kirstenhill Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 I'm currently working through RightStart D with DD (age 8, 3rd grade). While math hasn't always been a breeze, I was generally happy with RS levels A-C. I was apprehensive about all the review at the beginning of level D since we moved directly from C to D with no break. But DD insisted she liked RightStart and didn't want to make any changes, so we've pressed on and made it through the section with many review lessons (and a few new topics here and there). But, I am noticing that more and more, DD tends to get frustrated when she doesn't understand why we are talking about a particular concept (like when a bunch of examples are given that finally at the end lead to the "point" of the lesson), or when a few examples of easier problems are given, and then she is expected to "take it to the next level" and infer how to do a more challenging problem. I keep thinking she might really like a math program that was much more "straight forward" so to speak. While i think the conceptual understanding that RS develops is wonderful, I think DD would really like it if the lesson said "here is a definition of new terminology" or "Today we're going to learn how to do THIS type of problem and here is how you do it."...rather than these lessons that leave her guessing through many examples as to why we're doing something or what it is leading up to. I know I could try and present the material in the RS manual differently...but I don't find I am very good at that. If I present the material differently than what is written, DD seems to have an even harder time understanding what I am trying to explain! Any ideas as to what DD might like better? I don't think we want anything any more "spiral-y" than RightStart -- even RS feels too spiral at times. Something with a bit of spiral or at least built in review is probably good though. When we picked RightStart, Singapore was my "runner up" or 2nd choice. So I still find that appealing, but I don't know at all if using SM would solve the problem we have with RS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKshanmar Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 Singapore was the program I used with my kids. I liked how it introduced concepts. You could probably use it in conjuction with Right Start, until you have a feel for which one is really working better. Singapore has the plus of being really inexpensive. Another great supplement is the "Keys to..." products, sold by Key Curriculum Press. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shinyhappypeople Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 Math Mammoth is very clear and straight forward. I like it a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidi Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 I would think MM & SM would be too similar to RS. If you're looking for traditional, straightforward math look at R&S or CLE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirstenhill Posted January 12, 2013 Author Share Posted January 12, 2013 I'm not sure that I'm just looking for "traditional" in the way the math is approached. I like that RightStart teaches interesting ways of doing mental math, and ways of understanding math that seem better than the traditional ways I was taught. And in the earlier levels of right start it didn't seem like as many "leaps of understanding" were assumed in the lessons (or maybe DD was catching on faster in those levels? Or maybe I was better at filling in the holes of the explanations?). A lot of RightStart lessons lately seem to ask her to do several problems and then ask a question like, "What pattern do you see?" She absolutely hates that question and seems to find some interesting pattern in the numbers that have nothing to do with the point of the lesson. :glare: Then from that "what pattern do you see?" question, The lesson makes some kind of "point" that she was supposed to learn from figuring out the pattern (for example in one lesson, the "point" was that if you are multiplying three numbers together, it doesn't matter what order you multiply them in, and the problem may be easier depending on what order you multiply them in). Would it have been so bad to teach the same idea, but not ask her to "find the pattern"? AKA, just tell her "you can multiply these numbers in any order and look! Try it in a different order and see if it's any easier". I've tried to explain some of the lessons that way myself, but I seem to jumble the explanation in such a way that she just whines that she is confused. Does that make sense? Is there any math program that will explain similar types of concepual material, mental math tricks, etc, without asking her to try and figure out why it works that way just from looking at a bunch of problems? Or am I looking for something that doesn't really exist? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellie Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 And yet it sounds as if you're looking for something traditional in the way math is approached. :D And my recommendation would be Rod and Staff. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidi Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 I love MM and think it is clear and straightforward too, yet it also contains the same kind of problems you are describing. I can't really compare the two because I've never seen RS irl. What you don't like about RS is what makes conceptual math what it is; incremental steps, seeing patterns in numbers. Maybe you can print out samples of MM and see what you think though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirstenhill Posted January 12, 2013 Author Share Posted January 12, 2013 And yet it sounds as if you're looking for something traditional in the way math is approached. :D And my recommendation would be Rod and Staff. :) Okay, maybe I have the wrong mental imagine of what Rod and Staff would be like...but it's hard to me imagine something like that teaching mental math tricks, KWIM. I mean, I never learned anything like that in school -- I have learned a ton of ways to do math in my head since we have been doing Right Start. I have talked to a lot of people who are naturally "good at math" and they figured out a lot of these strategies in their head on their own (things like the "nines trick" where you make something that ends in nine into a ten by giving it one from the other number when you are adding). I honestly would have never thought of that on my own, but it of course made a lot of sense once I saw it explained. Why does a curriculum that teaches "why something works" or teaches how to do math in your head have to also assume that a kid can "find a pattern" to understand something? It doesn't follow to me that they have to go together. I've always been lousy at "find the pattern" sorts of questions or making leaps of understanding beyond what is presented, but I can follow directions to learn a few new math tricks or even non-traditional algorithms. Can I have the best of both worlds? Traditional presentation while learning something beyond what I remember learning in a traditional school environment. Or is this just a pipe dream? :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirstenhill Posted January 12, 2013 Author Share Posted January 12, 2013 I love MM and think it is clear and straightforward too, yet it also contains the same kind of problems you are describing. I can't really compare the two because I've never seen RS irl. That's a good idea...I actually have a couple MM downloads I bought for extra practice that we haven't used. What you don't like about RS is what makes conceptual math what it is; incremental steps, seeing patterns in numbers. Maybe you can print out samples of MM and see what you think though. I must really have a pipe dream in mind...I think patterns are really interesting, and I feel like I personally I can learn a lot from someone just showing me a pattern AND explaining it. I mean, why can't I learn a concept or a "reason why" just from someone telling me and not having to figure it out myself? I feel like my DD thinks so much the way I do when it comes to math. DS on the other hand is just like my DH...DS5 can figure so many things out with very, very little explanation. Both he and my DH just seem to "get" math without trying. I made it all the way through three semesters of college calculus, but I had to work super, super hard, ask a ton of questions for more understanding, etc to get there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellie Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 Okay, maybe I have the wrong mental imagine of what Rod and Staff would be like...but it's hard to me imagine something like that teaching mental math tricks, KWIM. I mean, I never learned anything like that in school -- I have learned a ton of ways to do math in my head since we have been doing Right Start. I have talked to a lot of people who are naturally "good at math" and they figured out a lot of these strategies in their head on their own (things like the "nines trick" where you make something that ends in nine into a ten by giving it one from the other number when you are adding). I honestly would have never thought of that on my own, but it of course made a lot of sense once I saw it explained. Have you actually held a R&S book in your hand and read it? Then you don't know what you're missing. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airforcefamily Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 Teaching textbooks is like that. Open to a lesson. The lesson is titled with 'multiplying by fives' or a similar descriptive tittle. Then the lesson starts with reading about the concept. There are a very small number of review problems (I think there are five every day but maybe the days each have a slightly different number). Then there is new work with some recent review interspersed. I like mm too but not the lack of explanation. I need something that explains what is going on in the lesson and not just presents a bunch of problems. We haven't used mm past first grade, maybe they add in written explanations later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirstenhill Posted January 12, 2013 Author Share Posted January 12, 2013 Have you actually held a R&S book in your hand and read it? Then you don't know what you're missing. :D I will admit that I haven't -- I've browsed their preschool books online and I looked at a grammar book once at a convention for a few minutes...but it looked so "old fashioned" that I made the assumption they would approach math in an old fashioned (or at least "the same way I was taught in school") sort of way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuovonne Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 A lot of RightStart lessons lately seem to ask her to do several problems and then ask a question like, "What pattern do you see?" She absolutely hates that question and seems to find some interesting pattern in the numbers that have nothing to do with the point of the lesson. :glare: Then from that "what pattern do you see?" question, The lesson makes some kind of "point" that she was supposed to learn from figuring out the pattern My DD had a similar issue with Right Start. She could never figure out the pattern or rule that RightStart wanted, but she would try to find patterns in weird places, like in cards dealt from a shuffled deck. Early on I gave up and knew to just tell her the pattern/rule/generalization. About halfway through level C, for unrelated reasons, I switched her to Miquon and then Math Mammoth for various reasons. It hasn't always been easy, but Math Mammoth is a good fit for her now. 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.