mommymilkies Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 My 11 yo is very good at math. She was soooo excited about Pre-Algebra with AoPS. She is almost entirely a VSL. She can do math, but has trouble verbalizing how she does it. I heard AoPS was great for kids like this. But yesterday we were doing lesson 1.2-1.3 and after reading the proofs, she totally lost it. It was waaaay too wordy and redundant. It was even too much for me. She was more confused afterward than before. D they really expect you to memorize and understand all of the formulae and definitions from the very beginning all at once? Does it get better? I am used to programs that work you up to concepts slower than this! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halcyon Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 Writing on my phone do pardon the brevity. I think with aops those rules are supposed to be understood in a deep way, not memorized persay. The Childs should be able to apply them in context without necessarily having"memorized" them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regentrude Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 I think with aops those rules are supposed to be understood in a deep way, not memorized persay. The Childs should be able to apply them in context without necessarily having"memorized" them. :iagree: I have not seen the prealgebra book, but used all the others. There is no memorization in AoPS. Actually, there should be no memorization in math at all (asides from things like the times tables). Conceptual understanding renders memorization unnecessary. What memorization exactly are you referring to? Can you give an example of the formulas you mean? That might make it easier for me to specifically address your question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regentrude Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 I am used to programs that work you up to concepts slower than this! Any other program is slower than AoPS. You picked the fastest, most challenging curriculum. Hold on tight for an exciting ride. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcadia Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 (edited) But yesterday we were doing lesson 1.2-1.3 and after reading the proofs, she totally lost it. I just check my book and those lessons are for the commutative and associative property for addition and subtraction. My boys were shown the proof in 2nd grade and my younger kid understood the proof after manipulating with coins. My kids read the boxes at first reading, than the full text. We are using the book as a supplement, we are still deciding on the spine. My boys watched the videos before doing the book. They discuss the video among themselves. ETA: my boys are audio-visual learners so the videos reinforce the concepts for them. Edited September 28, 2012 by Arcadia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyforlatin Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 My 11 yo is very good at math. She was soooo excited about Pre-Algebra with AoPS. She is almost entirely a VSL. She can do math, but has trouble verbalizing how she does it. I heard AoPS was great for kids like this. But yesterday we were doing lesson 1.2-1.3 and after reading the proofs, she totally lost it. It was waaaay too wordy and redundant. It was even too much for me. She was more confused afterward than before. D they really expect you to memorize and understand all of the formulae and definitions from the very beginning all at once? Does it get better? I am used to programs that work you up to concepts slower than this! Those properties were probably covered in an earlier math book. DD was exposed to these properties in MM and Beast. Is the problem with memorization or with understanding the concepts? I know there aren't many problems in those lessons, but if she can explain those concepts using numbers rather than letters, then you could always come back to it later on. One day, she can substitute the numbers with variables. Have you looked at the videos? They don't really add much to the book, except you get to see the author while he explains the concepts. The videos are short and funny, and we've only looked at them after the doing the problems in the book. I'm not really into videos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jennynd Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 Try out c rods. It will quickly clear her up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommymilkies Posted September 28, 2012 Author Share Posted September 28, 2012 Those properties were probably covered in an earlier math book. DD was exposed to these properties in MM and Beast. Is the problem with memorization or with understanding the concepts? I know there aren't many problems in those lessons, but if she can explain those concepts using numbers rather than letters, then you could always come back to it later on. One day, she can substitute the numbers with variables. Have you looked at the videos? They don't really add much to the book, except you get to see the author while he explains the concepts. The videos are short and funny, and we've only looked at them after the doing the problems in the book. I'm not really into videos. She understands the concepts. It's the huge page long list of terms and stuff that looks daunting! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wapiti Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 She understands the concepts. It's the huge page long list of terms and stuff that looks daunting! What page do you mean? The chapter summary, pp. 48-49? As long as she understands the concepts in the list, I think that's enough. Associative, commutative and distributive terms are good to understand, but the long list of terms I don't think my kids would know, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyforlatin Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 What page do you mean? The chapter summary, pp. 48-49? As long as she understands the concepts in the list, I think that's enough. Associative, commutative and distributive terms are good to understand, but the long list of terms I don't think my kids would know, lol. I agree. I use the terms with DD, but as long as she understands the concepts, I'm willing to use the terms consistently until she absorbs them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halcyon Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 What page do you mean? The chapter summary, pp. 48-49? As long as she understands the concepts in the list, I think that's enough. Associative, commutative and distributive terms are good to understand, but the long list of terms I don't think my kids would know, lol. I disagree, to a point. When i ask my son, "what is the definition of division?" i expect him to know the answer, but only because he understands the rule. When i give a hint like "think about how the associative law might come into play here" i expect him to know what i am referring to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wapiti Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 I disagree, to a point. When i ask my son, "what is the definition of division?" i expect him to know the answer, but only because he understands the rule. When i give a hint like "think about how the associative law might come into play here" i expect him to know what i am referring to. I do want them to know what associative, commutative and distributive mean, but I'm not terribly concerned about them recognizing the rest of the terms on those two pages (most of which are descriptive rather than actual terms). I guess I should add negation and reciprocal to my little list. But, I personally wouldn't stop moving forward over term definitions as long as the concepts are understood. I guess what I'm trying to say to OP about words is that there are really only a few words there that I'd be concerned about, and that I'm much more concerned about concepts. The terms for the concepts become easier to remember as the student comes across them more in the book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommymilkies Posted September 28, 2012 Author Share Posted September 28, 2012 I do want them to know what associative, commutative and distributive mean, but I'm not terribly concerned about them recognizing the rest of the terms on those two pages (most of which are descriptive rather than actual terms). I guess I should add negation and reciprocal to my little list. But, I personally wouldn't stop moving forward over term definitions as long as the concepts are understood. I guess what I'm trying to say to OP about words is that there are really only a few words there that I'd be concerned about, and that I'm much more concerned about concepts. The terms for the concepts become easier to remember as the student comes across them more in the book. And she knows what I mean when I say the term or we habpve a problem with them, but for some reason those couple pages made her think she would never get this or get beyond those pages. We also came from SM, which didn't review a lot of the terms, just the understanding of math. Kwim? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down_the_Rabbit_Hole Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 I don't know how the other AOPS math books are, but in the Algebra book I am constantly seeing them remind the student to not memorize. They want them to understand them only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.