Can You Compare R&S Math with BJU Math for Me?

[Cynful]

My son with learning delays has a HORRIBLE time with math. We've tried it all. Asian-style would be my preference but it's just too abstract for him. We just did a year in CLE Math and it's like we never did it. He needs more time on each skill.

 

I've narrowed down to these two (BJU Math and Rod&Staff) and possibly MCP Math. Can anyone help on this? I'm at my wit's end here. Which of these will explain it best to him and then give him a lot of practice (ALOT)? and also give me help in explaining it?

 

ETA: In case it helps, we've tried, CLE Math, RightStart, Singapore, Math Mammoth, MathUSee, Saxon, Teaching Textbooks......

 

Thanks,

[natjen05]

R&S will be abstract because it is a lot of memorization. I'm surprised SM didn't work. It starts out very hands on. You can also adapt the strategies to be hands on. Take all the time you need with each strategy. Use manipulatives every time you do a problem. What grade?

[Cynful]

That's what he needs though, memorization, and it takes him forever to memorize things. SM is a problem for both of us; he doesn't understand it and I don't teach it well. I just can't wrap my head around a lot of it. He's on about a 5th grade level.

[daybreaking]

I think R&S would be an excellent choice for him. We've used grades 1-5, so I'm very familiar with it. I don't see it being abstract at all. I think the explanations are extremely clear and the review is fantastic. Some complain of the repetition and "mindless drill," but I don't see it that way at all. The drill in the early grades is what is extremely successful in helping children learn their facts. Then, once they have a good foundation, more advanced math is very easy. R&S builds slowly, giving students plenty of time to master material, and the continual review ensures they don't forget it. R&S also gently introduces new topics, giving the students the time they need to understand, before moving on to new material.

[SilverMoon]

On 12/2/2012 at 8:33 PM, daybreaking said:

 

 

Edited October 30, 2022 by SilverMoon

[Cynful]

Thank you for the replies.

 

Has anyone used both? How does BJU "teach" compare to R&S? Which would hold my hand more?

[Donna A.]

Agreeing with the votes for R&S. After many math trials over the years, I've finally realized that my children (all three of them) NEED the mastery, step-by-step instruction of something like R&S to be able to really "get" math. They need the time and attention focused on each skill before moving on to the next one. One of my children could probably move a little faster than R&S does, but I'm keeping R&S as a backup, anyway. Even if she gets bored with the repetition and memorization of R&S mastery lessons, I don't care.... I've been through too many math trials with my oldest to give in on this area. I want them to KNOW this stuff backwards and forwards. No more assuming they know it and then moving on.

 

Currently my plan for the remainder of our homeschool years is to use R&S math all the way through elementary (what's left of it), and then switch to MUS for high school. Oldest is finishing out high school with MUS. (I wish R&S had high school math!) My 8th grader is doing MUS Pre-Algebra, but I'm using R&S to pause from MUS as needed to stop and teach concepts that she's struggling with. My youngest is doing R&S only.

 

One reason I'm loving R&S is because *I* can understand the teacher's manual and it's very easy for me to teach, or explain (to the older girls) when they're struggling with something. I wish I'd discovered this years ago!

 

I've not used BJU Math except for one year when I tried the 3rd grade level *without* the TM and other go-alongs that many people told me I didn't need. Uhhh.... if you're not a math person, then you NEED the TM and other go-alongs. Sure, I could teach basic addition and subtraction without a TM.... but there are other concepts that begin to build on each other that I just didn't know how to explain to my daughter if she didn't get it the first time. The teacher HAS to be able to communicate math concepts to the students. If you don't naturally know how to do that, then you need a TM that you can understand.

 

And let's face it.... there's a BIG price difference between BJU and R&S. :bored:

[MamaHappy]

Another vote for R&S. I'm currently using it for both of my boys and they are thriving with it.

 

The TM is *excellent* and the explanations are very clear. It is even scripted if you need that. There is a lot of repitition in the assignments and a ton of review. In grades 1-3, there are blackline masters available that provide even more drill and review if you need it and then in grades 4 and up, there are extra drill pages in the back of the book you can use.

 

MCP is very mastery. Each lesson focuses on one concept and there is a lot of practice. But there is very little review. Both BJU and R&S have review problems in *every* lesson, while MCP does not. MCP has a short review at the end of every chapter. From what you describe, it sounds like MCP might not be the best choice because of the lack of review.

 

I've never used BJU, but have heard good things about it. However, the TM looks *very* overwhelming to me (not to mention expensive!!). This is one thing I love about the R&S TM's... as I mentioned above the TM's are so clear and concise and easy to follow. In grades 4 and up, there is an Oral Drill section that reviews previous concepts and really keeps things fresh. Then it walks you through step-by-step on how to present the lesson. It tells you what to say and write on the chalkboard. It's so easy to use.

 

A couple of other things to consider is BJU has a consumable workbook for children to write in, but R&S does not. Many children will find having to write problems and answers on separate paper very tedious, like my own ds. I've mostly gotten around this though by just letting him write in the book, but sometimes there isn't enough room.

 

Another thing is that BJU is aligned to current national standards, while R&S is not. R&S does not spend as much time on algebra and geometry concepts and this is especially noticeable in the middle school grades. I don't know if this matters to you or not, but I just thought I'd throw it out there for you. :)

[Down_the_Rabbit_Hole]

I never used R&S but have used BJU for 20 yrs. Grades K-6 is teacher intensive and manipulative intensive. The teacher's manual holds your hand while teaching giving step by step dialog to walk them through each lesson. They also approach the skills from different angles to help different learning styles. Word problems both oral and written are taught and having the student create word problems helps show an understanding of the material. There is adequate daily work both with mom and on their own plus there is an extra activities book if they need more. Daily review of facts and other math skills. The workbooks are colorful and fun, each year you follow a story and character.

[MamaHappy]

Double Post

[Donna A.]

A couple of other things to consider is BJU has a consumable workbook for children to write in, but R&S does not. Many children will find having to write problems and answers on separate paper very tedious, like my own ds. I've mostly gotten around this though by just letting him write in the book, but sometimes there isn't enough room.

 

You could also copy the student pages in the R&S book and use them as worksheets if copying the problems onto separate paper is an issue. Personally, I've found that copying the problems onto separate paper is a good skill to learn, especially if it's a student who struggles with it. How does a child overcome weaknesses? Not by avoiding it, but by learning and practicing.... even if it means starting with only two or three or five problems and then gradually adding to the number of problems copied. It trains in attention to detail, focus, endurance, persistence, patience, diligence (some of the problems can be character issues, too), neatness, accuracy, and even handwriting practice. It's the same idea as doing copywork in history or language arts via Charlotte Mason or WTM. You don't have to make a child who struggles do all 42 problems on the page.... but they can do 5. Five a day this week, then 10 next week. And so on. You can also use the white board for these lessons (w/colored markers if it helps), and you can also do a lot orally. Or a mix of all three methods.... do some via copywork onto separate paper, some on the white board, and some orally. Start with the white board and then transition to paper.)

 

So please don't let the lack of a workbook with blanks to fill in hinder you from using R&S. There are many benefits to NOT having a workbook.

 

We have a saying in our house: "Copywork should never have a mistake." Copywork teaches them many good things as long as you're patient with them and don't overwhelm... letting the skills build gradually. :001_smile:

 

 

Another thing is that BJU is aligned to current national standards, while R&S is not. R&S does not spend as much time on algebra and geometry concepts and this is especially noticeable in the middle school grades. I don't know if this matters to you or not, but I just thought I'd throw it out there for you. :)

 

 

To clarify, R&S does *seem* to start out slow in the early years, but that's because of how much time they spend on each concept. (Which is the very reason R&S could be a positive over BJU.) A R&S student is definitely ready for Algebra by high school, though, just like BJU or any other math program. They all work out to be prepared for Algebra by 9th grade, unless LDs or other delays such as inconsistency on Mom's part during elementary years have gotten in the way. Now if you're looking to have an advanced 7th or 8th grader doing Algebra like many classical homeschoolers do, then no, R&S won't get you there unless you start it early and stay on the fast track. But by high school, which I think is more "normal" (and remember, we're talking about a student with LDs in this thread, anyway), then R&S is more than adequate. And if R&S weren't "enough", I couldn't be using it to fill in gaps for my 8th grader who's doing MUS Pre-Algebra. ;) (She just started MUS this year, btw, so her having gaps is not a reflection on MUS. It's a reflection on our previous math program.)

[natjen05]

I think R&S would be an excellent choice for him. We've used grades 1-5, so I'm very familiar with it. I don't see it being abstract at all. I think the explanations are extremely clear and the review is fantastic. Some complain of the repetition and "mindless drill," but I don't see it that way at all. The drill in the early grades is what is extremely successful in helping children learn their facts. Then, once they have a good foundation, more advanced math is very easy. R&S builds slowly, giving students plenty of time to master material, and the continual review ensures they don't forget it. R&S also gently introduces new topics, giving the students the time they need to understand, before moving on to new material.

 

 

The reason that I say it is abstract is because you are not using manipulatives to learn. When you work just with numbers that is an abstract way of learning. If you use pictures or things to count with, it is hands on. Sorry I'm a certified teacher so if there is something you don't understand let me know. SM is hard to teach because it does not spell everything out for you. I have taken a couple of classes on it so I have an easier time with it probably. I do have some things I could email you if you would like.

 

My brother had a hard time with math because it didn't make sense to him either. Memorization is probably your best bet. R&S does a lot of that. If you started SM at the level 5 it probably won't make sense because you have to have the previous understanding from the years before. I would suggest a lot of games working with numbers and teach counting on. Use a number line or use a place value mat. That is from SM but you can incorporate a lot of things from SM into any math curriculum. Let me know and I can send you the mat and stuff.

[Donna A.]

The reason that I say it is abstract is because you are not using manipulatives to learn. When you work just with numbers that is an abstract way of learning. If you use pictures or things to count with, it is hands on.

 

 

Well, the 1st-3rd grade R&S books DO include manipulatives (pictures, the bee poster, etc.), but honestly, I don't know of any math curriculum that has manipulatives *scheduled for you* after the 3rd or 4th grade, except for MUS which the OP has already tried. Do you?

 

It's because of the mastery method, the sheer amount of review and practice in R&S, and the clear teaching that enables a struggling math student to really learn.

[natjen05]

 

Well, the 1st-3rd grade R&S books DO include manipulatives (pictures, the bee poster, etc.), but honestly, I don't know of any math curriculum that has manipulatives *scheduled for you* after the 3rd or 4th grade, except for MUS which the OP has already tried. Do you?

 

It's because of the mastery method, the sheer amount of review and practice in R&S, and the clear teaching that enables a struggling math student to really learn.

 

 

That would be pictorial. Manipulatives are things that you can manipulate. Such as blocks, counters that type of thing. I use beads a lot of times for a manipulative. I do like the R&S for their review. Every lesson builds on the previous which is great. If you do the R&S which is very cost effective, just incorporate counters and things like that. If he learns through doing, this will help out a lot.

One thing that helped my daughter also is get out a deck of cards. Take out the JQK's and jokers and remind them that the A is one or even write a one on it. Do memory games such as two numbers that make 5 can be kept. I also have my daughter tell me the answer between two numbers no matter what and she is learning through that also. You can have manipulatives to count out so if you pick up 3 and 4 have counters to count out those and see if it makes 5. Little games like that work great. Go fish is another one you could do that way.

 

Number bonds (SM) help show the correlation between the numbers. I will have to tell you that there is no "right" program out there. You have to incorporate different ones to really get a balanced understanding.

 

Someone said before that there aren't worksheets that you can write in for the R&S but there is a student workbook that you can buy.

[Cynful]

Well.... I think cost is going to affect this decision for me. I have R&S 4th already. I'd have to purchase BJU which is $136 at CBD for the 3rd edition which is the one I like. I LOVE scripted. I know alot don't, but it helps me and makes me feel I'm leading the right direction. I also have Singapore Standards 4a&b which I might be able to pull things from. Really I just don't know why he doesn't "get it". Numbers and mathematics are like a complete foreign language to him. We'll just keep slogging through and get him as far as we can. I've been completely stressing about how behind he is and how he'll not get to Algebra this way, but he'll never get to Algebra anyway if he doesn't understand the foundation.

 

Thank you so much to everyone who has posted.

[SilverMoon]

R&S does teach with pictures and manipulatives in the early years. :huh: My dd in the 1 book is currently learning subtraction, by physically taking ducks out of a pond. Another dd in the 3 book learned multiplication by multiple waves dropping groups on the table. My teen has demonstrations on the whiteboard, straight from the TE, before he begins his lessons. Abstract shmastract.

 

And there is not a workbook option beyond grade 2. You're probably thinking of the drill and quiz booklet, which has speed drills and occasional quizzes. There's also a test booklet starting at grade 4. I've personally used all but two of the levels of R&S math with my children. :tongue_smilie:

[daybreaking]

The reason that I say it is abstract is because you are not using manipulatives to learn. When you work just with numbers that is an abstract way of learning. If you use pictures or things to count with, it is hands on.

 

 

I'm not sure I undertand this. R&S does use manipulatives and has plenty of pictures.

 

Sorry I'm a certified teacher so if there is something you don't understand let me know.

 

I am a certified teacher, too, and spent many years teaching math across many grade levels, to all levels of students, from special education up to honors, so I think I have a pretty good background from which to evaluate R&S and from which to analyze concrete-pictorial-abstract learning. (I hope that didn't sound snarky ... I don't mean it to be. :-)

 

To reinforce what I said above and previously, I skimmed the grade 1 book and here are just a few examples of "hands on" learning:

 

forming numbers: children form the numbers in the air

number order: students might do dot-to-dot pages to practice number order

counting: the students are asked to count the number of various items in the classroom (chairs, clocks, doors, etc.)

adding: children move ducks from grass to a pond (in grade 2, sailboats are used as manipulatives in the same way)

subtracting: children remove ducks from a pond

ordering numbers: each child gets a number card and the students line up in order of their numbers

telling time: children move the hands on a clock

money: children use actual money to count (and in later grades to count back change)

fractions: teacher cuts an apple or a cookie in half or fourths

ordinal numbers: children count actual items

measurement: teacher and/or students use real objects to teach (canning jar, measuring cup, ruler, etc.)

temperature: students use a real thermometer and discuss real life situations such as what clothing one would wear when it is a certain temperature

 

I don't have time right now to go through the other books, but I think the above examples illustrate why I believe R&S is concrete, rather than abstract. (Of course, as one gets farther up in the levels, the math does get more abstract, but I think that's true for most programs, Singapore included, since children at that level are able to think more abstractly.)

[Donna A.]

R&S does teach with pictures and manipulatives in the early years. :huh: My dd in the 1 book is currently learning subtraction, by physically taking ducks out of a pond. Another dd in the 3 book learned multiplication by multiple waves dropping groups on the table. My teen has demonstrations on the whiteboard, straight from the TE, before he begins his lessons. Abstract shmastract.

 

And there is not a workbook option beyond grade 2. You're probably thinking of the drill and quiz booklet, which has speed drills and occasional quizzes. There's also a test booklet starting at grade 4. I've personally used all but two of the levels of R&S math with my children. :tongue_smilie:

 

This. I agree with you completely, SilverMoon. I'm using/have (happily) used three different levels with my children and will be using several more, so I've studied carefully what I'm getting myself into because I've had ENOUGH math issues over the years.

[natjen05]

I'm not sure I undertand this. R&S does use manipulatives and has plenty of pictures.

 

 

 

I am a certified teacher, too, and spent many years teaching math across many grade levels, to all levels of students, from special education up to honors, so I think I have a pretty good background from which to evaluate R&S and from which to analyze concrete-pictorial-abstract learning. (I hope that didn't sound snarky ... I don't mean it to be. :-)

 

To reinforce what I said above and previously, I skimmed the grade 1 book and here are just a few examples of "hands on" learning:

 

forming numbers: children form the numbers in the air

number order: students might do dot-to-dot pages to practice number order

counting: the students are asked to count the number of various items in the classroom (chairs, clocks, doors, etc.)

adding: children move ducks from grass to a pond (in grade 2, sailboats are used as manipulatives in the same way)

subtracting: children remove ducks from a pond

ordering numbers: each child gets a number card and the students line up in order of their numbers

telling time: children move the hands on a clock

money: children use actual money to count (and in later grades to count back change)

fractions: teacher cuts an apple or a cookie in half or fourths

ordinal numbers: children count actual items

measurement: teacher and/or students use real objects to teach (canning jar, measuring cup, ruler, etc.)

temperature: students use a real thermometer and discuss real life situations such as what clothing one would wear when it is a certain temperature

 

I don't have time right now to go through the other books, but I think the above examples illustrate why I believe R&S is concrete, rather than abstract. (Of course, as one gets farther up in the levels, the math does get more abstract, but I think that's true for most programs, Singapore included, since children at that level are able to think more abstractly.)

 

 

I'm sorry I was talking more about the upper grade levels. Not the younger. I should have made that more clear. The older grade levels deal more with the abstract. Not as much hands on. Sorry I wasn't so clear on that.

[Donna A.]

 

 

I'm sorry I was talking more about the upper grade levels. Not the younger. I should have made that more clear. The older grade levels deal more with the abstract. Not as much hands on. Sorry I wasn't so clear on that.

 

That's okay.... Sometimes we learn more about homeschooling and what works with our own children as we gain experience while homeschooling (12th year here) than as classroom-certified teachers. It's just not the same. :rolleyes: I'm not sure how many different math curriculums you've had experience with in the classroom, but MOST math curriculums don't schedule manipulatives beyond 3rd grade. However, the teaching methods of R&S in particular are clear enough that they often aren't needed for the older student, so the OP should be fine. ;)

[Cynful]

However, the teaching methods of R&S in particular are clear enough that they often aren't needed for the older student, so the OP should be fine. ;)

 

I'm glad to hear that. I do try to add in some manipulatives where I can though he hates them. The only one he tolerated was the abacus from RightStart. He hated the MUS blocks - he just couldn't picture them and make them do what he wanted. He liked frog counters better. He has visual spatial issues also and I think that's part of why math is so hard for him. Geometry will be a nightmare.

[natjen05]

That's okay.... Sometimes we learn more about homeschooling and what works with our own children as we gain experience while homeschooling (12th year here) than as classroom-certified teachers. It's just not the same. :rolleyes: I'm not sure how many different math curriculums you've had experience with in the classroom, but MOST math curriculums don't schedule manipulatives beyond 3rd grade. However, the teaching methods of R&S in particular are clear enough that they often aren't needed for the older student, so the OP should be fine. ;)

 

A good teacher will use manipulatives no matter what level you are working with. I have used a few different math programs. I do like the R&S but I use SM as my core and R&S to back it up. When you have a child that has a hard time with math, it doesn't matter if it shows it clearly or not. It is also about being able to change the program to how your child needs to be taught. I am a homeschooling mom, and I think it is so much better for kids than a public school. Teaching is much more different and much more rewarding! I was wanting to explain why I said the things I did by being a cert. teacher not that I know more than anyone. I just didn't know if she would understand my wording. I'm sorry it came across that I thought I would know more about being a cert. teacher. My apologies.

[Donna A.]

 

A good teacher will use manipulatives no matter what level you are working with. I have used a few different math programs. I do like the R&S but I use SM as my core and R&S to back it up. When you have a child that has a hard time with math, it doesn't matter if it shows it clearly or not. It is also about being able to change the program to how your child needs to be taught.

 

Yes, I understand all that, but the OP has indicated that manipulatives don't work with this child, and I've found the same to be true for one of my children. In this case, it's more important that the teacher/parent be able to understand the clear teaching in the TM so that we know HOW to change the program to relay the information to the student. That's why so many of us are advocating so strongly for R&S.

 

Yes, we can and should use manipulatives for an older child, even when they're not scheduled in, *IF* that particular child needs them. But that doesn't seem to be the case for the OP's child.

 

Anyway, it sounds like the OP has made a decision, and that was the goal. :001_smile: Best wishes for success, Lucidity!