Diapponted :( .... Math...

[RainbowSprinkles]

So I sat down with DS7 this morning and we did the Saxon Placement Test. He did not do well at all.. He only scored 4 out of 13, which means he needs to start at the beginning. I'm sad and disappointed, but it confirms that Singapore Math is not the right fit for him. But we also did not finish book B yet, and some of the stuff on the test has not been covered yet in SM.

 

So I'm thinking about what I should do here. Finish book 1B and then have him take the test again or save us time and just start with Saxon 1. At the moment I feel like SM is not working for him and I should just go ahead and buy Saxon.

 

What would you do in this situation?

[Melissa B]

Personally, I would finish 1B this year and start in Saxon 2 next year. Everything in Saxon 1 is covered again in Saxon 2 and 3. I can't think of any section in Saxon 2 that doesn't feel like you are starting from the beginning. So long as he recognizes and can write all of his numbers (basically has his kindergarten skills down) Saxon 2 will likely be a good starting point next year.

[pitterpatter]

Could you talk more about what you tried with SM? I assume you started with 1A this year. What books did you use? Did you use the HIG? Was this his first exposure to math curriculum?

[RainbowSprinkles]

Personally, I would finish 1B this year and start in Saxon 2 next year. Everything in Saxon 1 is covered again in Saxon 2 and 3. I can't think of any section in Saxon 2 that doesn't feel like you are starting from the beginning. So long as he recognizes and can write all of his numbers (basically has his kindergarten skills down) Saxon 2 will likely be a good starting point next year.

 

I had this thought as well. Thanks for your input.

[MustardSeedsMum]

Could you talk more about what you tried with SM?

 

:iagree:

 

Can I also add this little tidbit about Singapore Math? In Singapore, children begin Grade 1 the year they turn 7. So depending on your ds' birthdate, he could be a very young Grade 1 (in Singapore terms.) Add that to SM's more challenging approach :lol:, and you could possibly have the situation you're in. (At least this is what I tell myself when I feel like tearing my hair out when doing SM with my kiddos. :D)

 

FWIW, I have a just-turned 8 year old (technically at the end of Grade 2 here, but 3.5 months into Gr2 in Singapore ;) ) and I have been working with him verrrrry slowly with 1A and 1B this school year. There are days where I think he's got a learning disability :001_huh: because he takes FOREVER to grasp a concept. And even then, I find that we have to do LOTS of practice otherwise it's as though we never covered that topic.::blink:

[RainbowSprinkles]

Could you talk more about what you tried with SM? I assume you started with 1A this year. What books did you use? Did you use the HIG? Was this his first exposure to math curriculum?

 

Yes, we did SM 1A. HIG, textbook and workbook. We continue to practice math facts, work on calendar, and also added in coins after I realized he forgot the names and values of them after knowing them a few months ago. We also practice counting up and back and by 10's, 2's, 5's. Along with this, we are now working in SM 1B. HIG, textbook, workbook.

[redsquirrel]

I find those placement tests suspect. I say that for ALL placement tests, I have no experience with Saxon.

 

I think they are made to make a kid using a different program look like they don't know anything. That way the parent will freak out about whatever they are using and switch to the new program.

 

If SM isn't the program for you, then so be it. You must be having some suspicion or you wouldn't have investigated Saxon. But, if you like SM, I would investigate more.

[magnificat]

Personally, I would finish 1B this year and start in Saxon 2 next year. Everything in Saxon 1 is covered again in Saxon 2 and 3. I can't think of any section in Saxon 2 that doesn't feel like you are starting from the beginning. So long as he recognizes and can write all of his numbers (basically has his kindergarten skills down) Saxon 2 will likely be a good starting point next year.

 

 

I couldn't agree more! In my opinion, Saxon 1 is a wonderful Kindergarten math program - especially if it is used as intended.

 

Any change from SM to Saxon or vice versa would be tough because of the vast difference in scope and sequence. If you choose the Saxon route, your son will likely pick up the "Saxon methods" quite readily.

 

Good luck!

[boscopup]

I think they are made to make a kid using a different program look like they don't know anything. That way the parent will freak out about whatever they are using and switch to the new program.

 

I disagree. You're often going to have differences due to scope and sequence. That's not to make a kid feel bad and switch. :tongue_smilie:

 

And fwiw, my son doing Singapore 4B places into Saxon 7/6, so clearly nothing wonky going on with the placement tests to cause me to want to switch. ;)

 

It sounds like Singapore isn't a good fit for the OP's kid. In her position, I'd try Saxon too.

[RainbowSprinkles]

:iagree:

 

Can I also add this little tidbit about Singapore Math? In Singapore, children begin Grade 1 the year they turn 7. So depending on your ds' birthdate, he could be a very young Grade 1 (in Singapore terms.) Add that to SM's more challenging approach :lol:, and you could possibly have the situation you're in. (At least this is what I tell myself when I feel like tearing my hair out when doing SM with my kiddos. :D)

 

FWIW, I have a just-turned 8 year old (technically at the end of Grade 2 here, but 3.5 months into Gr2 in Singapore ;) ) and I have been working with him verrrrry slowly with 1A and 1B this school year. There are days where I think he's got a learning disability :001_huh: because he takes FOREVER to grasp a concept. And even then, I find that we have to do LOTS of practice otherwise it's as though we never covered that topic.::blink:

 

 

My son turns 8 this August. It does take him longer to learn and understand things compared to my daughter. We are making progress in math and reading, but it's been a long and slow road.

[LinRTX]

I would start Saxon 2 with him. My oldest daughter (now 22) was the first I used Saxon all the way with. I started her at 7 in Saxon 2. We tried Miquon (which I love) since it had worked so well with my oldest. I had taught her to add with the C rods in K (with a book that no longer exists) before going with the full Miquon program. At the end of first grade she was so totally confused she could no longer add.

 

We did Saxon 2 the next year and finished Saxon Calculus in 12th grade. I am definitely a believer in Saxon and have never used anything below Saxon 2. It reviews enough there should be no problem.

 

Linda

[wapiti]

So I sat down with DS7 this morning and we did the Saxon Placement Test. He did not do well at all.. He only scored 4 out of 13, which means he needs to start at the beginning. I'm sad and disappointed, but it confirms that Singapore Math is not the right fit for him. But we also did not finish book B yet, and some of the stuff on the test has not been covered yet in SM.

 

I think the placement test is a completely separate issue from whether or not SM is "working" for your ds. Why would you test him on material that he has not yet been taught and then be concerned about the score? How did he do on the questions that were on material that he WAS taught? I'd completely throw out the questions he hadn't been taught yet. What would his score be then - 4 out of what? Then, I'd look at the questions on material that he had been taught but got wrong, and ask why - did he not understand a concept, did he forget a math fact, did he make a silly mistake - and what were those topics? Can you go back and review them?

 

I would resist the temptation to use a placement test score (or a math curriculum generally) as a black box - I'd look much closer at the substance of the actual questions and use my own judgment.

 

FWIW, for first grade math, I'd be most concerned with the "core" topics of addition facts/number bonds and place value. Topics beyond that, like clocks and money and such, would not particularly concern me for placement decisions - it's simple enough to add from elsewhere if that turned out to be necessary later on.

Edited April 10, 2012 by wapiti

[jennynd]

What type mistakes did he made. Does he understand the concept?

If He does understand but just make computation error. I will keep SM but looking into MM to add extra practice. If he clearly not understand the concept. I will then look for other program.

[Spy Car]

As one who I'm sure is perceived as a "fan-boy" of Primary Mathematics (Singapore) I will say that at the early developmental stages that I believe that the "core" program (Textbooks/Workbooks) leap too quickly into "pictorial" means f teaching that a child may (or may not) get.

 

Singapore advocates for a progression of concrete>pictorial>abstract learning. You will see it in all their literature, books, and web information. But in the "core" books the "concrete" stage of learning is given short-shrift IMO.

 

But when children go "number-bond" like activities with Cuisenaire Rods, and combine "parts" to find "wholes" or have a "whole" and one "part" and find the "difference" using rods they have the opportunity to cement the concept in a hands on fashion build autonomy and competence.

 

Whole-parts math is about "getting" the model. If one can "turn the lights on" using developmentally appropriate means then children can "own the concept."

 

It can be hard for us as adults to remember that children think differently than we do as adults, and require different tools.

 

If the developmental hurdle can be leap (and there are playful and fun ways to do so) then the sort of Math Model that is developed in Singapore Math (and other like-minded programs) is a very powerful tool indeed.

 

Sometimes it can take so little to make a concept like "how much more" or "how much less" clear with a tool like C Rods, when words and pictures have brought nothing but incomprehension. Ask me how I know.

 

Before someone quits a whole-parts math approach I would at least ask them to consider what means they use to teach the introductory concepts, and think about whether they are being covered in the "concrete" way that many (most) young children seem to need to grasp the model.

 

My 2 cents.

 

Bill

Edited April 10, 2012 by Spy Car

[wapiti]

Sometimes it can take so little to make a concept like "how much more" or "how much less" clear with a tool like C Rods, when words and pictures have brought nothing but incomprehension.

 

Bill, by any chance might you have a link, or a reference to a page in something (a Miquon book, which of course I lent to a friend :glare:), or a short explanation for how to do this with C-Rods? I may do a tutoring session or two for a friend whose dc is having trouble with adding to 20. While I think that place value is probably the main issue, I don't know yet whether there may be lack of uncerstanding in other areas such as number bonds. (student is using a traditional curriculum at a school.)

[coffeegal]

So I sat down with DS7 this morning and we did the Saxon Placement Test. He did not do well at all.. He only scored 4 out of 13, which means he needs to start at the beginning. I'm sad and disappointed, but it confirms that Singapore Math is not the right fit for him. But we also did not finish book B yet, and some of the stuff on the test has not been covered yet in SM.

 

So I'm thinking about what I should do here. Finish book 1B and then have him take the test again or save us time and just start with Saxon 1. At the moment I feel like SM is not working for him and I should just go ahead and buy Saxon.

 

What would you do in this situation?

 

I was in this situation about 9 years ago. We switched over to Saxon 1,and I've never regretted the decision. We went back and tried Singapore again, but it produces tears in my household. Mammoth Math was worse for my family than Singapore. Life of Fred was a disaster. Saxon gets the job done and done well.

 

How is your son doing with math facts? If he's somewhat comfortable adding and subtracting within 20, go ahead and start Saxon 2. Otherwise, I'd start with Saxon 1. You can move faster by combining 2 lessons. Do 1 of the meetings, and cover both lessons and the side A of the worksheets. Once you run into new material, go ahead and slow down.

 

:001_smile:

[Spy Car]

Bill, by any chance might you have a link, or a reference to a page in something (a Miquon book, which of course I lent to a friend :glare:), or a short explanation for how to do this with C-Rods? I may do a tutoring session or two for a friend whose dc is having trouble with adding to 20. While I think that place value is probably the main issue, I don't know yet whether there may be lack of uncerstanding in other areas such as number bonds. (student is using a traditional curriculum at a school.)

 

You could easily "intuit" much of the C Rod work/play. There is an initial stage where a child needs to play with the rods, comparing them, learning that if this one (the white one) is 1-Unit that the red one is 2-Units. While adult brains worry about picking up these relationships (which are based on"length" not color) children tend to do it quickly.

 

One classic early activity is making "stairs." The child starts with a 1-Unit rod and then (working left to right) places a rod (oriented vertically) that is one unit larger next to it. This progression continues to 10 and forms a stair-step going up, and then they continue going down. This but one idea.

 

For littles there is a pre-Miquon booklet (it would work for any program you wanted to to use C Rods with) make by a woman named Miranda Hughes. I believe her blog is called "nurtured by love." I did not use this booklet (discovered it too late) but others have enjoyed it.

 

I really like Miquon with Singapore. It think it delivers exactly the missing elements one wishes were built into Primary Mathematics (but aren't) and Singapore extends the conceptual introductions in Miquon is a very systematic way. Combined they are synergistic.

 

For those who want a more straight-forward guide to C Rods than Miquon, Elle and others have recommended Mathematics Made Meaningful. I have not usd it myself, but the samples look like a very clear "here is how to use them" approach sans the "discovery" method. I happen to highly-value the guided discovery of the Miquon approach, but this is an alternative for those that don't.

 

Once the C Rods are understood as values, children can start to make "trains." These are stacks (horizontally oriented) of all the combinations that add up to a certain number. Say you had "8," a child could stack 7 and 1, 6 and 2, 5 and 3, 4 and 4, 3 and 5, 2 and 6 and 1 and 7.

 

Then they do number-bond like work. If they have two "parts" (say rods that are 3 and 5) they lay them end to end and find another rod that is the same overall length.

 

If they have the "whole" (say an 8) and one "part" (say 3) they can lay the 3 rod on top of the 8 rod and find the "difference."

 

Same sort of thing with "how much greater than/less than" type questions.

 

For this that have the Singapore HIGs, all the activities suggested for "Linking Cubes" can be easily translated into C Rod activities.

 

For place value understanding I like using base-10 "flats" as 100 values (these are the same scale as C Rods) Orange C Rods as Ten values and the other C Rods as Unit values. And then using a "math name" scheme (I used 3-Hundreds 6-Tens 5-Units for three hundred and sixty five). So 11 would be 1-Ten 1-Unit in "math names." We also discussed the "strange" English naming conventions, with words like "eleven" so he got both, but so many time a prompt of "how many Tens?" or "how many Units?" set thing right when there was a breakdown of understanding.

 

That's the quick version.

 

Bill

[walkermamaof4]

Another viable option would be Rightstart B. It helps the child see their facts. We found it wonderful and the games were great too.

[hollyh]

I would use a sm placement test to determine if he is learning the material. Use Saxon to determine where to place him if switching. That way scope and sequence are not a problem.

[wapiti]

That's the quick version.

 

Bill

 

Thanks for writing all that out - I really appreciate it :). Little things like calling it making "trains" are what I needed. I really like the place value section in MM 1B (which involves the activities you mention, ten-one and so on) but I'm not sure yet whether I would have to back up further than that, which might involve playing with c-rods.

[MomatHWTK]

The Khan Academy Singapore lessons (starting with level 3) cover place value in a way that really clicked with my middle son and helped my DD a little. I had to fast forward through some of the lecture because it moves a little slow.

 

For my artistic DD, to teach her that every placement of a digit meant something different I replaced the place value names with pictures of fruit. So, a "1" in the apples place meant that you had 1 apple but the same "1" in the pineapple place meant it was a pineapple. (You probably had to be there. LOL!)

 

Dimes and pennies are helpful for place value.

 

We also played a game where I would write a number on white board and then ask the kids to tell me what was in the "hundreds" place, etc.

 

Visual DD is doing better with addition facts drawing them out (i.e. 10 dots for "10") and then covering a subset of dots to figure out the two parts of the number bond.

Edited April 10, 2012 by MomatHWTK

[Spy Car]

Thanks for writing all that out - I really appreciate it :). Little things like calling it making "trains" are what I needed. I really like the place value section in MM 1B (which involves the activities you mention, ten-one and so on) but I'm not sure yet whether I would have to back up further than that, which might involve playing with c-rods.

 

After they make "trains" (and for the life of me I don't know why they are called that since they are not laid end-to-end, but "stacked") they can be given equations.

 

My little man was thrilled to get problems like 10-[ ]=7 or 5+[ ]=8 when he was just starting out because he could figure them out himself using the rods. Sometime this meant a little "trial and error" but he did it himself, and that inspired confidence and understanding and a sense of "fun." All these worked together to make an approach that was both enjoyable and highly effective. By the time he hit "number bonds" in Singapore the concept was a piece of cake.

 

The whole bar-diagram method of word problem solving is just an extension of this same model kids get from playing with C Rods.

 

Best wishes with your tutoring!

 

Bill

[...................]

Finish the year and start Saxon 2. I am an experienced Saxon user and I can tell you that 2 reviews everything extensively from Saxon 1.

[RainbowSprinkles]

I think the placement test is a completely separate issue from whether or not SM is "working" for your ds. Why would you test him on material that he has not yet been taught and then be concerned about the score? How did he do on the questions that were on material that he WAS taught? I'd completely throw out the questions he hadn't been taught yet. What would his score be then - 4 out of what? Then, I'd look at the questions on material that he had been taught but got wrong, and ask why - did he not understand a concept, did he forget a math fact, did he make a silly mistake - and what were those topics? Can you go back and review them?

 

I would resist the temptation to use a placement test score (or a math curriculum generally) as a black box - I'd look much closer at the substance of the actual questions and use my own judgment.

 

FWIW, for first grade math, I'd be most concerned with the "core" topics of addition facts/number bonds and place value. Topics beyond that, like clocks and money and such, would not particularly concern me for placement decisions - it's simple enough to add from elsewhere if that turned out to be necessary later on.

 

 

Even though some of the things have not been taught yet through SM, I have been working on them separately with him. Things like the calendar, money, skip counting.

 

The only thing on the test he had no exposure of ever was the clock and surprisingly he did get one of them right.

[coffeefreak]

Just out of curiosity, what made you choose Saxon over another program? Why are you leaving Singapore? Forgive me if I've missed a thread where you discussed all this, but I think WHY you leave one program indicates WHERE you should go and maybe Saxon isn't the place for your kiddo.

 

We started oldest off with Saxon and it was a total bust. We went to MUS, but then left MUS and went to Singapore in 1st grade because dd couldn't add and subtract using MUS's concepts. Singapore helped, but I always looked at it as a supplemental program for us. It was so out of the box to me and my ideas of what a traditional math program should be. Once we finished the 1A and 1B book, we scrapped it and went to Horizons in 2nd grade. It had nothing to do with Singapore, and everything to do with my insecurities and wanting her to be in a "Normal" math program. Since then, I have discovered she does best with the Unit Study method of studying math, not the spiral method of Saxon, Horizons or A Beka. One concept at a time with review at the end. She did well with MUS, Singapore, and I think (hope, pray) she'll do well with BJU. I wish I had stayed with Singapore for at least another semester before I decided to move on.

 

Blessings!

Dorinda