The New New Math: Back to Basics

[stripe]

There are other reasons, but I'm glad we homeschool if only for the math.

 

X2.

[regentrude]

. I had no problem with algebra in high school, I absolutely loved it, but up to that time I despised math. I understood it fine, but it was boring, I guess. Algebra, especially my second year, was like play to me.

 

 

Can someone tell me why that is? I have never been able to figure it out.

 

 

Because algebra is when math actually starts :)

Anything before that is just arithmetic. Necessary, but boring - much drill, little thinking.

Edited September 29, 2012 by regentrude

[Spy Car]

Because algebra is when math actually starts :)

Anything before that is just arithmetic. Necessary, but boring - much drill, little thinking.

 

Except there are interesting elementary math programs that incorporate good amounts of thinking and creative problem solving if people seek them out.

 

Bill

[Hunter]

My favorite years in math, were the years when the teachers gave me the tools to meet their expectations.

[mom31257]

I don't think the rich sort of math education offered by programs like Singapore are what people have in mind when they use the term "back-to-basics." Instead it refers to the shallow algorithm-only style of math education that emphasizes the memorization of "math facts" and de-emphasizes actual understanding of the mathematics.

 

"Back-to-basics" is not a move forward IMO. We need better for the 21st Century.

 

Bill

 

I was taught in the 70s and 80s with what you could call "back-to-basics" math, and I scored a perfect score on the math part of college entrance exams and acquired a math degree.

 

The real issue is that public education in this country is constantly an experiment. Scores aren't what they should be for a given group, so it must be the method. Let's try something else. They try something else, but now this other group's scores are not up to par. There must be another method that will work. Let's try this one while ignoring the fact that it may have failed in 45 other states. Let's try what they do in Singapore or Korea even though they are so serious about education there the students would learn no matter what method they choose.

 

No one in public education is going to address the real problem, though. Kids in America are not being raised to value education because far too many parents are too busy, tired, self-absorbed, or drunk/drugged to teach them to care about it.

 

If a student wants to learn something, he/she will, even with a mediocre method or teacher.

[Hunter]

 

If a student wants to learn something, he/she will, even with a mediocre method or teacher.

 

I didn't. Especially in math. HUGE expectations were placed on me without the tools to accomplish them. I cried. I had nightmares. I begged for help. No one helped me. They just threatened and sometimes punished. Almost everything else, I figured out how to learn without their help, but not math.

 

I did teach myself math as an adult. I found some books at the library and at yard sales. And everyone can blast Saxon, but I taught myself a LOT with it.

 

I think few children are taught how to READ a math book and are given access to math books at their reading level. I was little more than an obedient and driven robot as a child, whose primary desire was to meet expectations perfectly. I was completely befuddled how to not be punished and shamed about math.

 

I think other students had the same experience with reading. I was lucky that I was capable of teaching myself to read at 4 years old. I knew I was expected to read without being taught, along with so many other things.

 

I don't believe student failure is primarily reflective of not being driven to succeed. I think mediocre students sometimes don't strive to excel, but very few children are at all comfortable with failure. Failing students just don't have a clue as to how to self-educate and where to get the supplies.

[momtoamiracle]

Are you familiar with the Mathematics Enhancement Programme (aka MEP)?

 

It is a British/Hungarian math program with a lot of *thinking* and puzzely type problems. The materials are free to download here:

 

http://www.cimt.plymouth.ac.uk/projects/mep/default.htm

 

Bill

 

 

 

I've only briefly scanned it, no in depth look yet, but it is on my list.

[boscopup]

This may be a silly question, but after all the talk, will Math Mammoth give my son the math background he needs?

 

Yes, absolutely. It is strong in conceptual teaching while also giving tons of fact practice, teaching the basics (standard algorithm, etc.) and mental math.

 

(we used MM 1A-4B when we started homeschooling)

[mom31257]

I didn't. Especially in math. HUGE expectations were placed on me without the tools to accomplish them. I cried. I had nightmares. I begged for help. No one helped me. They just threatened and sometimes punished. Almost everything else, I figured out how to learn without their help, but not math.

 

I did teach myself math as an adult. I found some books at the library and at yard sales. And everyone can blast Saxon, but I taught myself a LOT with it.

 

I think few children are taught how to READ a math book and are given access to math books at their reading level. I was little more than an obedient and driven robot as a child, whose primary desire was to meet expectations perfectly. I was completely befuddled how to not be punished and shamed about math.

 

I think other students had the same experience with reading. I was lucky that I was capable of teaching myself to read at 4 years old. I knew I was expected to read without being taught, along with so many other things.

 

I don't believe student failure is primarily reflective of not being driven to succeed. I think mediocre students sometimes don't strive to excel, but very few children are at all comfortable with failure. Failing students just don't have a clue as to how to self-educate and where to get the supplies.

 

I would not call whoever your teachers were mediocre, just bad teachers. I'm sorry you had that experience with a subject that I think can be really fun and exciting.

 

I'm talking about teachers who are trying but just aren't the best. I am coming from the perspective of having a dh who has taught in one of those failing schools. It is really hard to be a teacher who does care about kids learning and watching kids come in and out of your classroom who care nothing about being there, learning, or anything that doesn't directly affect their social lives. It is hard to see kids whose lives have been messed up by terrible parents. You turn around at this same school and none of that is addressed, only how bad the teachers are or how the teaching methods are to blame. You are in meetings about improving education and the administrators running it basically say if you can all be "Ron Clark" the kids will magically become great students.

 

I just think we need to be careful finding an instant cure for a problem that is much more involved than simply the way something is taught. Who gets burned by this are teachers who are trying to educate and kids who are the guinea pigs. Does that make sense?

Edited September 29, 2012 by mom31257

[delaney]

This may be a silly question, but after all the talk, will Math Mammoth give my son the math background he needs?

 

 

 

 

I grew up in the 70's, graduated in 1985. I had no problem with algebra in high school, I absolutely loved it, but up to that time I despised math. I understood it fine, but it was boring, I guess. Algebra, especially my second year, was like play to me.

 

 

Can someone tell me why that is? I have never been able to figure it out.

 

 

 

 

 

I just don't know enough about new math to give an opinion about it. I've been out of school a long time and my son just turned six...

 

I am a very just give me the algorithm type person. I don't want the why but I found that math mammoth makes sense to me! I love the way they teach time. My younger DD was having such issue with it and I pulled the pages on time from MM and voila!

[delaney]

I also wanted to add that for some kids the hands-on approach to math is not great. I get that need a deeper meaning but for my older DD it just didn't work. She struggles with fractions so I got MUS. BIG mistake. The hands-on portion really threw her off and she was in tears. I had to resort to just memorizing the processes of dealing with them. She just doesn't get it! What do you do with and average and maybe slightly below average math student?

[Hunter]

I would not call whoever your teachers were mediocre, just bad teachers.

 

Oh! I get it :D

 

Yeh, they were bad teachers. You are right. I have a friend who gets REALLY upset when I talk about my schooling as if it was normal. I thought that was normal, because it was all I knew.

 

When you don't have a parent to advocate for you, what happens at school is worse than it is for kids who have involved parents. You can go to the exact same school, and even sit in the same classroom IF you are allowed in that class, but still have an entirely different experience, and relationship with the teacher and materials.

 

I remember the mediocre teachers and I remember the good teachers. They really stand out to me, amongst the sea of teachers who resented having children, from homes like mine, in their classes.

[regentrude]

If a student wants to learn something, he/she will, even with a mediocre method or teacher.

 

I strongly disagree. Some subjects might lend themselves to self-study, but others are extremely difficult and will - except for highly gifted students - lead to road blocks that can only be overcome with the help of a qualified teacher/tutor - a live person who can explain a difficult concept that, even upon several readings, does not make sense immediately.

 

The level up to which a student can progress without qualified teachers clearly depends on the student's inherent abilities, but even very intelligent students WILL at some point require the help of an expert. For some students, this may not come until university - but for many others, the point will be during grade school.

 

I teach at a STEM university, am surrounded by students who choose to be there and got in and want to learn the subjects - but fact is, very few will learn the material "on their own". Almost all require teaching, even though they are well educated, motivated young adults.

 

Now if you think about younger, more immature students with less educational background, there is no way they are equipped to self teach mathematics, even if they want to learn. If you have a mediocre (nnot even bad) math teacher who can not think beyond drilling algorithms, the students will not learn to think about complex problem solving.

Otherwise, we would have to conclude that the problem with math education in the US is the students' fault: they don't really want to learn the subject. Too easy, IMO.

Edited September 29, 2012 by regentrude

[Spy Car]

I also wanted to add that for some kids the hands-on approach to math is not great. I get that need a deeper meaning but for my older DD it just didn't work. She struggles with fractions so I got MUS. BIG mistake. The hands-on portion really threw her off and she was in tears. I had to resort to just memorizing the processes of dealing with them. She just doesn't get it! What do you do with and average and maybe slightly below average math student?

 

Have you looked at "Key to Fractions"? These inexpensive books are aimed at promoting understanding with children who are struggling to understand the concepts. They are gentle, fun, and effective.

 

Bill

[WishboneDawn]

I strongly disagree. Some subjects might lend themselves to self-study, but others are extremely difficult and will - except for highly gifted students - lead to road blocks that can only be overcome with the help of a qualified teacher/tutor - a live person who can explain a difficult concept that, even upon several readings, does not make sense immediately.

 

The level up to which a student can progress without qualified teachers clearly depends on the student's inherent abilities, but even very intelligent students WILL at some point require the help of an expert. For some students, this may not come until university - but for many others, the point will be during grade school.

 

I teach at a STEM university, am surrounded by students who choose to be there and got in and want to learn the subjects - but fact is, very few will learn the material "on their own". Almost all require teaching, even though they are well educated, motivated young adults.

 

Now if you think about younger, more immature students with less educational background, there is no way they are equipped to self teach mathematics, even if they want to learn. If you have a mediocre (nnot even bad) math teacher who can not think beyond drilling algorithms, the students will not learn to think about complex problem solving.

Otherwise, we would have to conclude that the problem with math education in the US is the students' fault: they don't really want to learn the subject. Too easy, IMO.

 

:iagree:

 

Even beyond math, the big problem for even the most motivated students is that you don't know what you don't know. Gaps that create issues are often invisible to the person with the issue. When I was a teenager I used to think I had a problem with algebra. Not so, my issues were with fractions and logic. To a good teacher who truly understood math that would have been obvious fairly quickly. I'm really not sure how I, if I didn't really understand the subject to begin with, could have ferreted that out and addressed it.

[stripe]

If a student wants to learn something, he/she will, even with a mediocre method or teacher.

 

I think this may be true in theory, but often proves very difficult in real life.

[momtoamiracle]

Yes, absolutely. It is strong in conceptual teaching while also giving tons of fact practice, teaching the basics (standard algorithm, etc.) and mental math.

 

(we used MM 1A-4B when we started homeschooling)

 

 

 

Thank you! I ve looked at the time sheets and it does look like it makes it easy to learn.

[wapiti]

The real issue is that public education in this country is constantly an experiment. Scores aren't what they should be for a given group, so it must be the method. Let's try something else. They try something else, but now this other group's scores are not up to par. There must be another method that will work. Let's try this one while ignoring the fact that it may have failed in 45 other states. Let's try what they do in Singapore or Korea even though they are so serious about education there the students would learn no matter what method they choose.

 

While I agree that there are too many fads, I think the problem goes much deeper, to insufficient understanding on the part of educators choosing the fads. There are specific reasons why each fad failed for large swaths of the student population. The mathematical weakness of elementary teachers on a national level is one of the key themes (though not the only reason), which is why curriculum selection is so important, IMO. Curriculum choice is less important for great teachers who can supply whatever a curriculum lacks.

 

Obviously there's no one answer (not even getting to the fact that there's no one-size-fits-all curriculum even for the majority of students), but for kids mid-elementary and above, I'd like to see a curriculum with less critical instruction contained only in the TM, because that relies on the teacher communicating such instruction to the student. I see that as one way to help break the vicious cycle where each generation's students become teachers.

 

Hunter, that's an interesting point about learning how to read math books.

 

If you have a mediocre (nnot even bad) math teacher who can not think beyond drilling algorithms, the students will not learn to think about complex problem solving.

 

:iagree:

 

I took algebra around 1981-2, very traditional (super boring - a lot of daydreaming; if I had to pinpoint where I completely tuned out of math, that would be it, which is such a shame!!). I had seemingly competent teachers in middle school, a great SAT math score, and yet recently AoPS Prealgebra showed me a whole new world I never knew existed. AoPS is probably an extreme example, but it was my first exposure to that math perspective and to problem solving. Literally, if I had been taught differently, my entire career might have been different. Eta thinking out loud, perhaps insufficient problem solving could be viewed as a scope and sequence issue as much as a lack of depth? I am thinking of the point in Rusczyk's talk where he laments the fact that the standard curriculum leaves out a lot of areas of real math...

Edited September 29, 2012 by wapiti

[Beth in SW WA]

which is why curriculum selection is so important, IMO.

 

 

 

:iagree:

 

I am very impressed w/ enVison math at dd8's ALE. Granted, I have only seen the elementary program. A bit slow for my taste, but the conceptual teaching is there along w/ procedural practice. I have renewed hope for our nation's math potential. I know hundreds (literally) of kids in public/private schools who are learning rock-solid math.

 

The tide is turning...

[TarynB]

Yes, absolutely. It is strong in conceptual teaching while also giving tons of fact practice, teaching the basics (standard algorithm, etc.) and mental math.

 

(we used MM 1A-4B when we started homeschooling)

 

Boscopup, would you mind sharing why you switched from Math Mammoth to Singapore after MM 4B? My son used MM 4A & B and is currently using MM 5A, but I'm trying to decide if I want to continue MM to the end (6A & B).

 

Loving this discussion, BTW! Learning so much. Thanks!

[boscopup]

Boscopup, would you mind sharing why you switched from Math Mammoth to Singapore after MM 4B? My son used MM 4A & B and is currently using MM 5A, but I'm trying to decide if I want to continue MM to the end (6A & B).

 

My son preferred the presentation of Singapore, preferred having less problems on a page (we do all the SM workbook problems now, but skipped at least 1/2 the MM problems), and he doesn't need the incremental teaching that MM had. He gets math easily. So we did through the long division part of MM4B, then switched over to SM 4A (losing a semester, but he's accelerated, so that's ok). We'll do through SM 5B, then do some type of prealgebra (AoPS or other - I have several things here to play with). We're also doing Life of Fred Fractions (almost done) and will do Decimals and Percents next.

[TarynB]

My son preferred the presentation of Singapore, preferred having less problems on a page (we do all the SM workbook problems now, but skipped at least 1/2 the MM problems), and he doesn't need the incremental teaching that MM had. He gets math easily. So we did through the long division part of MM4B, then switched over to SM 4A (losing a semester, but he's accelerated, so that's ok). We'll do through SM 5B, then do some type of prealgebra (AoPS or other - I have several things here to play with). We're also doing Life of Fred Fractions (almost done) and will do Decimals and Percents next.

 

Thank you for taking the time to share this. It's very helpful, as I'm sorting through where to go next with math and when.

[kiwik]

It is hard to learn maths from a teacher who doesn't understand or like it. Long division at age 10 out me off for 10 years. It wasn't hard just tedious and the problems went on and on. They were more interesting when I used pounds and pence for the .oney questions (our textbook was old) but I was doing it by rote at didn't understand the remainder thing until years later.

 

Lucky I have got to like maths since because my son likes it and heasia unexpected questions.

[jeninok]

D

:iagree:

 

I am very impressed w/ enVison math at dd8's ALE. Granted, I have only seen the elementary program. A bit slow for my taste, but the conceptual teaching is there along w/ procedural practice. I have renewed hope for our nation's math potential. I know hundreds (literally) of kids in public/private schools who are learning rock-solid math.

 

The tide is turning...

 

For my DS Envision was a total train wreck. He came out halfway through 4th grade totally confused and anxious over all math.

 

We started over with Miquon, and as fuzzy and simple as the program seems he blossomed right before my eyes. It was amazing. We are now using CLE combined with Miquon and its like magic, I plan to move to the keys to series once we finish Miquon yellow and purple.

 

In the hands of a good teacher, Envision might work, but it was frantic in its topic jumping, and didn't teach simple algorithms at all. DS actually got in trouble for doing multiplication the traditional way vs. Lattice. :(

[momtoamiracle]

My son preferred the presentation of Singapore, preferred having less problems on a page (we do all the SM workbook problems now, but skipped at least 1/2 the MM problems), and he doesn't need the incremental teaching that MM had. He gets math easily. So we did through the long division part of MM4B, then switched over to SM 4A (losing a semester, but he's accelerated, so that's ok). We'll do through SM 5B, then do some type of prealgebra (AoPS or other - I have several things here to play with). We're also doing Life of Fred Fractions (almost done) and will do Decimals and Percents next.

 

I see you are also using Singapore with your five year old. Is there a reason you didn't go back to math mammoth? Just curious. I am looking to supplement math mammoth with something more interesting either Singapore, miquon, or MEP. I haven't gotten far with MM yet tho so maybe it will get better as we go?

[Spy Car]

D

 

For my DS Envision was a total train wreck. He came out halfway through 4th grade totally confused and anxious over all math.

 

We started over with Miquon, and as fuzzy and simple as the program seems he blossomed right before my eyes. It was amazing. We are now using CLE combined with Miquon and its like magic, I plan to move to the keys to series once we finish Miquon yellow and purple.

 

In the hands of a good teacher, Envision might work, but it was frantic in its topic jumping, and didn't teach simple algorithms at all. DS actually got in trouble for doing multiplication the traditional way vs. Lattice. :(

 

Are you sure you are not confusing enVision Math with Everyday Mathematics?

 

Bill

[Roadrunner]

:iagree:

 

I am very impressed w/ enVison math at dd8's ALE. Granted, I have only seen the elementary program. A bit slow for my taste, but the conceptual teaching is there along w/ procedural practice. I have renewed hope for our nation's math potential. I know hundreds (literally) of kids in public/private schools who are learning rock-solid math.

 

The tide is turning...

 

Really? My kids have it and I don't see anything impressive. There is no challenge, no depth that I have seen (granted we are in2nd grade). And it moves sooooooo slowly. We have yet to learn a new concept this year and we are starting the fall break next week.

[boscopup]

I see you are also using Singapore with your five year old. Is there a reason you didn't go back to math mammoth? Just curious. I am looking to supplement math mammoth with something more interesting either Singapore, miquon, or MEP. I haven't gotten far with MM yet tho so maybe it will get better as we go?

 

Once I started using Singapore, I really liked it and decided to have DS2 do it also. He's young and a visual thinker. I didn't think MM would be a good fit, presentation wise. We'd done Essential Math K, and I figured he'd like to continue with the PM series. I also have one more child coming up behind him, so the books will get plenty of use.

 

MM does get better as you go. I found the first grade to be incredibly boring, but my son LOVED it because it was much more interesting than Saxon 1 that he was doing at school (and he should have been in Saxon 2 at that time). It's all relative. :D I added Singapore's IP and CWP while we were doing MM2 (and we ended up skipping almost all of 2B), and then MM got more interesting in the 3rd and 4th grade books, but DS really loved Singapore. Now perhaps if he'd used Singapore for 4 grade levels, he would have gotten bored with it too. He'll only use it for 2, so it shouldn't be an issue. :)

[Beth in SW WA]

D

 

For my DS Envision was a total train wreck. .... Lattice. :(

 

No lattice in enVision.

[Beth in SW WA]

Really? My kids have it and I don't see anything impressive. There is no challenge, no depth that I have seen (granted we are in2nd grade). And it moves sooooooo slowly. We have yet to learn a new concept this year and we are starting the fall break next week.

 

Grade 3 and up is decent. I looked through every lesson of grades 3 - 5. For public school math for the masses it is sufficient if it is taught well. Dd only does it 'for fun' so I am not a typical customer. She does all 5 lessons in one sitting at home. There is solid math going on in enVision.

[Hunter]

Grade 3 and up is decent. I looked through every lesson of grades 3 - 5. For public school math for the masses it is sufficient if it is taught well. Dd only does it 'for fun' so I am not a typical customer. She does all 5 lessons in one sitting at home. There is solid math going on in enVision.

 

Spy Car is going to have nightmares tonight. At one of the spectrum you are doing enVision, and on the other end I'm doing How to Tutor and Guide to American Christian Education. :lol:

[momtoamiracle]

Once I started using Singapore, I really liked it and decided to have DS2 do it also. He's young and a visual thinker. I didn't think MM would be a good fit, presentation wise. We'd done Essential Math K, and I figured he'd like to continue with the PM series. I also have one more child coming up behind him, so the books will get plenty of use.

 

MM does get better as you go. I found the first grade to be incredibly boring, but my son LOVED it because it was much more interesting than Saxon 1 that he was doing at school (and he should have been in Saxon 2 at that time). It's all relative. :D I added Singapore's IP and CWP while we were doing MM2 (and we ended up skipping almost all of 2B), and then MM got more interesting in the 3rd and 4th grade books, but DS really loved Singapore. Now perhaps if he'd used Singapore for 4 grade levels, he would have gotten bored with it too. He'll only use it for 2, so it shouldn't be an issue. :)

 

 

 

 

I thought that was probably the reason.

 

 

Yes first grade is killing me it is so dull! Some of the problem is that he did a semester of first grade math in kindy (K12) and got pretty far. However he seems to have forgotten most of his math facts so I've started over with MM 1A to help him remember them. When we stopped K12 last May, he was adding numbers up to thirty. I had intended on working with him all summer so he wouldn't forget, but that didn't happen. We were burnt out on school and with other things going on I didn't have the heart or mind to do it. So now we start first grade and he has to learn most of the math facts all over. Oh well, he should know them really well by 2nd grade.:001_smile:

[Spy Car]

Spy Car is going to have nightmares tonight. At one of the spectrum you are doing enVision, and on the other end I'm doing How to Tutor and Guide to American Christian Education. :lol:

 

I'm not going to have nightmares. My son uses enVision at school too. I've felt is was an OK program for K-2nd, but 3rd (as Beth suggests) has been a step up. I'd still prefer the schools use Primary Mathematics (Singapore) and we continue to use PM and other things at home.

 

I don't think enVision is an "end of the spectrum" type program. It is one that attempts a good mix of conceptual understanding, place value work, learning standard algorithms, and some reasoning work. It is not perfect, but not terrible.

 

Bill

[Hunter]

Are you sure you are not confusing enVision Math with Everyday Mathematics?

 

Bill

 

 

I don't think enVision is an "end of the spectrum" type program. It is one that attempts a good mix of conceptual understanding, place value work, learning standard algorithms, and some reasoning work. It is not perfect, but not terrible.

 

Bill

 

So confused, :confused: but that's okay. It's nothing new for me to be confused. :lol:

[Spy Car]

So confused, :confused: but that's okay. It's nothing new for me to be confused. :lol:

 

I believe the criticisms of the PP were intended for "Everyday Mathematics" (which teaches lattice multiplication and is criticized for not teaching the standard algorithms) and NOT at "enVision Math" (which DOES teach the standard algorithms and does not—to my knowledge—teach "lattice multiplication."

 

Everyday Mathematics and enVision are two totally different math programs. EM is "fuzzy math" but enVision is not. I think the PP confused the two.

 

Make sense now?

 

Bil

[Hunter]

I believe the criticisms of the PP were intended for "Everyday Mathematics" (which teaches lattice multiplication and is criticized for not teaching the standard algorithms) and NOT at "enVision Math" (which DOES teach the standard algorithms and does not—to my knowledge—teach "lattice multiplication."

 

Everyday Mathematics and enVision are two totally different math programs. EM is "fuzzy math" but enVision is not. I think the PP confused the two.

 

Make sense now?

 

Bil

 

I think I've lost track of who said what. :confused: It's okay. I'm not worried about it, though. I don't want to use either program, right now, so...it doesn't matter.

[kagmypts]

I have a strong focus on mastering the basics which involves knowing them cold as a result of fully grasping them and working with them a lot in many different situations. Being able to compute without comprehension doesn't make sense to me. That's not mastery. Neither is comprehending the idea without being efficient and precise in its use. I don't understand the separation.

 

This. Very well said!!!

[Roadrunner]

Grade 3 and up is decent. I looked through every lesson of grades 3 - 5. For public school math for the masses it is sufficient if it is taught well. Dd only does it 'for fun' so I am not a typical customer. She does all 5 lessons in one sitting at home. There is solid math going on in enVision.

 

Does it have anything challenging or comparable to SM IPs or CWP in later grades? We are so frustrated with how easy it is and now that we have common core, it is going to be even slower. I believe Common Core introduces concepts even later.

I haven't seen any "funny" math in enVision either, but it does feel inch deep even if it teaches concepts.

[Beth in SW WA]

Spy Car is going to have nightmares tonight. At one of the spectrum you are doing enVision, and on the other end I'm doing How to Tutor and Guide to American Christian Education. :lol:

 

Hunter, enVision is not fuzzy math. I said on the afterschooling board last week that it reminds me of SM. I'm impressed with the problem-solving sections (which is all I require dd to do). I looked ahead and I'll definitely have dd continue w/ enVision 4 & 5. It's 2 hours/week at our ALE. Not a big deal. Dd enjoys her little class. It's a win-win.

 

No nightmares here. We can all sleep well. :)

[Beth in SW WA]

Does it have anything challenging or comparable to SM IPs or CWP in later grades?

 

The enVision word problems/mental math/problem solving sections in grades 4/5 are no where near as complex as SM ip/cwp (3/4/5). But do they need to be? No, imho. Teachers in Singapore receive extensive training to teach that content.

 

ETA: As to the OP, enVision may be considered 'back to basics' by some.

Edited September 30, 2012 by Beth in SW WA

[Roadrunner]

The enVision word problems/mental math/problem solving sections in grades 4/5 are no where near as complex as SM ip/cwp (3/4/5). But do they need to be? No, imho. Teachers in Singapore receive extensive training to teach that content.

 

ETA: As to the OP, enVision may be considered 'back to basics' by some.

 

If they were, the top 30% of the class would at least be challenged. As is, it is only suited for the "weaker" kids in classrooms.

[Beth in SW WA]

If they were, the top 30% of the class would at least be challenged. As is, it is only suited for the "weaker" kids in classrooms.

 

What is suited for weaker kids? :confused:

[Pen]

:bigear:

 

And thinking about people saying MM is boring...oh great, it's on order and now :glare: you tell me!

[boscopup]

:bigear:

 

And thinking about people saying MM is boring...oh great, it's on order and now :glare: you tell me!

 

Many kids really like it. Did you try out the sample pages first?

 

We could have kept going with it. It wasn't claw your eyes out boring, especially once he was placed correctly. We just had to accelerate to get there. It's just that between the two curricula, he liked Singapore better, and it was a better fit for him. MM was perfect for when I first pulled him out though, because accelerating through Singapore would have been $$$. :tongue_smilie:

 

There are ways to make MM more interesting, so don't freak out. :D And again, while *I* thought MM1 was boring, my son liked it, because he had just come out of Saxon 1. If I saw another apple seed, I was going to puke. :lol: Same... exact... questions... every... day. Drove ME nuts, and I wasn't the one teaching it or having to do the homework! MM is way more exciting than that. :tongue_smilie:

 

I think most first grade math programs are boring. It's hard to make interesting problems when the kid only knows very basic addition and subtraction.

 

So pretend you never read anyone's "boring" comments. You'll be fine. Your kid will love MM, and you will too. And if they don't love it, that's fine too - just adjust it a bit (do NOT assign all the problems on the page if it's a big page of drill!!!!). MM is incredibly flexible!

[Farrar]

:bigear:

 

And thinking about people saying MM is boring...oh great, it's on order and now :glare: you tell me!

 

It's not the most exciting program, but I don't think of a core curriculum as having to be exciting. I mean, some programs have you using manipulatives a lot, but not all kids gravitate toward that, and some programs have lots of color and cute characters, but that's just extras. You do a little of it every day, but MM leaves plenty of time to do the supplementals that are much more fun - the math story books, the games, the math labs, etc. Math is (I hope) fun in our house, and one of my kids uses MM.

[Hunter]

Pen, I am making arithmetic exciting with picture books, and what we talk about, and trying to apply everything to money and other commonly used items and events (like birthdays :D thanks to farrarwilliams). Have you seen the How to Tutor pages. :lol: They look like Waldorf math missing all the art. :lol:

 

Exciting is learning and making progress and entering the Great Conversation. The development of the Arabic/Hindu decimal system is one of the most important discoveries ever made of ALL time, and most adults have no idea what the discovery is, or how to join the conversation of using it. I don't want any distractions on the arithmetic pages themselves. Arithmetic is exciting and beautiful itself. It's beauty is evident in it's simplicity. Sometimes additions of "fun" just obscures the beauty.

 

I looked at MM and passed it up because it was too much, not because it was too little. :lol:

 

We have math picture books scattered all over the apartment right now, and I'm looking at all sorts of math labs to place out for students to explore with. I don't want ANY of that ON our arithmetic pages though. I want the student next to me, with a blank piece of paper, and me with my notes, and nothing more than her fingers and some money and maybe a ruler. I also want to add in rulers as numberlines I think, after I figure out how.

Edited September 30, 2012 by Hunter

[Pen]

Pen, I am making arithmetic exciting with picture books, and what we talk about, and trying to apply everything to money and other commonly used itemsI also try to do that--but sometimes discover that other things work better for him--for example telling me what plane that I've never even heard of goes how many times, including fractions, faster than the speed of sound, or things about light years. He does find money of interest, but not as interesting as parsecs--it's that 2e thing and events (like birthdays :D thanks to farrarwilliams). Have you seen the How to Tutor No. Is there a link somewhere in the above thread if I pay better attention? pages. :lol: They look like Waldorf math missing all the art. :lol: for us Waldorf art was fantastic, but not the math

 

Exciting is learning and making progress and entering the Great Conversation. The development of the Arabic/Hindu decimal system is one of the most important discoveries ever made of ALL time,that I totally agree with!!! The Story of Math DVD and Hakim's science series have some interesting things. I'm thinking to get the Mathematicians are People Too book hivers have mentioned and most adults have no idea what the discovery is, or how to join the conversation of using it. I don't want any distractions on the arithmetic pages themselves. Arithmetic is exciting and beautiful itself. It's beauty is evident in it's simplicity. Sometimes additions of "fun" just obscures the beauty.

 

I looked at MM and passed it up because it was too much, not because it was too little. :lol: hmmm...a new perspective! I guess I will see very soon. A box just came!

 

We have math picture books scattered any you'd particularly recommend for around 5th grade?all over the apartment right now, and I'm looking at all sorts of math labs to place out for students to explore with. I don't want ANY of that ON our arithmetic pages though. I want the student next to me, with a blank piece of paper, and me with my notes, and nothing more than her fingers and some money and maybe a ruler. I also want to add in rulers as numberlines I think, after I figure out how.

 

Ah. This is actually reassuring. My ds lately likes to shove me away during math saying "I will do it myself", so this may be perfect. Last year his dyslexia meant explanations on the page were a problem, but it may turn out just right for this stage. Well, fingers crossed!

 

I suppose, back to the original thread topic, that there is not only "basics" and/or "concepts" and/or "fuzzy" etc., but also what makes for a good individual fit to the actual student and teacher.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Pen

[jeninok]

Are you sure you are not confusing enVision Math with Everyday Mathematics?

 

Bill

 

This is a little bit late, but yes it was Envision. I have two of the textbooks still sitting on my shelves.

 

They were doing almost all lattice multiplication, partial quotient division, and all the jumping around from book, to computer, to worksheets with no instructions was a mess. Interesting that they don't teach Envision using the Everyday math methods everywhere, but they certainly were at DS school.

Edited October 2, 2012 by jeninok

[Spy Car]

This is a little bit late, but yes it was Envision. I have two of the textbooks still sitting on my shelves.

 

They were doing almost all lattice multiplication, partial quotient division, and all the jumping around from book, to computer, to worksheets with no instructions was a mess. Interesting that they don't teach Envision using the Everyday math methods everywhere, but they certainly were at DS school.

 

So in the enVision textbooks you have on the shelf are you seeing lattice multiplication? In my experience thus far (K-3) the children are learning the standard algorithms, some mental math, and beginning level bar diagrams for word problems. It has been nothing like Everyday Mathematics.

 

Bill

[jeninok]

So in the enVision textbooks you have on the shelf are you seeing lattice multiplication? In my experience thus far (K-3) the children are learning the standard algorithms, some mental math, and beginning level bar diagrams for word problems. It has been nothing like Everyday Mathematics.

 

Bill

 

I'm not at home right now, but I will look when I get there, and see if it is in the actual text. If not this is going to be a methodology issue vs. bad program, or they were adapting Terc/Everyday Math type methods into Envision.

 

I will see if I can dig out any of his worksheets from 3rd and 4th grade too.

 

It has been a year since I even cracked one of them open, but I do remember that he had a very hard time with the lack of sequential review, the topic jumping, and was just completely confused by math all together.

The method they taught for carrying in addition, as well as double and triple digit multiplication were confusing, and they were doing a lot of drawing out large addition problems, similar to a video I have seen on youtube, I will try to find it.

 

 

ETA again....

Here is a link to some of the instructions in the text. DS found the books very confusing, and I see why, when I compare it to other programs. These confusing instructions combined with the overly busy bright pages, which didn't seem to have given any thought to how the eye traveled across the page made everything even worse.

 

https://www.box.com/shared/t2irivk1ca

 

 

Since switching to Miquon in February, and now combining it with CLE, he has made leaps and bounds, LEAPS! He understands numbers, can do an entire page of word problems from singapore or the spectrum 4/5 review book and is intuitively understanding fractions.

Edited October 2, 2012 by jeninok