PeterPan Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Well I can't promise it will hold to other years, but I just finished giving dd her standardized tests for the year (CAT from Seton). Admittedly it's an easy test, but the results in the past have lined up with the Woodcock Johnson and the np tests we've done. Math computation has always been a weak point for her, typically almost 20 points lower. In January, after a lot of bumps and floundering with other stuff, we tried TT pre-algebra. She has done around 85 lessons of it. (Told you we had a bumpy year, lol.) And, drum roll, this is the first year she has been PERFECT on computation!! It just blows my mind how well she did in fact, just very fast and confident. So I know TT takes a lot of hard slamming, and I know we weren't using it on grade level. And of course we may change our tune. But for at least this year it has really been a good change for her. It wasn't so much that anything she did was *new* to her, because it wasn't. It was more that the TT explanations and the gentle repetition and way of thinking made something click. Humanities people speaking to humanities people? Narrative thinkers to narrative thinkers? I don't know. I just know I'm elated, because computation has been a horrendous sore point around here for a LOT of years. I have those low computation scores going back over and over all the way back to 2nd or whenever it was we started testing. So it least it can work out well for SOMEONE. Now if she just tests as well next year. That will be the trick. But I'm really thankful for this year at least! :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Woods Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 :party: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Embassy Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Yay!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonor Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Congratulations!:hurray: Rejoicing with you!:party: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokyomarie Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Congratulations! As I have mentioned before, my middle daughter used TT for two levels- Geometry and Algebra II- after struggling through other curriculum at the Pre-algebra & Algebra I levels. She did great! After finishing Alg. II, I did have her do some ALEKS Alg. II work to review, but ultimately she tested into a pre-calculus level college course shortly after completing TT. She did not have to repeat any coursework that was covered by TT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 (edited) :party: This is great news Elizabeth! I am sure your girl must be really happy too :)! I think the negative publicity started after Jay Wile (the author of the upper level Apologia programs) was a bit negative in an interview. Not sure if this was because he is friends with the author of Video Text but in any case, I was looking to find his comments for you (not sure if you knew about it) and stumbled on something else. It appears that Jeannie Fulbright (the author of the elementary Apologia books) has used Teaching Textbooks and has written a review on it. I thought you might find it interesting so I am linking it for you :). http://homeschoolblogger.com/jeanniefulbright/320861/ Edited June 23, 2012 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterPan Posted June 23, 2012 Author Share Posted June 23, 2012 :party: This is great news Elizabeth! I am sure your girl must be really happy too :)! I think the negative publicity started after Jay Wile (the author of the upper level Apologia programs) was a bit negative in an interview. Not sure if this was because he is friends with the author of Video Text but in any case, I was looking to find his comments for you (not sure if you knew about it) and stumbled on something else. It appears that Jeannie Fulbright (the author of the elementary Apologia books) has used Teaching Textbooks and has written a review on it. I thought you might find it interesting so I am linking it for you :). http://homeschoolblogger.com/jeanniefulbright/320861/ That's very interesting. I read it a couple times trying to understand where she's coming from. It's an old review, so doubtless she has shifted her opinion a few times since then, lol. The thing that confuses me is her comments about the pre-algebra basically being a math 7th course and that her dc was being newly exposed to negative numbers at the end of TT pre-algebra and not getting it. In the edition (2.0) we're using they get into negative numbers about mid-year, not at the end. We first did negative numbers in level C (or B?) of RS, which means that was back in 1st and 2nd grade. I honestly can't fathom writing a review where you slam something for not enough review or inadequate explanations when it's a concept that was typically introduced in most curricula YEARS earlier with manipulatives. We've spent quite a bit of time over the years doing negative numbers with algebra mats, the HoE materials, etc. etc. And in the 2.0 they get into them around the middle of the materials. So I just hope someone doesn't read Fulbright's somewhat scattered review of an old edition and freak out. I'm totally open to the possibility that things will fall apart later, but so far so good. My dd actually gets out the HoE manipulatives and uses them with the TT lessons. So my comment here was on the actual, measurable progress in computation. The CAT and other standardized tests usually break computation and conceptual apart, and there had been a wall for us that we found really hard to break through. I *thought* I was seeing that happening, simply because she looked visibly more at ease. She's still the same child she was, still in the throes of puberty, etc. etc. The only thing that has really changed is that she has been bustin' her butt to go through lessons of TT. And I just like that I have objective evidence to show it working for her, at least this year. We'll watch next year and see how that goes. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 (edited) So I just hope someone doesn't read Fulbright's somewhat scattered review of an old edition and freak out. I'm totally open to the possibility that things will fall apart later, but so far so good. My dd actually gets out the HoE manipulatives and uses them with the TT lessons. I did not want to leave anything hanging before going on my forum break so I just wanted to point out here that I just linked that for you as an fyi ;). I wasn't saying that Fulbright and her review should influence your math choices in any way. The little that I have known you Elizabeth, I know you are a person that weighs things and thinks them through. I just thought I would show you Fulbright's perspective so that you can weigh it and see what you think. I like doing that, personally :). It helps me think about things from different angles/ perspectives, that I might not have thought of otherwise. Anyway, my apologies if I have inadvertently caused confusion or dismay to anyone else reading my post and link provided. Edited June 23, 2012 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellers Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 :party::party: I'm a big TT fan! :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmom2011 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 :party::party: I'm a big TT fan! :) :iagree: We love TT too! :party: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairProspects Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 :hurray::party:Great job to both her and you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MerryAtHope Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 yay! So happy for you & your dd! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4Hisglory Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Your report just made me smile. I'm so happy for both of you!:party: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peacefully Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiramisu Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 I'm very happy for you and dd. :grouphug: How nice to find something that seems to be working and then get that validation. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pen Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 Yay! Congratulations to both of you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paisley Hedgehog Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heathermomster Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 Awesome!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamonaQ Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 Hey! Fantastic!!!!! :001_smile::001_smile::001_smile: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiramisu Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Elizabeth, I just wanted to update you with dd's ACT scores. As you may remember, dd used TT Geometry and Algebra 2, and stopped TT Pre-Calc after chapter 2 after not doing very well with it. Her ACT math scores weren't all that terrific, but it's just too funny that she did the best in plane geometry and trigonometry. She has never studied trigonometry. :confused: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterPan Posted June 25, 2012 Author Share Posted June 25, 2012 Kelli, I've read that three times trying to make heads or tails, and I'm confused as you are. :lol: So you're saying her two best sections on the ACT were where it overlapped with TT or where she hadn't covered it AT ALL??? That's hilarious. How ironic. Superb guesser, eh? Just so you know, I'm with you that it could totally happen that when she goes into radically new territory there's not enough overlap and repetition and things don't get nailed. My *theory* is to have her do Patty Paper Geometry along with the TT algebra 1. That way when she hits TT geometry, it's actually review. I have no clue beyond that. That's as far as I've gotten in my thinking. That stage between algebra 2 and calculus was really nebulous for me in school. I'm not sure what the class was called I took that year, but I don't think we even had a textbook. We just spent the whole year proving theorems. It was totally weird. Then they tried to spend the whole of calculus proving theorems too. I'm not a terribly applied person, but there comes a point where you've sent x or n to infinity so much that you'd actually like to have a USE for something, kwim? It's why I take ANY advice I see on the hs board about math with a stinkin' huge grain of salt, because I was taught with Dolciani and know it's not the end all. It's just one facet. There are more perspectives, more ways to approach the math. That's what makes TT so unique to me, that it's coming in at a sort of humanities angle. But whether it's so sound in instruction and methodology that when she hits radically new materials, that I can't guarantee. I think the overlap and repetition is going to be key for her. But we'll see. The difference so far is amazing. Whatever it is, I'm taking it. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomandlorih Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 :hurray: Good for your dd! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dina in Oklahoma Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Encourging !!! Congrats to DD!!! :party: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.