siloam Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 I know my kids are young yet, but I am a big picture kind of gal who needs to see where I am going. And if I use LOF I will start next year, so I really don't feel I am jumping the gun too much. ;) I have been following the math posts for a while and right now (subject to change) the three above are my main picks. Can anyone help me understand what are their strengths and weaknesses? What philosophy they are based on? I know NEM has a non-traditional sequence, doesn't cover all the higher level maths (not sure where it ends through) and is demanding. Sounds like it might be short on proofs, is that right? LOF just looks fun, and you can't discount fun when you are talking math, because there can be precious little of it. Jacobs/Foerster sounds very strong on proofs. I know I should know, probably know what proofs are, but can someone explain it to me? I have gotten that they are very strong on proofs, but I am concerned about the...figure this out, then we will teach you the method set up of Foerster. I was always good at math, but mostly because I could look at the example and apply it. I just accepted formulas and used them. It wasn't because I was a math genius who understood HOW math worked, so this sounds like a bit much. My kids are not math gurus. They do well with it and don't mind it for the most part. If I gave the the option to stop they would have a party and never look at it again. But on the other hand my 10yo wants to be a Zoologist, Vet or Botanist and my 8yo wants to be a Vet and Computer Programmer (at the moment both, LOL!), so math is in their future. We will probalby have the time to do one full program and part of another as supplement, because we hs year around. What would you recommend we use as a main program and as a supplement and why? Comments encouraged even if you haven't seen or used them all. I want to know why you use your program, what its strengths and weaknesses are. The more I can wrap my mind around the programs the better a decision I can make about what would meet our goals. Thanks! Heather Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ria Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 Heather, My dh is a chemical and mechanical engineer, so math is a big part of his life. We used both Singapore and Saxon (we always used both programs w/ all our kids) when the kids were young, and moved them into NEM in 7th grade. The year our twins finished NEM 3 we also had them working from a public school pre-calc text. From there they went into cc classes. The twins have done well in college this year, so I have no problem recommending NEM along with something else to finish up high school (if you start NEM in 7th grade, your kids will be done with it in 10th). Dh feels that the mathematical reasoning skills taught/used in NEM are the best he's ever seen. Be warned - it's difficult and challenging. However, it really helped prepare ds for his engineering courses and higher level math classes. Ria Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidSChandler Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 Jacobs/Foerster sounds very strong on proofs. ...figure this out, then we will teach you the method set up of Foerster. ...What would you recommend we use as a main program and as a supplement and why? ...I want to know why you use your program, what its strengths and weaknesses are. Hi, I'm the author of the Math Without Borders supplementary materials (http://mathwithoutborders.com). I chose Foerster's Alg I and Alg II books as the basis for my videos because he has the strongest approach to word problems I have seen anywhere. I would not characterize him as overboard on proofs. He is rigorous, but he also knows when to back off and use examples and discussion rather than proofs to make his point. He comes from an engineering background and the word problems have a very realistic flavor to them. --David Chandler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest At home with 3 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 How does the New Elementary Mathematics Series correlate with general US texts? New Elementary Math uses an integrated approach. As a general guideline: NEM 1 - Pre-algebra, about 1/3 algebra 1 and geometry NEM 2 - 2/3 algebra 1, 1/3 geometry NEM 3 - some alegbra 1, most of algebra 2, 1/3 geometry, some trigonometry NEM 4 - some advanced algebra and geometry and review (NEM 1 - 3 covers the equivalent of pre-algebra, algebra 1, geometry, and most of algebra 2, with some advanced math concepts). Maybe this will help. I have used Singapore Math since Primary Math 2. We are starting NEM 3 this fall. I love it. NEM1 was challenging for us but NEM2 went better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpupg Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 We use both LOF and NEM. LOF is a complete math program. Don't let the fun aspect trick you into dismissing it as a supplement. It is demanding, and the geometry text is proof-driven like you would not believe. And when the kid sneaks the books out of the storage cabinet to read in bed, you know you have a winner :) These texts are short on practice sets and there are no review sections at all. The author is legendary for his availability and willingness to help. NEM is also demanding. It takes a different slant on things, which I really like. There are no 2-column proofs, but many of the geometry exercises are essentially proving various theorems -- they just aren't named or explained in that way. Their word problems can't be beat. I've been told the teacher's guides aren't that helpful. There are plenty of problems and periodic revision (review) sections. There is a solutions manual for levels 1 and 2, but not 3 or 4. Our solution is to use both. LOF is our spine, and NEM gets spliced in by chapter/topic. So we get both slants on the topic, the fun of Fred, the problem sets of NEM, lots of word problems, what's not to like? But my ds is a math freak and can handle this load. For my up and coming dd, who does not enjoy math so much, I may take a different path. Hope this helps, Karen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mom-to-three-sons Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 What is LOF? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinag Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 What is LOF? Life of Fred Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siloam Posted July 20, 2008 Author Share Posted July 20, 2008 Heather, My dh is a chemical and mechanical engineer, so math is a big part of his life. We used both Singapore and Saxon (we always used both programs w/ all our kids) when the kids were young, and moved them into NEM in 7th grade. The year our twins finished NEM 3 we also had them working from a public school pre-calc text. From there they went into cc classes. The twins have done well in college this year, so I have no problem recommending NEM along with something else to finish up high school (if you start NEM in 7th grade, your kids will be done with it in 10th). Dh feels that the mathematical reasoning skills taught/used in NEM are the best he's ever seen. Be warned - it's difficult and challenging. However, it really helped prepare ds for his engineering courses and higher level math classes. Ria Ria, It is good to see you back on the boards! Thanks for the reassurance on NEM. I just needed it. Thanks to Myrtle sending me a PM I know understand proofs, and want them too! We have the time for two programs, so I think the plan will be to use both NEM and Foerster together, but without Jacobs. The reasoning/problem solving is a large part of why I use the Elementary program. I don't know why I forget these things from time to time. :001_huh: Heather Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siloam Posted July 20, 2008 Author Share Posted July 20, 2008 Hi, I'm the author of the Math Without Borders supplementary materials (http://mathwithoutborders.com). I chose Foerster's Alg I and Alg II books as the basis for my videos because he has the strongest approach to word problems I have seen anywhere. I would not characterize him as overboard on proofs. He is rigorous, but he also knows when to back off and use examples and discussion rather than proofs to make his point. He comes from an engineering background and the word problems have a very realistic flavor to them. --David Chandler David thanks for your input. I am glad to hear the Foerster books make a stong program. Using video texts, though, goes against my teaching philosophy and given math is my best and favorite subject it will be the last one to go, even if I do have to compromise some day due to time constraints. I am glad you do produce such things for those who do need them! Heather (who now wants proofs, now that I know what they are ;) ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siloam Posted July 20, 2008 Author Share Posted July 20, 2008 How does the New Elementary Mathematics Series correlate with general US texts?New Elementary Math uses an integrated approach. As a general guideline: NEM 1 - Pre-algebra, about 1/3 algebra 1 and geometry NEM 2 - 2/3 algebra 1, 1/3 geometry NEM 3 - some alegbra 1, most of algebra 2, 1/3 geometry, some trigonometry NEM 4 - some advanced algebra and geometry and review (NEM 1 - 3 covers the equivalent of pre-algebra, algebra 1, geometry, and most of algebra 2, with some advanced math concepts). Maybe this will help. I have used Singapore Math since Primary Math 2. We are starting NEM 3 this fall. I love it. NEM1 was challenging for us but NEM2 went better. Thank you, I will have to print that out and study it! Heather Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siloam Posted July 20, 2008 Author Share Posted July 20, 2008 We use both LOF and NEM. LOF is a complete math program. Don't let the fun aspect trick you into dismissing it as a supplement. It is demanding, and the geometry text is proof-driven like you would not believe. And when the kid sneaks the books out of the storage cabinet to read in bed, you know you have a winner :) These texts are short on practice sets and there are no review sections at all. The author is legendary for his availability and willingness to help. NEM is also demanding. It takes a different slant on things, which I really like. There are no 2-column proofs, but many of the geometry exercises are essentially proving various theorems -- they just aren't named or explained in that way. Their word problems can't be beat. I've been told the teacher's guides aren't that helpful. There are plenty of problems and periodic revision (review) sections. There is a solutions manual for levels 1 and 2, but not 3 or 4. Our solution is to use both. LOF is our spine, and NEM gets spliced in by chapter/topic. So we get both slants on the topic, the fun of Fred, the problem sets of NEM, lots of word problems, what's not to like? But my ds is a math freak and can handle this load. For my up and coming dd, who does not enjoy math so much, I may take a different path. Hope this helps, Karen Karen, That is great to know! Now that I plan on using the Foerster Algebra I text I was wondering what I would do for Geometry, now I think I will plan on LOF. I still like the idea of LOF, so it still on team, just not on the starting line at this point. Time will tell how it all works out in real life. Thanks! Heather Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denise in PA Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 I highly recommend Paul Foerster's Algebra text. His text is written to encourage real thinking, to analyze and learn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidSChandler Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 Using video texts, though, goes against my teaching philosophy... One point of clarification: I wouldn't characterize my videos as a video text. They are the "lecture" component of the course. The textbook is the text. The videos are not intended to stand on their own. The student reads the text, listens to the lecture, and works from the text. I don't know if this still clashes with your philosophy, but I wouldn't want you to misperceive it. --David Chandler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siloam Posted July 21, 2008 Author Share Posted July 21, 2008 One point of clarification: I wouldn't characterize my videos as a video text. They are the "lecture" component of the course. The textbook is the text. The videos are not intended to stand on their own. The student reads the text, listens to the lecture, and works from the text. I don't know if this still clashes with your philosophy, but I wouldn't want you to misperceive it. --David Chandler David, I am glad you clarified that for anyone who might be reading the thread now or in the future and be confused. Personally I have a conviction that I need to work one on one as much as possible with my kids, so I shy away from any media resources unless they are just a supplement. Math, though, is my favorite subject so that will truly be a privilege to teach, one that I am just not willing to give up. :) Heather 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.