Is Saxon Math Considered Slow/Behind?

[crazyfordlr]

I wish I could remember her exact wording b/c it's been bothering me for weeks.

 

My ISP director commented that Saxon math was slow/behind/weak compared to the regular textbook most families used, Houghton-Mifflin's California Math.

 

Why does she think this? I was so taken back that I didn't know what to say. (I'm a big proponent of SM and personally knew John. Dh and I both keep in touch with many people that worked at Saxon Publishers back when we did.)

 

After much thought the only conclusion I've come to is CA state standards ... there's a big push to have students taking Algebra I in 8th grade. If one follows the path of 7/6 in 6th grade, 8/7 in 7th grade, and Algebra 1/2 in 8th grade, he or she will be behind.

 

I don't think most people, including my director, understand that you don't have to do both 8/7 and Algebra 1/2.

 

Am I even making sense? I'm tired and should just go to bed. IDK why this is bothering me so.

[Ellie]

My ISP director commented that Saxon math was slow/behind/weak compared to the regular textbook most families used, Houghton-Mifflin's California Math.

She's entitled to her opinion.

 

Why does she think this? I was so taken back that I didn't know what to say. (I'm a big proponent of SM and personally knew John. Dh and I both keep in touch with many people that worked at Saxon Publishers back when we did.)

I have no idea. I think she's mistaken.

 

After much thought the only conclusion I've come to is CA state standards ... there's a big push to have students taking Algebra I in 8th grade. If one follows the path of 7/6 in 6th grade, 8/7 in 7th grade, and Algebra 1/2 in 8th grade, he or she will be behind.

 

I don't think most people, including my director, understand that you don't have to do both 8/7 and Algebra 1/2.

There you go.

 

Besides which I don't see a reason to do algebra in 8th. :glare:

 

As long as you're not required to use the Houghton-Mifflin, go ahead and use Saxon and just smile and nod when she makes her comments.

[~*Beatrix*~]

I think of Saxon as being rigorous. I'm puzzled.

[Jpoy85]

I dont know that its behind. Todays Saxon 1 lesson was counting 1-5. At 1st grade they should know this already. The next few lessons are writing the numbers. Again 1st grade should know this..... BUT i have never used Saxon so maybe this is more review since its at the beginning of the book- maybe its to help bridge the K to 1 gap?

[TGHEALTHYMOM]

My consensus is that Saxon does start with alot of review to make sure concepts are bridged and learned before moving on.

 

My dd9 has just started using TT3 grade and she told me it is easier than Saxon Math.

 

She loves Math! I have Saxon workbooks for her to do if she still wants to, and she will.

 

Saxon is considered rigorous in our area of home schoolers and especially for self starters.

 

I know CC uses the Saxon Teacher DVD sets, and I have used the DIVE before with success but not without struggle.

 

I have some children who love math and some who struggle. The strugglers are mixed and I am sticking with them through Saxon at their own pace and with the help of DVD's at home.

[theYoungerMrsWarde]

I don't really think CA standards are exactly what you should be aspiring to. :glare: (I live in CA, and did elementary and high school in CA public schools.)

[boscopup]

I think the K-3 starts out a bit slow (K is really more like preK, and the 1st grade is somewhere inbetween normal K and 1st), BUT... I think once you get to 5/4 and up, it keeps up with traditional public school math programs.

 

California, OTOH, has different standards. I use Singapore Standards Edition (which is lined up to California standards, though it's probably a bit ahead of those standards also), and when my son was doing Singapore 4B, he would have tested into Saxon 7/6... BUT, I think Singapore has an advanced scope and sequence. I don't think Saxon is "behind". If you follow the normal Saxon sequence, you will still get to Algebra in 8th or 9th grade, which is what I would expect.

 

I have other issues with Saxon (especially the lower levels), but being "behind" is not one of them. :D

[angela in ohio]

When you line up curriulum and compare their S&S, yes it covers things a bit later than some other programs in the early years. Many have shared experiences on here of testing a child to put them into Saxon from another program, and the child tests ahead into Saxon. This happened with my oldest dd (we used it for a year, before we figured out she - and I - can't use incremental programs.)

 

There are different programs, some ahead or behind the rest or the average. Most will get you where you are going, though, if used consistently and well, including Saxon. :001_smile: If you are happy with Saxon, if your dc are learning with it, don't worry about what she says.

 

The usual advice is to pull out another math book or program once in a while and see if they can do some grade level problems. This is one way to make sure your child is really learning with a program and not just following the pattern of one specific text.

[Meriwether]

I don't know if it is behind, but I always use it a grade ahead. My 9 year old uses 7/6 and my 8yo uses 5/4. My 6yo is using Saxon 2. I have many other math resources, and my kids haven't had trouble with any of them.

[The Way of My People]

I think that Saxon K is "behind" grade level. We use it for pre-K here. By the end of Saxon 1, however, it seems to be at grade level.

 

I dont know that its behind. Todays Saxon 1 lesson was counting 1-5. At 1st grade they should know this already. The next few lessons are writing the numbers. Again 1st grade should know this..... BUT i have never used Saxon so maybe this is more review since its at the beginning of the book- maybe its to help bridge the K to 1 gap?

 

The first 30-ish lessons are review. I think the assumption is that your kid is just coming back to math after a summer break. Since we school year-round, I just skip/skim the first 30 lessons and dive in where they start teaching new material.

[Spy Car]

I don't really think CA standards are exactly what you should be aspiring to. :glare: (I live in CA, and did elementary and high school in CA public schools.)

 

The CA math stardards are the highest rated math standards in the nation.

 

CA is one of a very few states whose standards get an "A rating" from the Thomad Fordham Foundation, which is the highly respected organization that evaluates state educational standards. A shocking many states rank F, D, or C.

 

The overview of CA's math standard from Thomas Fordham reads:

 

California's standards could well serve as a model for internationally competitive national standards. They are explicit, clear, and cover the essential topics for rigorous mathematics instruction. The introduction for the standards is notable for providing excellent and clear guidance on mathematics education.

 

Bill

Edited October 16, 2012 by Spy Car

[Plateau Mama]

Considering that most people use Saxon a grade ahead, yes I think it's behind. If you use it as most people do then I think it is "fine". I'm using K now with my 4 yo and I'm ready to chuck the stupid thing and move to either Saxon 1 or MM.

 

When my son used it he was always at least a grade above. We used it thru 5/4. My daughter did Algebra 1 as a 6th grader as enrichment to her PS curriculum.

[TracyP]

The CA math stardards are the highest rated math standards in the nation.

 

CA is one of a very few states whose standards get an "A rating" from the Thomad Fordham Foundation, which is the highly respected organization that evaluates state educational standards. A shocking many states rank F, D, or C.

 

The overview of CA's math standard from Thomas Fordham reads:

 

California's standards could well serve as a model for internationally competitive national standards. They are explicit, clear, and cover the essential topics for rigorous mathematics instruction. The introduction for the standards is notable for providing excellent and clear guidance on mathematics education.

 

Bill

 

Yeah, but how are the students actually doing? MN loves to follow right along, next in line behind CA's standards. Yet the kids keep falling further behind. A quick google search brought up articles that seem to show a similar trend in CA. Really, I think parents should be concerned with making sure their children master concepts before moving on - not with meeting CA standards.

 

Back to the OP, I have always assumed that Saxon is behind. Their placement test recommends starting Saxon K at age 4.5, Saxon 1 at age 5.5, etc. So if you are using it at grade level it may be behind. I've never used Saxon so I don't know. Like I said, it is just an assumption I have.:bigear:

 

If your dc are doing well, I wouldn't worry too much about "behind". Every math program falls *somewhere* on the spectrum of ahead-behind. It all seems to even out around Algebra. ETA: FWIW, that is not to say that all Algebra programs are equal, just that basically every math curriculum will have you ready for Algebra by 8th or 9th grade.

Edited October 16, 2012 by TracyP

[Hunter]

Just because something includes ample review doesn't make it behind.

 

I don't believe in "behind" in math curricula. Pick a series that you like, and place your child at their ability level, no matter what number is on the cover.

 

And as for standards, they don't mean much to me. Expectations without assistance to get there are useless. And the ones that look the best on paper are often the hardest to implement.

 

And one of our human rights is to be "wrong" and do it anyway. If you like Saxon use it. And you don't need to defend that choice to anyone. You don't even need to be entirely sure about your choice. Your other rights are to make mistakes and to change your mind.

[Farrar]

 

I don't believe in "behind" in math curricula. Pick a series that you like, and place your child at their ability level, no matter what number is on the cover.

 

And as for standards, they don't mean much to me. Expectations without assistance to get there are useless. And the ones that look the best on paper are often the hardest to implement.

 

 

:iagree:

[Spy Car]

Yeah, but how are the students actually doing? MN loves to follow right along, next in line behind CA's standards. Yet the kids keep falling further behind. A quick google search brought up articles that seem to show a similar trend in CA. Really, I think parents should be concerned with making sure their children master concepts before moving on - not with meeting CA standards.

 

Back to the OP, I have always assumed that Saxon is behind. Their placement test recommends starting Saxon K at age 4.5, Saxon 1 at age 5.5, etc. So if you are using it at grade level it may be behind. I've never used Saxon so I don't know. Like I said, it is just an assumption I have.:bigear:

 

If your dc are doing well, I wouldn't worry too much about "behind". Every math program falls *somewhere* on the spectrum of ahead-behind. It all seems to even out around Algebra.

 

The children with "advantages" (good schools and financially well-off parents) tend to be doing great. At my son's school the math scores are phenomenal even with the high standards and expectations. But CA has a very high percentage of disadvantaged students as well, and success with those students his more highly variable. High Standards alone do not get the job done. That does not make high standards "bad."

 

I don't believe programs even out by algebra, unless one simply means kids get into a year of study called "algebra." but there is no doubt in my mind that a child raised using the best sort of math programs available to home educators will be light-years ahead of a student who has used a program that lacks serious creative problem solving and mathematical reasoning as a central part early math education. There is a world of difference between deep and shallow math educations.

 

Bill

[Carrie12345]

I think that Saxon K is "behind" grade level. We use it for pre-K here. By the end of Saxon 1, however, it seems to be at grade level.

 

 

 

The first 30-ish lessons are review. I think the assumption is that your kid is just coming back to math after a summer break. Since we school year-round, I just skip/skim the first 30 lessons and dive in where they start teaching new material.

 

:iagree:

My dds are doing 6/5 and 5/4 right now. Every year, they talk about how easy the first few weeks are, but it does ramp up.

[TracyP]

The children with "advantages" (good schools and financially well-off parents) tend to be doing great. At my son's school the math scores are phenomenal even with the high standards and expectations. But CA has a very high percentage of disadvantaged students as well, and success with those students his more highly variable. High Standards alone do not get the job done. That does not make high standards "bad."

That is the same story as here in MN. I have friends who work in a local school district. The staff realized how far behind their kids were in math. They basically said heck with the "standards" these kids are not ready for algebra. They backed them up and shored up the basics and this school knocked it out of the park when it came to test scores this year.

 

Anyway, I don't find high standards to be bad at all. But common sense has to prevail. MN is always patting itself on the back for "high standards." That means very little when 40% of your college bound students need remedial work before they can take College Algebra.

 

I don't believe programs even out by algebra, unless one simply means kids get into a year of study called "algebra." but there is no doubt in my mind that a child raised using the best sort of math programs available to home educators will be light-years ahead of a student who has used a program that lacks serious creative problem solving and mathematical reasoning as a central part early math education. There is a world of difference between deep and shallow math educations.

 

Bill

I edited in the meantime cuz I knew someone was going to jump on that. I'm not anywhere near qualified to get into "most rigorous Algebra" debate.;)

[MommaOfalotta]

The PS system I attended used Saxon for Elementary, Middle school and High school. They placed you in the math group based on your skills.. For ex. 8th grade had students in different books.

 

I agree that K is more preK curriculum.. and Saxon does offer a TON of review.. but Ive also always heard the saying that kids who use Saxon "will really KNOW their math."

[thebacabunch]

Most kids in CA are at or below grade level. Few are succeeding. The kids are ill prepared for it. We have to do very VERY rigorous work in math and multiple curriculums, lots of practice, etc to be on target. My kid is pretty burned out in math. I think it is ironic because CA students aren't doing all that well. The math standards don't meet the ability of the ps to get the kids on standard iykwim. My goal is to help my kids do well in college math. Period. The philosophy in CA makes me laugh. It seems to be: the kids are failing and falling behind so let's make everything way more difficult. DOn't work to give the kids a good foundation and fix what is broken, make the standard even more impossible.

 

BTW, some areas do well. Silicon valley and the bay area kick butt, for instance. The parents are heavily involved and push push push. It is a different world.

[NASDAQ]

The first four (K-3) are very different from the rest.

 

I think California has ambitious math standards. I don't think they're particularly good at achieving them.

 

is HM California Math the one that uses Singapore as a guide?

[crazyfordlr]

OP here...thanks for all your input! I feel better just getting it out there kwim. The more I think about it the more I think my director doesn't really know what she's talking about. She's only really familiar Saxon K-1...and not in her own classroom, just supporting parents who use it.

 

Carry on w/your discussion. I'm finding it very interesting ;)

[NASDAQ]

Saxon K-1 is a very different program. It has different authors, and was added to the series well after the main set. If she's basing her opinion of later grades on K-1, then she's speaking from a place of ignorance.

[NASDAQ]

FWIW, it looks like Saxon is an approved program in the state of California up to 87, but the Algebra 1/2 and Algebra 1 were rejected:

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ma/im/documents/mathrpt.pdf#search=saxon%20algebra&view=FitH&pagemode=none

 

That was prepared in 2001 but the up-to-date adoption listings still don't include Saxon after 87.

[angela in ohio]

FWIW, it looks like Saxon is an approved program in the state of California up to 87, but the Algebra 1/2 and Algebra 1 were rejected:

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ma/im/documents/mathrpt.pdf#search=saxon%20algebra&view=FitH&pagemode=none

 

That was prepared in 2001 but the up-to-date adoption listings still don't include Saxon after 87.

 

If used a grade ahead. You'll notice that 54-87 are recommended for grades 3-6. You can read more about that on mathematicallycorrect.com, where they have some great info on the history of CA standards and on Saxon math.

 

IMHO, CA has the only real math standards in this country. I wish our state would adopt something similar. It wouldn't solve the problems, of course, but at least we could open up a dialogue about changes in teacher education in math in order to try to meet them.

[Ellie]

Just because something includes ample review doesn't make it behind.

 

I don't believe in "behind" in math curricula. Pick a series that you like, and place your child at their ability level, no matter what number is on the cover.

 

And as for standards, they don't mean much to me. Expectations without assistance to get there are useless. And the ones that look the best on paper are often the hardest to implement.

 

And one of our human rights is to be "wrong" and do it anyway. If you like Saxon use it. And you don't need to defend that choice to anyone. You don't even need to be entirely sure about your choice. Your other rights are to make mistakes and to change your mind.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

[crazyfordlr]

ITA!