beast Academy 3A arrived yesterday! I'm so excited. We're using it as a supplement to Singapore, starting with BA 3A. It is going through things differently then Singapore and I definitely don't see it as overkill. I plan to start tomorrow with our first lesson. :) My 7 y.o. already has grabbed the books and digging through them. We only got 3A for now.

[Snickerdoodle]

Snickerdoodle, I didn't perceive this as grumpy at all, maybe because this exactly reflects my problem with all the other math programs I've tried. With DS9, once he got a concept that was it. It. The end.

 

I would not have purchased BA if it would have been another slightly different version of Singapore or Russian math (UChicago books). I am glad that the AoPS people have decided to do something completely different and fresh.

 

I would love to hear from the people using MEP how it compares. MEP is the one resource I've only spent a little bit of time trying to do.

[Alte Veste Academy]

I would not have purchased BA if it would have been another slightly different version of Singapore or Russian math (UChicago books). I am glad that the AoPS people have decided to do something completely different and fresh.

 

I would love to hear from the people using MEP how it compares. MEP is the one resource I've only spent a little bit of time trying to do.

 

:iagree: I was also hoping for a compare and contrast review of BA and MEP. I have tried a few bits and pieces of MEP, here and there, but I found the format more challenging than I would like to admit. :blush: I feel that AoPS has put out a program that makes me not feel like I have to keep going back to try MEP. BA is filling our void of puzzling/challenging materials.

[Spy Car]

Hi Bill,

 

Off topic, but I've been wondering: I know your son is in school, is he in 2nd grade? What does he do for math at school? I'm guessing he is in a gifted program--is he able to work at school at the same level he does at home?

--Sarah

 

Yes, my son is in 2nd Grade. The school uses a math program called enVision. He works in enVision on a 2nd Grade level (with the rest of his class) and works ahead at home. While it wouldn't be my program of choice, enVision has its own challenges and isn't a waste of time. His teacher sometimes gives him more challenging extra work.

 

Bill

[garddwr]

Yes, my son is in 2nd Grade. The school uses a math program called enVision. He works in enVision on a 2nd Grade level (with the rest of his class) and works ahead at home. While it wouldn't be my program of choice, enVision has its own challenges and isn't a waste of time. His teacher sometimes gives him more challenging extra work.

Bill

 

Thanks for the reply. I've been curious about how the school learning/home learning mesh together for those on this board who afterschool.

[stripe]

I would love to hear from the people using MEP how it compares.

Two immediate differences that may or may not count as insightful:

* In MEP there is less clarity about what exactly one is studying. Things are mixed up together. It may be about addition, but there are problems about money, for example. Beast Academy seems more focused on the particular topic. The problems may be deep, and may be clever, but they are narrowly focused. We are learning about triangles, so let's find the triangles. I am not sure I think one is better than another but they are quite different.

 

* MEP doesn't have a textbook for the child to read. The teacher does or suggests a series of exercises/activities and the students do written work. BA has a whole book just for the kid plus a practice book.

 

Also obviously MEP is neatly divided into a day's work, which obviously the teacher may ignore, but in BA there are no such proposals.

 

Two more things -- MEP has a lot of review. Things come in and out and are periodically revisited. BA seems to cover a topic and then that's it.

MEP also has tons of Roman numeral work, which clearly serves as a surrogate for a type of thinking, but BA is less roman numeral fixated, to say the least.

Edited March 22, 2012 by stripe

[Alte Veste Academy]

Two immediate differences that may or may not count as insightful:

* In MEP there is less clarity about what exactly one is studying. Things are mixed up together. It may be about addition, but there are problems about money, for example. Beast Academy seems more focused on the particular topic. The problems may be deep, and may be clever, but they are narrowly focused. We are learning about triangles, so let's find the triangles.

 

* MEP doesn't have a textbook for the child to read. The teacher does or suggests a series of exercises/activities and the students do written work. BA has a whole book just for the kid plus a practice book.

 

Also obviously MEP is neatly divided into a day's work, which obviously the teacher may ignore, but in BA there are no such proposals.

 

Thanks for this.

 

I do think BA not laying out a day's work is the nature of the beast though (pun intended :tongue_smilie:). With the level of challenge (especially for those starred problems) it would be difficult to lay out a schedule, knowing that there is the overwhelming potential to constantly be off that schedule. Some problems will be solved with relative ease and others might need to be pondered for a day or two.

[onaclairadeluna]

Two immediate differences that may or may not count as insightful:

* In MEP there is less clarity about what exactly one is studying. Things are mixed up together.

 

Yes. BA is more explicit. I think the two programs complement eachother very well. I don't think I'll have too much trouble bouncing back and forth while waiting for the books.

 

For example somewhere in MEP 3a they were having the student practice problems like 2x9 2x90 20x9 20x90 where the child was expected to figure out the adding a 0 trick. In BA 3b they explained it. I thought this was just about perfect for DD who basically had the idea of what was going on but probably wouldn't have been able to put it in words herself.

 

On the other hand they also threw out 27,000,000,000,000,000 without telling the students what a quadrillion was. I had to think for a second. DD is pretty clueless large numbers so I had to clue her in and her dyslexic brain had a bit of a hard time keeping millions and billions straight. No big deal but it was a bit of a leap. Generally though BA is way more explicit.

 

The other big difference is more tightly packed with challenge. MEP seems to scatter it freely so a more advanced student might need to skip around a bit. And since the problems are scattered so willy nilly it's not so easy to figure out how to skip around without missing some great kernel of learning buried deep within its pages.

[stripe]

I do think BA not laying out a day's work is the nature of the beast though (pun intended :tongue_smilie:). .

 

I am sure it is intentional, but the format is so different I thought it worth noting.

 

For example somewhere in MEP 3a they were having the student practice problems like 2x9 2x90 20x9 20x90 where the child was expected to figure out the adding a 0 trick. In BA 3b they explained it.

 

Yes, and in MEP the student is often led through some deliberate exercise that should lead to the child figuring out the principle in question.

[Bug's Mom]

Add us to the list....books arrived today.

 

Dd is in 4th grade and halfway through MUS Gamma. There were some major math issues early on, so we had to slow down for a while. Things are much better now. When I first saw BA, I knew that she would love it. She is constantly drawing crazy creatures and making comics. Let's hope she enjoys the work, too. We'll be trying it out after lunch. I'll let you know how it goes. :)

[Roadrunner]

My thoughts.... Judging only by topics that BA covered in 3A and 3B, I don't see a need for another core program to cover those topics. Do you really need to cover area/parameter, multiplication, angles with another core program? I think it's more than enough. My guess is eventually their 2nd grade program with cover all the addition, subtraction and place value work thoroughly and with plenty of practice.

However, I think mix and matching different programs is a good thing, not because they aren't "enough" as standalone programs, but because different styles of instruction have an added benefit of "different vision". That's why we aren't going to completely dump SM. While we won't redo work on chapters like area/parameter with SM, we will probably press on with CWP and IPs because they are different and enrich learning. The plan is to transition to BA as a primary program.

[Sneezyone]

In terms of how BA works for an afterschooling family, DD is in 1st grade but walks to 2nd grade math. Her school uses Everyday Math (which I dislike for its random presentation of new material) so we've supplemented at home with SM2 to fill in any gaps and provide much-needed repetition and drill. Even though DD has only completed SM2A at home, many of the concepts in 2B are review since they've already been covered at school. Under the circumstances (school's out in June), moving to 3A was not a huge leap.

 

BA has ramped up the challenge level because it's introducing completely new concepts but DD hasn't struggled with it at all. We just did the triangles unit last night. It will be interesting to see how DD feels about SM3 in the fall tho. Hopefully it won't be too boring after working through the BA stuff. Not that I care, of course. :D

[walkermamaof4]

Update on my lost order:

 

The USPS is a total joke! 3 days of phone calls have produced nothing. No wonder they're a drain on our economy and are going bankrupt...I finally decided to contact AOPS and Tina returned my email immediately. She has offered to send out a duplicate order via FedEx tomorrow. Awesome customer service! Now I'm off to start stalking my FedEx guy. :tongue_smilie:

 

:iagree: My package just arrived with both ends sliced open from beginning to end and package empty. Nice. Tina said they'd priority mail a package out right away.

[garddwr]

:iagree: My package just arrived with both ends sliced open from beginning to end and package empty. Nice. Tina said they'd priority mail a package out right away.

 

OK, now I want to know which WTM'er was so desperate to get their hands on this curriculum that they assaulted your package and and absconded with the contents!

Edited March 22, 2012 by thegardener
fix typo

[Spy Car]

Thanks for the reply. I've been curious about how the school learning/home learning mesh together for those on this board who afterschool.

 

In our case they mesh well. The school math serves as review. EnVision, while not the greatest program ever, is not terrible and it does have its own challenges. And math homework (which happens 4 days a week) takes my son about 2-5 minutes, where some kids struggle with it. The good news for us is 5 minute homework doesn't cut into his post-school time.

 

What I'm not doing using using "school math" as a spine I'm trying to "supplement." I do my thing, they do theirs.

 

Bill