"Postponing" Math until 10-12 y/o

[Soror]

I watched the Finland Phenomenon (well most of it as I fell asleep!), very interesting. We started formal Math at 6 and that was perfect for ds. I'm planning to do about the same with dd. We hit the ground running when we did start and it has went well.

[stripe]

Can you name an example of that "expense"?

Is this like, having no personal life because people are so busy studying 20 hours a day and whatnot?

 

I do think that, if we consider being a student to be a child's occupation, we should expect them to spend some amount of time, that is substantial. Not that the child gives up all other interests, never goes outside to play, never speaks to her family, or whatever, but I think there is certainly a vast middle ground between the typical American student's life and someone who is chained to their desk for 12 years!

[Hunter]

regentrude, somehow in a way I have yet to be able to figure out, your responses to my words often make no sense to me. Somehow what I write is not well understood by you, or I consistently misunderstand you. And the more we talk, the more confused I get.

 

I appreciate your responses, so we all can read them, but I'm not going to respond directly to all of them, because... I don't how to.

 

As for child development, are you saying that European students that spend LESS time on task that American students, are starting math topics earlier at ALL grades? I was under the impression that arithmetic was often delayed until after reading fluency was accomplished. I was under the impression that European students had higher test scores in general, with less time on task, but that topics were introduced later, or at about the same time, until the later grades.

[regentrude]

Hunter, I am sorry you have trouble understanding my responses. Let me see if I can answer your questions. I use Germany as my example for details because that is what I am most familiar with:

 

As for child development, are you saying that European students that spend LESS time on task that American students, are starting math topics earlier at ALL grades? I was under the impression that arithmetic was often delayed until after reading fluency was accomplished. I was under the impression that European students had higher test scores in general, with less time on task, but that topics were introduced later, or at about the same time, until the later grades.

 

Kids are starting school at age 6 (or late starters at 7) with first grade. ("kindergarten" is here preschool and not devoted to academics; kids play and learn to color). Reading and math instruction begin simultaneously in first grade; I have never heard of math being delayed until reading fluency is accomplished.

School days are shorter: Elementary school gets out at 11am or 12 noon. Middle schoolers are done by 1:30; maybe once a week they have school until 2:30. Middle school students have four periods of math weekly; each period is 45 minutes.

Arithmetic instruction with positive integers is finished by the end of grade 4; at that point, they are about even with their US peers, or even a tad behind. In 5th and 6th grade, students study fractions but also a lot of geometry. For example, geometry in 6th grade covers formal proofs of triangle congruency, a topic that is studied in the US in 10th grade geometry. 7th grade contains, among other topics, linear equations (=algebra 1). quadratics are taught in 9th grade. Non-college bound students leave school with a diploma after 10th grade; college bound students are required to take two years of calculus in 11th and 12th.

 

The main difference in math instruction everywhere is that math is not compartmentalized. There is no "algebra 1" or "geometry". Simpler algebra topics are introduced earlier, more abstract ones later. This allows progress through the material without having to wait until students are mature enough for the harder abstract topics.

 

In order to compare pace, let me tell you what forced us to homeschool: my kids were in a good public elementary/middle school. For the 2nd half of 6th grade, we planned to spend a semester in Germany. So, at the beginning of the school year, I translated the German 6th grade math curriculum and asked the math department of our school which topics would be covered by Christmas. They informed me that none of those topics would be covered before Jr High school and that I should find a tutor if I wanted my child to be up to speed to attend school in Germany. That is when we pulled her out of school: a full year behind in math compared to her German peers.

 

The big time waster in the US schools are the Middle grades, when math education stalls from 5th through 8th grade. Average students do not need four years to be taught fractions over and over again. During these years, students in European schools progress in math while US students are parked until they are considered mature enough for all topics of algebra 1. I consider this one of the biggest problems.

 

The other big problem is, of course, teacher training; European math teachers for grades 5-12 are trained in math and have a far better subject knowledge. (Elementary school teachers teach all subjects and do not have specific math teaching degrees).

 

I hope this answers your questions, and I hope it makes sense.

Edited August 23, 2012 by regentrude

[regentrude]

Is this like, having no personal life because people are so busy studying 20 hours a day and whatnot?

 

I do think that, if we consider being a student to be a child's occupation, we should expect them to spend some amount of time, that is substantial. Not that the child gives up all other interests, never goes outside to play, never speaks to her family, or whatever, but I think there is certainly a vast middle ground between the typical American student's life and someone who is chained to their desk for 12 years!

 

Chained to their desk? That is not the reality in Europe. Back home, school days are actually shorter: elementary school ends at 11 or noon. Middle school at 1:30 (times vary for different days of the week.)

Kids have free time, play, learn instruments, play sports, hang out, spend time with their families.

I can't speak for countries like Korea, but at least in Germany, school children have more free time than US kids. And that seems to be similar in other European countries. I always felt sorry for my children when they were still attending public school in the US because the school day was so incredibly long... with little to show for.

Edited August 23, 2012 by regentrude

[Soror]

Regentrude I always appreciate your input to threads. The way you describe education is what makes sense to me so I love to hear details about how it works in other places and how you have made it work for you. We start a bit later, don't spend a ton of time but are trying to be rigorous in what we do accomplish. It is nice to see rigor being accomplished within those parameters when so often it is said that rigor means starting super young and spending all day and doing everything under the sun. However, it is clear that there is evidence from yourself (and other similarly inclined hs'ers) as well as many European countries that there are other models for success.

[stripe]

Chained to their desk? That is not the reality in Europe. Back home, school days are actually shorter: elementary school ends at 11 or noon. Middle school at 1:30 (times vary for different days of the week.)

Kids have free time, play, learn instruments, play sports, hang out, spend time with their families.

I can't speak for countries like Korea, but at least in Germany, school children have more free time than US kids. And that seems to be similar in other European countries. I always felt sorry for my children when they were still attending public school in the US because the school day was so incredibly long... with little to show for.

 

I wasn't really being serious. ;) I was wondering if that was what Hunter meant by the expense of high academic achievement. My (immigrant) husband went home for lunch through the end of third grade. And he actually remembers what he learned in 4th grade. He also had almost no homework, really until high school. A very different experience all around.

 

I think the perception of high performing countries is this massive academic overload. While I think it may be true of high school students in Korea and Japan, I am not sure how much it is true for elementary school students in any country, nor to what degree it is really inappropriate to expect teenagers to spend a good amount of time on academics, as opposed to, say, hanging out, watching tv, applying makeup, and playing sports.

[Hunter]

I am always curious about what European schools are doing, but far less curious about what Asian schools are doing. So often the Asian schools are the ones being talked about and set as an example. I don't want to copy methods that take more time than the US schools. I want to see what I can copy from the EFFICIENT models.

 

I'm also not all that interested in the methods used here in the USA and in the USSR, during the cold war. The USA results were disastrous. I've heard conflicting rumors about the USSR. And with the economy the way it is, and some third world countries beginning to compete with the countries that have recently been unchallenged, I'm seeing more of the mentality that was present during the cold war, popping up.

 

I've seen magazine articles and bits and pieces here and there over the decades that showed delayed math in at least one European country. In particular I remember pictures of children reading picture books without shoes on, and children outside playing in the snow. That magazine article was the first time I was introduced to higher math scores with LESS time spent on task. The magazine was pressing USA educators to look to Europe NOT Asia as a model.

 

Not too long ago, on a human rights website, there was a article about Asian countries now being accused of human rights violations concerning the long hours some students are being forced to study, not just by the schools, but by their parents. Last time I mentioned this article on the high school board, someone felt personally offended, :001_huh: and I just dropped it, because...I couldn't understand what I had done wrong by mentioning the article. Sometimes I can be rude and unaware without knowing it though. Moms of aspies can be like that sometimes :tongue_smilie:

 

No one in real life has EVER accused me of being easy on my boys or any students I have taught over the decades. :lol: BUT, I don't believe that pushing academics to the degree that I sometimes see, is healthy, either. Academics are CRITICAL but are not the ONLY part of a quality well ROUNDED life.

 

I personally don't think the European and Asian maths are the same thing.

 

And also I--and many other moms here--just don't have the educational background and time to teach some math curriculums, and will do more harm that good attempting, but failing, to use them properly.

Edited August 24, 2012 by Hunter

[Hunter]

Hunter, I am sorry you have trouble understanding my responses. Let me see if I can answer your questions. I use Germany as my example for details because that is what I am most familiar with:

 

I hope this answers your questions, and I hope it makes sense.

 

I understood all this better thank you.

 

So it's at the middle years that the German system become more efficient. The students don't work harder, and it's not just expectations that are set higher, but the methods are more EFFICIENT? And the teachers are better trained?

[jennynd]

I am always curious about what European schools are doing, but far less curious about what Asian schools are doing. So often the Asian schools are the ones being talked about and set as an example. I don't want to copy methods that take more time than the US schools. I want to see what I can copy from the EFFICIENT models.

 

I'm also not all that interested in the methods used here in the USA and in the USSR, during the cold war. The USA results were disastrous. I've heard conflicting rumors about the USSR. And with the economy the way it is, and some third world countries beginning to compete with the countries that have recently been unchallenged, I'm seeing more of the mentality that was present during the cold war, popping up.

 

I've seen magazine articles and bits and pieces here and there over the decades that showed delayed math in at least one European country. In particular I remember pictures of children reading picture books without shoes on, and children outside playing in the snow. That magazine article was the first time I was introduced to higher math scores with LESS time spent on task. The magazine was pressing USA educators to look to Europe NOT Asia as a model.

 

Not too long ago, on a human rights website, there was a article about Asian countries now being accused of human rights violations concerning the long hours some students are being forced to study, not just by the schools, but by their parents. Last time I mentioned this article on the high school board, someone felt personally offended, :001_huh: and I just dropped it, because...I couldn't understand what I had done wrong by mentioning the article. Sometimes I can be rude and unaware without knowing it though. Moms of aspies can be like that sometimes :tongue_smilie:

 

No one in real life has EVER accused me of being easy on my boys or any students I have taught over the decades. :lol: BUT, I don't believe that pushing academics to the degree that I sometimes see, is healthy, either. Academics are CRITICAL but are not the ONLY part of a quality well ROUNDED life.

 

I personally don't think the European and Asian maths are the same thing.

 

And also I--any many other moms here--just don't have the educational background and time to teach some math curriculums, and will do more harm that good attempting, but failing, to use them properly.

 

Funny things is.. Taiwan copied German education system. If u look at how asia and europe system, alot similarity. It is same thing with math, there is no seperating algebra and geometry, it is integrated. Most Asia country started algebra at 7 th grade, not 9th. But at one point when u have so many people fighting for limited spot in university, from high school entry exam to college. In my time, it was 14% to get in decent high school and 20%-30% to get in college. My Dad's time, it was 7%-11% to get in college. So, tell me what is ur other choice? u got to study. It is not about human right, it is about competition to get into the top school so they can get a better life. U really don't seem understand this part of dynamic. It is not about the system or curriculum, it is about u need to compete to be one of that small percentage to get in . We sure like to go have fun, but when u snooze, u lose

 

Like it or not, u gonna see more and more of that in this country. Our kids are not compete with US kids anymore, our kids are compete with kids around the world. they are flood of people from other countries waiting to take jobs from our kids. As an engineer, I am seeing that 1st hand.

[boscopup]

Hunter, I'm trying to figure out how Asian math takes so much more time than US math in your mind? You like Saxon 5/4 and up. Everyone talks about how long those lessons are. I use Singapore, and the lessons are short and sweet. I spend half the time teaching Asian math as I would a Saxon lesson. So for efficiency, I'm glad I chose a more efficient math.

 

I also don't see why you can't be efficient and still teach formal math. My K'er struggles to read, so we are really focusing on that. At the same time, we are doing formal math (Singapore) and informal math (Life of Fred). Our school day, including read-alouds, is about 1 hour, and that's doing first grade math, not K math. It just doesn't take much time to do lower elementary subjects like that. You don't have to take out math to have an efficient school day, nor do you have to sacrifice conceptual understanding. There are a million ways to teach math, both efficiently and inefficiently, and the country the math comes from matters not when it comes to efficiency.

[regentrude]

So it's at the middle years that the German system become more efficient. The students don't work harder, and it's not just expectations that are set higher, but the methods are more EFFICIENT? And the teachers are better trained?

 

Yes.

Starting in 5th grade, children are tracked into two different tracks. A college prep track through 12th grade, a non-college prep track through 10th grade. This means that classes are more homogeneous with respect to ability. (And yes, there is the possibility to go to college even if a student is on the non-college prep track; the program that leads to the Abitur exam which is required for university entrance takes three years for a student graduating with the 10 year diploma.)

My statements about math sequence are true even for the non-college prep track; I specifically looked up the curriculum. (They move a bit slower and do not take calculus.)

The teaching is generally more efficient in all subjects. Since my kids attended ps in the US, I had the opportunity to see how much time is wasted in schools for non-instructional activities. In German schools, the focus is on academics. Fewer assemblies and less time wasted during the school day. Fewer unrelated activities in class.

 

The teachers are better trained.

When I still lived in Germany (10 years ago), all teachers (except elementary) had to study at the university for five years and get a degree that is equivalent to a Masters. In the last years they have changed the university system to make it similar to the US system. There are now both bachelor and masters programs, and I was not able to find out quickly which degree is required for which school. Teachers for vocational schools, non-college prep, and college prep schools have different degree programs and requirements.

 

Teacher students must pass a standardized State Exam to graduate (this is being phased out as universities change over to the new system; not sure what exactly the changes entail). I found samples of this exam for aspiring high school math teachers; they include differential equations, number theory, complex analysis, analytical geometry, statistics.

Edited August 24, 2012 by regentrude

[regentrude]

I'm also not all that interested in the methods used here in the USA and in the USSR, during the cold war. The USA results were disastrous. I've heard conflicting rumors about the USSR. .

 

As little as I like the communist system, which I know first hand from growing up in East Germany: the public school education was excellent in math and sciences. Less so in humanities because of the communist bias (but there is no bias in math). Fairly good in languages, despite the absence of native speakres and resources; I became fluent in two foreign languages.

In terms of math education, the USSR schools were top notch.

Edited August 24, 2012 by regentrude

[Soror]

I noticed that in Finland all the teachers have Master's degrees as well. I know around here that is fairly rare.

[JennyD]

But at one point when u have so many people fighting for limited spot in university, from high school entry exam to college. In my time, it was 14% to get in decent high school and 20%-30% to get in college. My Dad's time, it was 7%-11% to get in college. So, tell me what is ur other choice? u got to study. It is not about human right, it is about competition to get into the top school so they can get a better life. U really don't seem understand this part of dynamic. It is not about the system or curriculum, it is about u need to compete to be one of that small percentage to get in . We sure like to go have fun, but when u snooze, u lose

 

 

I taught for a couple of years in a Japanese middle school, and this was pretty much my impression as well. The elementary school years were wonderful, but once the kids hit middle school it was *all* about the high school entrance exams. The focus at school became extremely narrow, and the kids who were hoping to get into a good high school spent tremendously long hours after at cram schools. It was the structure of opportunity, not the curriculum or even the philosophy of education, that dictated the long hours.

 

On higher math education for elementary school teachers, wasn't that the core puzzle that Liping Ma set out to solve in her dissertation -- that even though elementary math teachers in China had far less formal education than elementary math teachers in the US, Chinese students still performed much better? And IIRC, her conclusion was that despite their significantly lower levels of education the Chinese teachers had greater knowledge of and interest in fundamental mathematics than the college-educated US teachers. I wonder if anyone else has followed up on her research?

Edited August 24, 2012 by JennyD

[wapiti]

And also I--and many other moms here--just don't have the educational background and time to teach some math curriculums, and will do more harm that good attempting, but failing, to use them properly.

 

This brings up an interesting point, that many curricula are not necessarily designed to work with (or around) a teacher who lacks a certain foundation to properly communicate what's contained in the TM, and this is such an enormous problem for US schools. It is worth noting that Math Mammoth attempts to deal with this by directing itself to the student without a teacher manual. (I am looking forward to seeing how MM works in a school near me, though they are just starting out with it, so it will be a while.) Something similar could be said of AoPS, though they probably never thought of their method in that light, i.e., a teacher's lack of foundation.

Edited August 24, 2012 by wapiti

[Roadrunner]

As little as I like the communist system, which I know first hand from growing up in East Germany: the public school education was excellent in math and sciences. Less so in humanities because of the communist bias (but there is no bias in math). Fairly good in languages, despite the absence of native speakres and resources; I became fluent in two foreign languages.

In terms of math education, the USSR schools were top notch.

 

My mom always says that USSR copied old German school system.

When you describe your experience, you are describing mine. I was home by noon in elementary school and we accomplished more than what I see my kids accomplishing in 6 hours every day. I still have my first grade math homework notebook and nobody believes me that it's truly 1st grade.

As much as I despise the USSR, they did have a simpler and stronger educational system. I still remember the shock on the faces of American kids on a cultural exchange when we told them that we studied physics, chemistry, bio and math every year and every semester and on most days in high school that meant 2 different science classes.

Edited August 24, 2012 by Roadrunner

[serendipitous journey]

...

 

On higher math education for elementary school teachers, wasn't that the core puzzle that Liping Ma set out to solve in her dissertation -- that even though elementary math teachers in China had far less formal education than elementary math teachers in the US, Chinese students still performed much better? And IIRC, her conclusion was that despite their significantly lower levels of education the Chinese teachers had greater knowledge of and interest in fundamental mathematics than the college-educated US teachers. I wonder if anyone else has followed up on her research?

 

I am curious about Liping Ma's work; esp. because China is not known for producing esp. good maths thinkers at the high levels (this is relative to the numbers of such people you might expect from their educational population base, not to say that there are not extraordinary Chinese mathematicians); and our friends familiar with the Chinese educational system do not seem to have the feeling that it is designed to produce good thinkers, as such, either mathematically or otherwise. -- though this perhaps stems from the intense competition to get into good schools, which is a very performance-focused metric ...

Edited August 24, 2012 by serendipitous journey

[serendipitous journey]

As little as I like the communist system, which I know first hand from growing up in East Germany: the public school education was excellent in math and sciences. Less so in humanities because of the communist bias (but there is no bias in math). Fairly good in languages, despite the absence of native speakres and resources; I became fluent in two foreign languages.

In terms of math education, the USSR schools were top notch.

 

My mom always says that USSR copied old German school system.

When you describe your experience, you are describing mine. I was home by noon in elementary school and we accomplished more than what I see my kids accomplishing in 6 hours every day. I still have my first grade math homework notebook and nobody believes me that it's truly 1st grade.

As much as I despise the USSR, they did have a simpler and stronger educational system. I still remember the shock on the faces of American kids on a cultural exchange when we told them that we studied physics, chemistry, bio and math every year and every semester and on most days in high school that meant 2 different science classes.

 

... my Eastern Bloc friends are the only folks I know who believe to their cores that women are just natively talented in maths as men ... perhaps correlated ...

[jennynd]

My mom always says that USSR copied old German school system.

.

And I heard China copied USSR. Funny how that works

[jennynd]

I am curious about Liping Ma's work; esp. because China is not known for producing esp. good maths thinkers at the high levels (this is relative to the numbers of such people you might expect from their educational population base, not to say that there are not extraordinary Chinese mathematicians); and our friends familiar with the Chinese educational system do not seem to have the feeling that it is designed to produce good thinkers, as such, either mathematically or otherwise. -- though this perhaps stems from the intense competition to get into good schools, which is a very performance-focused metric ...

 

Part of me agree with you, part of me not.

 

If you stop by any top notch graduate school in Math or Science, you see more Chinese students than any other races. When I was in graduate school (mechanical and aerospace engineering), we have class of 16. 4 of the Chinese always score the top 4 spot, with 2 Russian somewhere is that mix and US student my hubby included always in the middle,

But yes to Chinese not creating "top, top" math students. Part of is culture, Chines has more inner personality than US, Indias .. Chinese tend to polish everything to perfect before than will show people rather than some culture when they know a scale of 3, they talk like they know 10. If a Chinese knows 10, they talk like they only know 3.

Another part of it is competition and a lot focus on memorization. I insist that our math and science education is just about perfect. But the memorization is killing us. We have to memorized what Confucius said. "word by words", What Sun Yat-Sen said word by word. Not just little motto thing, but whole speech. In china's case. the memorized Mou's word by word. Same thing with vocabulary, you got to memorize what is in the book "word by word". God forbidden you replace one word to explain a vocabulary which has exact same meaning, that will be wrong. Memorized the English textbook, Chinese textbook .. the whole article.......etc.. There is not a lot free thinking, there is no Chinese literature.. just memorize , memorize, and memorize some more.

IMO, that is the problem. because the competition, they have to make thing "standard" to "fairly" separate out the "good" student.

[Hunter]

Boscopup,

 

I am big fan of Saxon in SPECIFIC circumstances that are common in the homeschooling community. Sometimes my choice of Saxon isn't because I think it's the best way to teach MATH, but that it fits into the entire curriculum PACKAGE and the LIFE of the family.

 

Also I tend to reply to certain types of posts and don't respond to others. So even though I can be repetitive with what I post, I don't think that ALL, or even most, people should use my personal favorites. When certain math threads start, I don't point out to a mom, that I think she should NOT use Saxon. I just don't say anything at all, because I think the thread is just doing fine without my contribution.

 

I absolutely think some members here should use Asian Math textbooks. And that for some families, it would actually be irresponsible for them not to.

 

I do not believe in a one-size-fits-all curriculum, ESPECIALLY for homeschool families. There are families here with gifted children, money and highly trained parents. I seldom respond to posts for families like that, unless they hit a glitch situation, in which I think I have one specific piece of advice, that is NOT attached to the general mantra that I preach to families with less resources.

 

I post to INDIVIDUALS about their INDIVIDUAL situation, or mind my own business. I do a lot of minding my own business here, believe it or not :-) I mean seriously, there are people who do NOT need MY advice about ANYTHING, and have made it pretty clear they would prefer that I not even be a contributor in certain general conversations :lol:

Edited August 24, 2012 by Hunter

[Ellie]

My favorite article on delaying formal math: The Story of an Experiment.

[Hunter]

Funny things is.. Taiwan copied German education system. If u look at how asia and europe system, alot similarity. It is same thing with math, there is no seperating algebra and geometry, it is integrated. Most Asia country started algebra at 7 th grade, not 9th. But at one point when u have so many people fighting for limited spot in university, from high school entry exam to college. In my time, it was 14% to get in decent high school and 20%-30% to get in college. My Dad's time, it was 7%-11% to get in college. So, tell me what is ur other choice? u got to study. It is not about human right, it is about competition to get into the top school so they can get a better life. U really don't seem understand this part of dynamic. It is not about the system or curriculum, it is about u need to compete to be one of that small percentage to get in . We sure like to go have fun, but when u snooze, u lose

 

Like it or not, u gonna see more and more of that in this country. Our kids are not compete with US kids anymore, our kids are compete with kids around the world. they are flood of people from other countries waiting to take jobs from our kids. As an engineer, I am seeing that 1st hand.

 

This is exactly what I'm talking about. This mentality affects curriculum writers and can cause MAJOR problems when applied to the average ability students. Test scores can drop instead rise, when the REALITY of the development of these children and the teachers' training is ignored. Not EVERYONE can COMPETE in maths. And even if they can, the bar just gets raised until they can't. Competition is like that.

 

Also I am VERY aware that countries have copied methods from each other. But methods gets tweaked and adapted. There are specific features of Asian and cold war maths that don't allow for the correct pacing and priorities of average ability students and set them and their teachers up for failure.

Edited August 24, 2012 by Hunter

[regentrude]

There are specific features of Asian and cold war maths that don't allow for the correct pacing and priorities of average ability students and set them and their teachers up for failure.

 

Could you give an example? I am not sure what specific features you are talking about.

In the USSR (and the whole Eastern block), during the cold war, the school system was highly uniform. The main political goal was to offer the same education to everybody and to level any educational gaps that existed between children from families of intellectuals and children from families with a working class background. So, if the countries managed to educate their students well in math, this was geared towards their average students, because special nurturing of naturally gifted students would NOT have fit the political agenda.

The results you see from students educated in the Eastern block before the fall of communism is the result of an education geared towards the broad masses, the average learner. As much as I hate communism- but that is the one department where they achieved far superior results than the US public education.

So it might be especially the "cold war maths" of the Soviet union that you want to look at - because they applied to the average learner in a huge country, not some small specially nurtured elite. (For example, in East Germany, with the exception of a tiny number of focus schools, there was no tracking and no differentiation; all students were taught together with the same curriculum from 1st through 10th grade in a tightly knit class; university bound students continued two years longer.)

Edited August 24, 2012 by regentrude

[jennynd]

 

are specific features of Asian and cold war maths that don't allow for the correct pacing and priorities of average ability students and set them and their teachers up for failure.

 

What is ur definition of failure? Not going to college?

[Hunter]

Could you give an example? I am not sure what specific features you are talking about.

In the USSR (and the whole Eastern block), during the cold war, the school system was highly uniform. The main political goal was to offer the same education to everybody and to level any educational gaps that existed between children from families of intellectuals and children from families with a working class background. So, if the countries managed to educate their students well in math, this was geared towards their average students, because special nurturing of naturally gifted students would NOT have fit the political agenda.

The results you see from students educated in the Eastern block before the fall of communism is the result of an education geared towards the broad masses, the average learner. As much as I hate communism- but that is the one department where they achieved far superior results than the US public education.

So it might be especially the "cold war maths" of the Soviet union that you want to look at - because they applied to the average learner in a huge country, not some small specially nurtured elite. (For example, in East Germany, with the exception of a tiny number of focus schools, there was no tracking and no differentiation; all students were taught together with the same curriculum from 1st through 10th grade in a tightly knit class; university bound students continued two years longer.)

 

Maybe I do need to do more research. The bits I heard were conflicting, as I posted earlier. I'd heard from a couple sources that when a poorly trained teacher used the curriculum with average students they were overwhelmed. I'd heard glowing results about gifted students with trained teachers from all sources. From some reports I'd heard that the need to produce scientists was accomplished at the expense of the average students.

 

I heard that the USA attempts to produce more scientists, neither produced more scientists, nor met the needs of the average student.

 

But it's all talk. I wasn't there. I don't have confidence in any of my sources. Time is short. Funds are scant. I didn't pursue it further.

Edited August 24, 2012 by Hunter

[Hunter]

What is ur definition of failure? Not going to college?

 

Failure is adults who cannot cut a recipe in half, or double it. Failure is being unable to figure out a 15% tip, or estimate sales tax.

Edited August 24, 2012 by Hunter

[regentrude]

I'd heard from a couple sources that when a poorly trained teacher used the curriculum with average students they were overwhelmed.

I'd heard glowing results about gifted students with trained teachers from all sources.

 

I believe both of these statements.

The problem is not the average student, but the untrained teacher; math is probably the subject where this is the biggest problem.

And gifted students with trained teachers will do well in any case, even with inferior curriculum, because a teacher who is competent can just disregard curriculum nonsense and teach well.

I do not think any of this has to do with the curriculum per se.

[Hunter]

I believe both of these statements.

The problem is not the average student, but the untrained teacher; math is probably the subject where this is the biggest problem.

And gifted students with trained teachers will do well in any case, even with inferior curriculum, because a teacher who is competent can just disregard curriculum nonsense and teach well.

I do not think any of this has to do with the curriculum per se.

 

I think there are some curricula that when used with average students by untrained teachers, at least make sure they can double and half recipes, and figure out tips and estimate sales tax. Sometimes when curricula with bigger goals are used in this same scenario, the students learn less, not more.

 

My younger son who was gifted, despite my lack of training, was able to use curricula that his brother couldn't. It didn't ALL come down to my training, even though that was a BIG factor. My younger son could make mental jumps despite not having been taught critical concepts. Even when I didn't teach it right, and sometimes not at all, he could still figure things out on his own.

 

Myself and my older son need to be taught. Yes, we can teach ourselves from a well written book, but that's still being taught. We cannot make mental jumps. Our progress is entirely reliant on either a good teacher or a good book. We need to be spoon fed and properly paced and only then can we learn.

[StephanieZ]

My kids learned basic arithmetic by the time they were 5 via osmosis and play and just talking and goofing around.

 

I don't think you have to use a text book, and I do think kids can and do learn a LOT of math easily via play, cooking, talking, etc.

 

That said, we started text books (Miquon first, then adding Singapore a few months later) around age 5. ;) We LIKE math here! It is fun! Why would you want to wait?!?

 

You'd be amazed at just how much math a young child can comprehend when given the opportunity to learn from high quality materials. There is sooooo much more to math than the crappy little text books used by most schools would lead you to believe . . .

[Aspasia]

I know people who take the same approach to reading. If your life turns to custard and you kids have to go to school how will they feel about your decision?

 

:iagree: Sorry, I'm not informed enough to get in on the math debate, but this idea drives a lot of my thinking when it comes to making decisions about curriculum and timing. Sure, our current plan is to homeschool long term, but if dh loses his job or dies or one of us becomes terminally ill or some other unthinkable thing happens--or heck, if we just decide that homeschooling isnt right for our family anymore--our kids will have to attend school somewhere, and I don't want them to be at any kind of disadvantage.

[Deb in NZ]

PS here in New Zealand has a shorter school day, but longer school year (190-196 days) than American schools. Primary school (years 1-8, ages 5-12) is 9:00-3:00 with 30 minutes off for morning tea & an hour off for lunch. My dd attended PS for Y1-6 & never used a maths book at all during that time. I relieve/substitute at our local intermediate school (Y7-8) & most teachers don't use a maths text & those that do only use it occasionally.

 

Ds#2 attends our local PS for highschool. Highschool (Y9-13, ages 13-18) is 8:45-3:30 with a 30 minutes break for morning tea & an hour break for lunch, same as in primary school. He has five hour long classes each day, with his 8 courses set up in a six day rotating timetable. He has 4 maths classes every six days. Maths in highschool is intergrated every year, with students covering the following strands (Number, Algebra, Geometry, Measurement, Statistics & Probability). Students are required to take maths in Y9-11. Y12&13 maths (& school) is optional.

 

NZ ranks far above the US on international tests that I can find on the web. But I do not believe that it would be fair to say that every student in NZ works at that level as only the top classes at Ds#2's school take those tests. I have students (11-12yo) in my classes that haven't yet mastered their times tables or advanced arithmetic :001_huh:, while others are working on very advanced problem solving exercises. Science, too, is covered informally in primary school & intergrated in highschool. At all levels science & maths are each taught no more than 4 hours weekly through out all the school years. Everyone has a basic understanding of each by the end of Y11(age15/16) & those who choose to study maths & science in Y12-13 will often take several sciences + advanced maths concurrently.

 

JMHO,

Edited August 25, 2012 by Deb in NZ

[SorrelZG]

Deb, I had never thought about that before but I have no recollection of any math texts or workbooks prior to the textbook handed to me in 8th grade (in Aus., not NZ). I recall having a math notepad each year but that's it. That is tripping me out now. I can't remember how that worked! I do recall two or four school-wide math facts competitions each year. So weird.

[momma2three]

Deb, I had never thought about that before but I have no recollection of any math texts or workbooks prior to the textbook handed to me in 8th grade (in Aus., not NZ). I recall having a math notepad each year but that's it. That is tripping me out now. I can't remember how that worked! I do recall two or four school-wide math facts competitions each year. So weird.

 

The videos online of MEP in action don't seem to show a textbook. The kids have notebooks that they take out and then carefully draw a line separating their current lesson from the previous lesson, and then they work from the board or what the teacher is saying. MEP also has worksheets, and I don't know if they're bound in a book or handed out individually.

[SorrelZG]

The videos online of MEP in action don't seem to show a textbook. The kids have notebooks that they take out and then carefully draw a line separating their current lesson from the previous lesson, and then they work from the board or what the teacher is saying. MEP also has worksheets, and I don't know if they're bound in a book or handed out individually.

 

We divided our notebooks just like that. :D I have even felt this compulsion like my child NEEDS to know how to neatly rule a notebook page with a red line along the top and bottom lines and a straight one down the middle. :lol: I don't recall any worksheets besides the occasional activity that wasn't for turning back in, just for keeping us quiet if we got done early.

[TippyCanoe]

.

[Deb in NZ]

We divided our notebooks just like that. :D I have even felt this compulsion like my child NEEDS to know how to neatly rule a notebook page with a red line along the top and bottom lines and a straight one down the middle. :lol: I don't recall any worksheets besides the occasional activity that wasn't for turning back in, just for keeping us quiet if we got done early.

 

When ds#2 went to PS last year for Y9, this was the biggest learning curve he had to handle. We had done a pretty good job academically, but I had completely overlooked showing him the proper way to use a notebook. Here in NZ students keep their notebooks as momma2three describes the MEP video. By the end of the first term ds#2 was more than halfway through his notebooks as he began each day on a new page, no matter how little he used the previous class. He is doing much better this year :tongue_smilie:

[NASDAQ]

Finnish is phonographic: "The Finnish orthography follows the phoneme principle: each phoneme (meaningful sound) of the language corresponds to exactly one grapheme (independent letter), and each grapheme represents almost exactly one phoneme. This enables an easy spelling and facilitates reading and writing acquisition. The rule of thumb for Finnish orthography is: write as you read, read as you write."

 

It's just a much easier language to learn to read. Children learn to read Hebrew very easily as well. Our local Hebrew school spends equal time on Hebrew and English and by the end of the children's first year (K), perhaps a third read English but they all read Hebrew.

[Hunter]

Finnish is phonographic: "The Finnish orthography follows the phoneme principle: each phoneme (meaningful sound) of the language corresponds to exactly one grapheme (independent letter), and each grapheme represents almost exactly one phoneme. This enables an easy spelling and facilitates reading and writing acquisition. The rule of thumb for Finnish orthography is: write as you read, read as you write."

 

It's just a much easier language to learn to read. Children learn to read Hebrew very easily as well. Our local Hebrew school spends equal time on Hebrew and English and by the end of the children's first year (K), perhaps a third read English but they all read Hebrew.

 

Very interesting. THANKS!!!

[beachrose]

The only group I know who believes in this is the Waldorf crowd.

I didn't read through the whole thread so I don't know if someone spoke to this already but that is not a true statement. Math is taught through all the grades

This quote was taken from this waldorf site http://millennialchild.wordpress.com/article/the-waldorf-curriculum-grade-one-110mw7eus832b-17/. Mr Schwartz is a long time Waldorf teacher that trains teachers in the Waldorf method. I would assume this is the usual curriculum for Waldorf first grade,6 and 7 year olds.

"We will approach the crucial first year of arithmetic from a number of perspectives:

• The Qualities of Numbers: The consciousness of the young child still experiences numbers as “qualities†at least as much as he or she understands them as “quantities.†For five to seven days, we will hear stories in which the numbers up to seven figure importantly (The Three Little Pigs, The Six Swans, The Seven Ravens, etc.) to set the stage for the increasingly quantifiable experience of numbers that constitutes arithmetic.

• Counting: Six- and seven-year-olds love to count; the combination of rhythmical regularity and ceaseless change is very harmonizing! We will become familiar with the succession of numbers from one to one hundred – forwards and backwards!

• Times-Tables: Once the children are comfortable with counting, it is a small but important step to count with strong rhythms, speaking some numbers quietly and others loudly – and suddenly the times-tables appear! Learning the rhythms of multiplication grows more difficult for children with each passing year, but it is crucial that children are comfortable with their tables up to 12 x 12 by the end of third grade. This year we will work with the twos, threes, fives, and tens tables. We will use recitation, song, movement exercises, form drawings, string games, and mental arithmetic to help us out, and you’ll experience it all at our parent evenings.

• Numbers as Signifiers: This is, of course, the basis of arithmetic as we know it today; indeed, this is the basis of modern life. Working with numbers as units, using a number to tell us “how many†there are is a powerfully awakening experience – and not all first graders are ready for the rude awakening of number-as-quantity. The bags of counting shells that you helped to make this summer will serve as our archetypal tools to enter into this powerful new way of perceiving the world.

• Cardinal and Ordinal Numbers: There is a profound difference between numbers that merely signify, e.g. I have three of those, five of these, etc. and those numbers that show places, e.g. I’m first in line! He’s the third child to get a book, etc. We will learn how a cardinal numbers become ordinal numbers.

• The Four Operations: The more I teach, the more I marvel at the mysterious ways in which children come to understand the difficult concepts of adding, subtracting, multiplying, and diving. We help things along by teaching the operations through a story (of course!) in which they are treated anthropomorphically (that’s not the same as “anthroposophicallyâ€). We’ll be examining this in detail in parent evenings this winter."

HTH There are a lot of myths about Waldorf out there.

[stripe]

I didn't read through the whole thread so I don't know if someone spoke to this already but that is not a true statement.

With all due respect, I took it back in post #39, so you could have saved yourself some typing. ;) I made the statement after knowing and knowing Waldorf educated children who were severely mathphobic and undereducated in math, in various parts of the country, and how their parents explained their schools. Clearly some disconnect here in terms of how the theory is implemented.

Edited August 29, 2012 by stripe

[NASDAQ]

As a non-Waldorf person, I think the confusion comes from a tendency of the people one knows who pursue Waldorf not to emphasize STEM topics _at all_. I'm sure we have Waldorfy mathy people on WTM, but IRL I don't meet them.

[stripe]

Just for the record, the Waldorf people I met and am familiar with have nothing to do with homeschooling. The last Waldorf "encounter" I had was about 6 or 7 years ago, when my oldest was still in diapers. As a quick example, a coworker of mine before I even had kids, was frantic when her daughter had to take a standardized test in 7th grade. She knew almost no math.

 

I am willing to suspend disbelief and assume that everyone I have ever met is an outlier, and Waldorf is really dandy about math and science.

 

But now that Waldorf is off the table as postponing math, does anyone here know of any such group?