Math Mammoth Revisions

[extendedforecast]

I just read the November newsletter detailing the changes Maria Miller is making to the curriculum. It looks to me that the curriculum is being dumbed down. Am I missing something? If this has already been discussed, please let me know, as I've already tried two searches on the forum and came up with nothing.

[Bearcat]

nm

[boscopup]

She's aligning it with Common Core Standards. Looks like several topics got bumped from grade 4 to grade 5, but she's still covering the material, so I don't know about it being "dumbed down". She doesn't appear to be removing things, just moving them around. She's also added some things in.

[extendedforecast]

Two topics (integers and something else) are being dropped from the 5th grade level. She didn't mention adding it in anywhere either.

[boscopup]

Two topics (integers and something else) are being dropped from the 5th grade level. She didn't mention adding it in anywhere either.

 

Ah, ok... I had read her blog post, but just looked up her newsletter post. Ick. She says she's moving some 6th grade things to 7th (which she doesn't have).

 

It does sound like she's dumbing some things down. :(

 

I prefer what Singapore does... Meet the standards OR exceed them. Why couldn't she do the same?

[TracyP]

Ah, ok... I had read her blog post, but just looked up her newsletter post. Ick. She says she's moving some 6th grade things to 7th (which she doesn't have).

 

It does sound like she's dumbing some things down. :(

 

I prefer what Singapore does... Meet the standards OR exceed them. Why couldn't she do the same?

:iagree: Does she have to do this to fit in new topics??? This really doesn't make sense to me.

[Farrar]

Here's a link to the blog post. It does look like new topics were added. But the post is only about grade 4 and 5. What's up with the whole series? What did the email say? I've never been on their email list somehow...

 

If it really is just reshuffling of things to meet the Common Core - some things moving up and others moving down, the way it looked there, then I'm okay with that. The problem is that my experience with these things has always been negative. When I was teaching, there were a lot of AP classes that were not allowed to cover the full AP content anymore because the Virginia SOL content had to come first. That was a blatant dumbing down of the material and standards and it was really dreadful. And the administration did use that exact language about it - "We'll get to this other content later." No. No you won't. It was a complete lie. So... I generally trust MM, and I mostly love it... but that standards alignment does really give me a pause.

[TracyP]

Here it is:

For grade 5, I know of these upcoming changes:

 

- prime factorization will move from 6th to 5th grade

- fraction division will move from 5th to 6th grade

- more difficult conversions between measuring units will move from 4th to 5th

- the current two last chapters (integers and percent) will be taken off from 5th grade

- in geometry, the lessons about area of polygons will move to 6th grade. Geometry topics for 5th grade will include coordinate grid, volume, and classifying two-dimensional figures into categories.

 

The main "framework" for 5th will not change—it will still concentrate on fraction and decimal arithmetic. The first and second chapters will cover about the same topics also.

 

For grade 6, there will be bigger changes. Many topics currently in MM6 will need to move to 7th.

[SorrelZG]

Hmm.. I'm guessing this wont effect the Blue series, right? Just the grade leveled Light Blue series? (The blog post isn't loading for me)

[hollyhock]

Thanks for posting this. I was unaware of the changes.

[extendedforecast]

Hmm.. I'm guessing this wont effect the Blue series, right? Just the grade leveled Light Blue series? (The blog post isn't loading for me)

 

I believe you're correct. I'm glad I have the old version of MM light blue. I need to be sure it's triply backed up, because I plan on using it for my younger ones when they start school.

[Mergath]

I believe you're correct. I'm glad I have the old version of MM light blue. I need to be sure it's triply backed up, because I plan on using it for my younger ones when they start school.

 

:iagree: Glad I have the whole set. I'm really liking the looks of it, and I don't want to have to use the new, dumbed down version when dd is old enough to start it.

[5Wizards]

I believe you're correct. I'm glad I have the old version of MM light blue. I need to be sure it's triply backed up, because I plan on using it for my younger ones when they start school.

 

:iagree:

 

I'm very happy with MM as is. I'm glad that I have the download for the future.

Edited November 12, 2012 by 5Wizards

[5LittleMonkeys]

I believe you're correct. I'm glad I have the old version of MM light blue. I need to be sure it's triply backed up, because I plan on using it for my younger ones when they start school.

 

:iagree: Me too.

[Stuart]

I'm planning on buying 5 and 6 during the thanksgiving sale. I can then download the "new" version and compare.

[ByGrace3]

Thanks for this thread! I recently emailed Maria Miller about first and third grade changes because I already printed both grades which is rather expensive. She emailed me the following:

 

the main part that is different is in the 1-B, addition and subtraction chapter.

 

In grade 3, there are some topics you'd need to reprint from the newer edition, and those are the geometry chapter (esp. the lessons on area and perimeter) and then the fractions chapter.

 

I am curious though. I just downloaded the new grades, but I am not sure which to use now...:bigear:

[crazyforlatin]

When I got that email, I was wondering if she could add a grade 7 book due to topics being moved to the next level. But I don't think so since she never mentioned Pre-A.

 

I do have the old version, and I think if we purchased the set a couple of years ago, we get free updates.

[Plateau Mama]

Two topics (integers and something else) are being dropped from the 5th grade level. She didn't mention adding it in anywhere either.

 

I talked to her yesterday. We are currently in MM5 and I was wondering if I should just use the old versions for 6th. She old me the last two chapters are being moved to 6th so skip them and do them next year. Decimal division is Also being moved to 6th, but she said to go ahead and do it now (that is the unit we are on) and then review it next year. She also said some of the geometry was being moved but to go ahead and do it all because extra geometry is never a bad thing.

 

All the same content is there, it's just being shifted up or down a year. I don see how that is dumbing it down? :confused:

[SorrelZG]

There's a Thanksgiving sale!? When? (seriously)

[crazyforlatin]

There's a Thanksgiving sale!? When? (seriously)

 

From her email:

 

Upcoming sale notices

 

I will run my traditional Thanksgiving sale from November 19 till November 30. I'll let you know the details when the time is near.

 

Currclick will run a sale starting in late November and on into December.

 

I'm sure someone here will post the sale.

[SorrelZG]

From her email:

 

 

 

I'm sure someone here will post the sale.

 

 

Thank-you!

[boscopup]

All the same content is there, it's just being shifted up or down a year. I don see how that is dumbing it down? :confused:

 

This part makes us think that:

 

For grade 6, there will be bigger changes. Many topics currently in MM6 will need to move to 7th.

 

She does not have a 7th grade program. So by making these changes, she is effectively "dumbing down" her program - it isn't ending in the same place as it once did at the end of 6th grade. I wasn't concerned about topics being moved around within the 1-6 series, but moving things out to 7th grade... don't like that.

 

Another concern of mine would be that people using the new version would read old threads here about going from MM6 straight to Algebra and think that they can do that with what they're using, which they may not be able to if those topics got moved out of the 6th grade program.

[Jim]

I purchesed MM Light Blue last year, or was it the year before. I e-mailed her last week about the new version and she provided a download link. If you b oght it already just e-mail and after downloading you can compare.

 

We're not overly concerned with common core so we'll stick with whats working. Ds2 is using this along side Saxon because he thinks it's fun. Picks it up himself.

 

 

Jim

[mothergooseof4]

I have all except 6b in the original version. Is there a way to get the original 6b? I don't want the updated version.

[boscopup]

I have all except 6b in the original version. Is there a way to get the original 6b? I don't want the updated version.

 

I don't think the updated version is available yet for that level. You should be ok buying it now.

[wapiti]

She does not have a 7th grade program. So by making these changes, she is effectively "dumbing down" her program - it isn't ending in the same place as it once did at the end of 6th grade. I wasn't concerned about topics being moved around within the 1-6 series, but moving things out to 7th grade... don't like that.

 

Another concern of mine would be that people using the new version would read old threads here about going from MM6 straight to Algebra and think that they can do that with what they're using, which they may not be able to if those topics got moved out of the 6th grade program.

 

I don't know if "dumbing down" is necessarily the best way to put it, but I'm not happy about spreading out the sequence for an additional year. I'm glad I have the old one, and I'm thankful that my kids' school, which uses some Light Blue MM, also has the old one (for now).

 

On the one hand, I don't think it's a big deal to move topics to 7 from 6 that are typically covered in a prealgebra text, e.g., parts of chapters 2, 6, 7, and 9. Some of that we skipped anyway, moving on to a prealgebra text instead. Based on her comment, I assume she'll have to write a grade 7, which is probably already half-written thanks to the topics being moved.

 

On the other hand, I really, really, really don't think that division should be separated by a grade level from the other operations for fractions and decimals. IMO, it should all stay in 5. I wonder why it can't be "aligned to the CCS" and yet cover a few topics earlier than the CCS.

 

Knowing nothing about either CCS or CA standards, I wonder whether they conflict - what grade level is the goal for "algebra 1" under these two systems? I'm guessing that CCS spreads out "middle school math" forever, or at least a year longer than CA standards - am I wrong? Will CA adopt the CCS?

 

I like that factoring is covered earlier in the new version. I probably like the various changes to the geometry chapters (moving some stuff out of the 5th grade geometry chapter).

 

I'd like to see negative numbers consolidated and covered earlier, so that later coverage could kick it up a notch.

 

ETA, wild speculation: do y'all suppose that "MM 7," if there was one, would have a sequence suspiciously like a prealgebra text? Maria, if you are listening, it would all be good if you'd just use a sequence for a grade 7 worktext that follows the sequence of aops prealgebra ;)

Edited November 10, 2012 by wapiti

[Bearcat]

nm

[justLisa]

I really wish she'd make BOTH options available then.

 

I would think she'd take a hit for this. Are not home schoolers a huge source of her buyers? I would think so. And so far it does not seem like HSers are happy about this.

[hollyhock]

Well, maybe I'm the only one, but I'm happy about the changes. My son is bright but average in math and MM5 was too much for him. I had to switch to something else (reluctantly) and it's been bothering me ever since. I am thrilled to know that we can leave some topics in MM5 for next year and return to it for the rest of this year. I don't feel it's being dumbed down. I feel like it's being made accessible to the more average student and the advanced topics are being moved to where they are more age-appropriate.

 

If your kids can handle it the way it was originally, that's great. But I'm glad I get the opportunity to use it, too.

[FairProspects]

Do you mean starting pre-algebra in 8th? It used to be done in 6th here. That would be a major move.

[Farrar]

I'm fine with holding off on a topic if it's not right for my kids at that time... but the idea that some topics would disappear from the sequence entirely bothers me. I'd much rather be finishing MM6 in "seventh grade" and have it be complete.

 

If it's really the case that these are topics that were included because they're needed before you do algebra and the material already exists, why can't she publish it all as a Blue volume 6th grade supplement? Or a special Blue volume of "Advanced Elementary Math Topics" or something alone those lines. Then the materials would be there for those of us who don't give a flying squirrel about the CCS and could be used however we want while the main Light Blue books could be fully aligned like she wants - presumably for marketing purposes.

[wapiti]

CA has already adopted CCS. And they had to lower many of the state standards they already had in place to do so.

 

CCS pushed pre-algebra and algebra studies back. It will not be studied until 8th and 9th grade, while it used to be started in 7th in most areas.

 

Thanks - that's interesting. I wonder about what this means, if anything, for SM Stds Ed.

 

I'm fine with holding off on a topic if it's not right for my kids at that time... but the idea that some topics would disappear from the sequence entirely bothers me. I'd much rather be finishing MM6 in "seventh grade" and have it be complete.

 

Thus it makes sense that she'll come up with "MM7." I almost emailed to ask whether that was the plan.

 

If it's really the case that these are topics that were included because they're needed before you do algebra and the material already exists, why can't she publish it all as a Blue volume 6th grade supplement? Or a special Blue volume of "Advanced Elementary Math Topics" or something alone those lines. Then the materials would be there for those of us who don't give a flying squirrel about the CCS and could be used however we want while the main Light Blue books could be fully aligned like she wants - presumably for marketing purposes.

 

All the topics are already included in Blue someplace. I suppose it depends on what she moves. Eta, I'm not sure why some of them were included to begin with, because I vaguely recall her saying someplace that 6 was not meant to be a prealgebra.

 

I agree that it would be nice to have an "advanced" sequence and a "traditional" sequence - maybe just a chart. Generally I prefer the Light Blue, but if I had to buy now for an advanced student I'd consider getting the Blue (either alone or in addition to the Light Blue).

Edited November 10, 2012 by wapiti

[Jyniffrec]

I really wish she'd make BOTH options available then.

 

I would think she'd take a hit for this. Are not home schoolers a huge source of her buyers? I would think so. And so far it does not seem like HSers are happy about this.

 

:iagree:

[Farrar]

All the topics are already included in Blue someplace. I suppose it depends on what she moves. Eta, I'm not sure why some of them were included to begin with, because I vaguely recall her saying someplace that 6 was not meant to be a prealgebra.

 

On her site, it has a what to do next sort of section and she basically says that you can do a 7th grade program or year of pre-algebra and makes suggestions or if your student is advanced, you can do right into algebra, and makes suggestions.

 

I know all the topics are currently in Blue somewhere... it would just seem that if an MM7 is not the plan, that she could relatively easily combine the material into a special MM6+ Blue series book so parents wouldn't have to search all around for it.

 

We have awhile though... as we're just in MM3. :D

[Kuovonne]

I contacted Maria Miller about the revised versions because I have only through 6A, not 6B and wanted to know if I need to buy 6B before it got revised, even though my kid just started MM4B. She suggested that I wait 1 to 1 1/2 years, and then buy 6B AND MM7 then. So she is definately planning on having MM7 and it will be done in time for my kids.

[justLisa]

I contacted Maria Miller about the revised versions because I have only through 6A, not 6B and wanted to know if I need to buy 6B before it got revised, even though my kid just started MM4B. She suggested that I wait 1 to 1 1/2 years, and then buy 6B AND MM7 then. So she is definately planning on having MM7 and it will be done in time for my kids.

 

Gee that stinks though, for people who don't want to stretch it over to MM7. Unless she is writing Algebra? :confused:

 

I think she should offer both or there are going to be some annoyed people.

[Plateau Mama]

Well, maybe I'm the only one, but I'm happy about the changes. My son is bright but average in math and MM5 was too much for him. I had to switch to something else (reluctantly) and it's been bothering me ever since. I am thrilled to know that we can leave some topics in MM5 for next year and return to it for the rest of this year. I don't feel it's being dumbed down. I feel like it's being made accessible to the more average student and the advanced topics are being moved to where they are more age-appropriate.

 

If your kids can handle it the way it was originally, that's great. But I'm glad I get the opportunity to use it, too.

 

My son is very good at math. I very rarely have to help him. I feel there is a very big jump between 4 & 5. He has had a couple of topics that he just didn't understand and I had to sit down with him and go over it.

 

Here Algebra is a 9th grade class. My 7th grader is taking it in PS. She had to test into it and she will recieve HS credit.

[AimeeM]

I'm glad I already purchased MM6.

I'm disappointed in her decision to conform the curriculum to meet CCS. If I wanted to meet public school standards, my children would be in public school.

[extendedforecast]

I'm glad I already purchased MM6.

I'm disappointed in her decision to conform the curriculum to meet CCS. If I wanted to meet public school standards, my children would be in public school.

 

:iagree: completely, and my kids are in public schools. I afterschool using MM 6 with my 6th grader. In her accelerated class, they are currently multiplying and dividing fractions, which was covered in MM 5B.

[extendedforecast]

Well, maybe I'm the only one, but I'm happy about the changes. My son is bright but average in math and MM5 was too much for him. I had to switch to something else (reluctantly) and it's been bothering me ever since. I am thrilled to know that we can leave some topics in MM5 for next year and return to it for the rest of this year. I don't feel it's being dumbed down. I feel like it's being made accessible to the more average student and the advanced topics are being moved to where they are more age-appropriate.

 

If your kids can handle it the way it was originally, that's great. But I'm glad I get the opportunity to use it, too.

 

I was able to adapt the curriculum to work with my daughter. For my oldest daughter, who is more of an average Math student, we stretched MM 5&6 over three years. I'm glad I did it this way for her. She now has a very solid foundation in Math and is acing her pre-algebra class this year.

[shukriyya]

I just checked the website and it looks like 5 and 6 will still be available in their original versions till next Spring. For those who don't want the revisions there is the option of going ahead and purchasing those grades now or during the upcoming sale.

[Chrysalis Academy]

I emailed Maria and asked her about the upcoming changes to MM (particularly MM5/6 and if MM7 is planned). I'm copying her reply here (with her permission), as clearly I'm not the only one who was wondering ;):

Aligning MM to the Common Core Standards is not a dumbing down at all. It mostly involves moving topics from one grade to another, not making the lessons or concepts "dumber". I could not do that! I still dearly love teaching children concepts of mathematics.

 

Besides, Common Core Standards aren't that "dumb" anyway. They are a big improvement over many current states' standards because they focus more (hence "core" standards), because they emphasize algebraic thinking, and because they specifically mention certain CONCEPTS that students should understand (and not just procedures).

 

In fact, some teachers feel CCS for math are a move towards too much conceptual & algebraic thinking in the lower grades :) They feel they are too difficult.

 

And, while some homeschoolers may not care for CCS, the fact is, those who are tested yearly will eventually have to take them into consideration because the tests will start reflecting the CCS.

 

I'm not yet working on MM7. It will be pre-algebra, yes. Please see these two draft documents for my planned scope and sequence for MM6 and MM7. I hope it will allay everyone's fears. The scope of MM6 currently actually includes some pre-algebra topics, so those will move to 7th.

 

http://www.mathmammoth.com/preview/docs/MM_lesson_list_grade_6_draft.pdf

http://www.mathmammoth.com/preview/docs/MM_lesson_list_grade_7_draft.pdf

 

Sincerely,

Maria Miller

 

 

Here are some actual examples of CCS for math. The whole document is available at

http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_Math%20Standards.pdf

 

(Third grade - mastery of multiplication facts is expected)

 

3.OA.7

Fluently multiply and divide within 100, using strategies such as the

relationship between multiplication and division (e.g., knowing that 8 ×

5 = 40, one knows 40 ÷ 5 = 8) or properties of operations. By the end

of Grade 3, know from memory all products of two one-digit numbers

(Distributive property in 3rd grade - I consider that a bit advanced)

 

3.MD

.7

c. Use tiling to show in a concrete case that the area of a rectangle

with whole-number side lengths a and b + c is the sum of

a × b and a × c. Use area models to represent the distributive

property in mathematical reasoning.

 

(Write and solve equations in 4th grade)

 

4.MD

.7

Recognize angle measure as additive. When an angle is decomposed

into non-overlapping parts, the angle measure of the whole is the sum

of the angle measures of the parts. Solve addition and subtraction

problems to find unknown angles on a diagram in real world and

mathematical problems, e.g., by using an equation with a symbol for

the unknown angle measure.

(Explicit mention of the standard algorithm)

 

5.NBT.5

Fluently multiply multi-digit whole numbers using the standard

algorithm.

 

(5th grade fractions - conceptual understanding required)

 

5.NF

.5

Interpret multiplication as scaling (resizing), by:

 

b. Explaining why multiplying a given number by a fraction greater

than 1 results in a product greater than the given number

(recognizing multiplication by whole numbers greater than 1 as

a familiar case); explaining why multiplying a given number by

a fraction less than 1 results in a product smaller than the given

number; and relating the principle of fraction equivalence a/b =

(n×a)/(n×b) to the effect of multiplying a/b by 1.

 

 

5.NF

.7

 

a. Interpret division of a unit fraction by a non-zero whole number,

and compute such quotients. For example, create a story context

for (1/3) ÷ 4, and use a visual fraction model to show the quotient.

Use the relationship between multiplication and division to explain

 

 

(6th grade - problems that can be typically found in pre-algebra and even algebra 1 books)

6.RP.3.

 

 

b. Solve unit rate problems including those involving unit pricing and

constant speed. For example, if it took 7 hours to mow 4 lawns, then

at that rate, how many lawns could be mowed in 35 hours? At what

rate were lawns being mowed?

 

c. Find a percent of a quantity as a rate per 100 (e.g., 30% of a

quantity means 30/100 times the quantity); solve problems

involving finding the whole, given a part and the percent.

 

(Maria's note: This means a problem like this:

Twelve students in the class are sick today, which is 30% of the class. how many students are in the class?

)

 

 

(6th grade statistics - I feel these are advanced concepts)

6.SP

Summarize and describe distributions.

4. Display numerical data in plots on a number line, including dot plots,

histograms, and box plots.

 

5. Summarize numerical data sets in relation to their context, such as by:

a. Reporting the number of observations.

b. Describing the nature of the attribute under investigation,

including how it was measured and its units of measurement.

c. Giving quantitative measures of center (median and/or mean) and

variability (interquartile range and/or mean absolute deviation), as

well as describing any overall pattern and any striking deviations

from the overall pattern with reference to the context in which the

data were gathered.

d. Relating the choice of measures of center and variability to the

shape of the data distribution and the context in which the data

were gathered.

 

 

(7th grade - pre-algebra stuff)

 

 

7. RP

 

2. c. Represent proportional relationships by equations. For example, if

total cost t is proportional to the number n of items purchased at

a constant price p, the relationship between the total cost and the

number of items can be expressed as t = pn.

d. Explain what a point (x, y) on the graph of a proportional

relationship means in terms of the situation, with special attention

to the points (0, 0) and (1, r) where r is the unit rate.

3. Use proportional relationships to solve multistep ratio and percent

problems. Examples: simple interest, tax, markups and markdowns,

gratuities and commissions, fees, percent increase and decrease, percent

error.

 

[Lang Syne Boardie]

I have infinite respect for Maria Miller and will certainly continue to use (older version) MM with my children, but Common Core Standards are indeed dumbed down compared to my state's former standards. And we're pretty torqued about it, not just homeschoolers but ps math teachers as well. (Edited to add, the English standards are worse than our original standards, too.)

[wapiti]

I'm not yet working on MM7. It will be pre-algebra, yes. Please see these two draft documents for my planned scope and sequence for MM6 and MM7. I hope it will allay everyone's fears. The scope of MM6 currently actually includes some pre-algebra topics, so those will move to 7th.

 

http://www.mathmammoth.com/preview/docs/MM_lesson_list_grade_6_draft.pdf

http://www.mathmammoth.com/preview/docs/MM_lesson_list_grade_7_draft.pdf

 

Thanks for emailing her and for posting her response!! I was hoping this was what she'd do. While I won't agree with all the CCS, what I think she's planning makes sense to me (with the caveat that I haven't clicked on these links yet).

 

I still don't understand why a program couldn't do a topic ahead of the timing in the CCS and still pass muster under the CCS.

[Hunter]

This reminds me of the What Your _ Grader Needs to Know revision. Topics got stretched out to grades 7 and 8, but were never published. :confused: as to why a publisher would do this.

 

I've been looking at MM. I'm doing well with Professor B and How to Tutor, but...I can't help looking around. I'm a very visual learner. While I do well with text only instructions aimed at the teacher, when I buckle down and use them, an illustrated text with good formatting does appeal to me. It's kind of like the difference between BFSU and Evan-Moor Daily Science.

 

Since there is a digital version, I would hope the author will continue to sell the old series to those that want it.

 

I don't mind dumbing down as long as a series is complete. I also don't mind placing a student lower in a rigorous curriculum than their grade/age, as a shorter series is often cheaper to purchase, and has less pages to complete altogether. I am sick to death of unfinished series though, especially ones that were originally complete.

[Corraleno]

I still don't understand why a program couldn't do a topic ahead of the timing in the CCS and still pass muster under the CCS.

I think the problem with that is that she has to take something out in order to fit the new topics in. E.g., she needed to add 6-7 new topics to MM4; if she'd left all of the original MM4 material in there, that would either have added many extra weeks to the year, or extra hours to the week — plus it would mean repeating the same material in MM5, since it would need to be there as well, in order to align with the standards.

 

I think it actually makes a lot of sense for her to align the sequence of topics with the CCS, because I think a significant chunk of homeschoolers (maybe even a majority) either come out of PS, or go back to PS at some point, or both. Not to mention those who have to take standardized tests. Aligning MM with the CCS means that, for parents to whom it does matter, they will know their kids have covered the topics that need to be covered. For those of us who are 100% sure our kids will never be going back to PS, well, we're free to accelerate, right?

 

Jackie

[Corraleno]

It will be pre-algebra, yes. Please see these two draft documents for my planned scope and sequence for MM6 and MM7. I hope it will allay everyone's fears. The scope of MM6 currently actually includes some pre-algebra topics, so those will move to 7th.

A lot of people (including me :D) have been bugging Maria to write a prealgebra program for quite a while. I think most students who finish MM6 still do a year of prealgebra before starting algebra anyway, so now they'll have MM Prealgebra. If it's finished in time for my current 5th grader to use it for 7th, I'll be thrilled!

 

I don't get the "dumbing down" comments. Looking at the changes for 4th & 5th grade, roughly the same # of topics were added to 4th grade as were moved up to 5th. Even with the changes, MM will still be an excellent, rigorous math program with deep conceptual explanations, challenging problem sets, and a strong emphasis on algebraic thinking and problem solving. Aligning the sequence of topics with CCS is not going to suddenly turn the program into Everyday Mathematics, kwim? :confused:

 

Jackie

[Hunter]

Does anyone know what is going on with the blue series?

[my2boysteacher]

I think most students who finish MM6 still do a year of prealgebra before starting algebra anyway, so now they'll have MM Prealgebra. If it's finished in time for my current 5th grader to use it for 7th, I'll be thrilled!

 

 

Jackie

 

Actually, quite a few people here have gone from Math Mammoth 5 directly into Pre-Algebra, my son included. But yes, I can see how a lot of people would like having a MM Pre-Algebra course. I just wonder how those with 'mathy' kids, who want an advanced math sequence, will feel about that. :confused:

[wapiti]

For those of us who are 100% sure our kids will never be going back to PS, well, we're free to accelerate, right?

 

Some of us are even free to accelerate with MM even if they're already in PS :D (my kids' charter school is using some MM this year, though I'll make them do MM at home regardless; the dd I accelerated at home with MM and then aops, who is now in middle school, did finally get into an algebra class, first year of two). Indeed, one of the great advantages of MM is its easy flexibility to use as you like without a lot of headache in tweaking or accelerating.

 

The more I think about this and see that MM7 is just prealgebra, where some of those MM6 topics belonged anyway, I think this is a good thing. Off the top of my head, the only topics I'd teach earlier than the new order would be division for fractions and decimals, and maybe negative numbers - or more likely, maybe I'd just accelerate through at a faster rate. I still haven't looked at the list in great detail, but I feel quite sure that MM prealgebra will help a lot of people, on these boards and elsewhere :). I hope she writes fast!

 

Does anyone know what is going on with the blue series?

 

I don't think anything is going on with the Blue.

 

Once she finishes MM7, maybe she'll add a few books to the Blue to include the new topics (square roots, pythag theorem, etc.).

Edited November 12, 2012 by wapiti