3rd ed. BJU math vs. CLE math

[jer2911mom]

It's hard to tell from previous threads what edition of BJU math people were using, and I'm gathering that the 3rd editions are quite an improvement over the previous editions, so if you have used both 3rd edition BJU math and CLE math, can you please compare the two for me?

 

Thanks,

Kathy

[sixpence1978]

I have used the 3rd edition BJU math from K-2 and have looked at, but not used, 3. We have also used CLE math from 205-400. We will be doing the 400 series this upcoming year.

 

These two programs are very different from each other. BJU math is very colorful and requires teaching. The TM is fairly scripted with how the lesson should be taught. There is a story-line throughout with a main human character and an animal character. The program is somewhat a blend of mastery and spiral. There are chapters for a certain topic (addition, measurement, decimals, multiplication, etc.) with each lesson being about that topic. The worksheets have a front side that is supposed to be worked through together. The backside is for individual work and the bottom has a small review of a previous topic. In my opinion, they are a bit visually busy. You can also get the reviews workbook for extra practice. It is basically the same material as the lesson you just learned, but also has a small review of a previous topic. The teaching is fairly conceptual. It isn't quite as in depth as something like Singapore, but it does use a lot of manipulatives and teaches the reason behind the math. Problem solving skills are included, but drill work is a bit sparse.

 

CLE math is black and white and green. The teaching is very much spiral/incremental in nature. It is similar to a Saxon approach, but spreads the material out a bit better. One day you will learn about addition, practice it a few times, then review past material. The next day you will learn how to measure in inches, practice it a few times, then review past material. The pages have plenty of room for writing, but that does make the lesson about 4 pages long. The teaching can sometimes be conceptual, and at other times procedural (this is how to work it out...with no reasons why). The TM aren't necessarily required. All the teaching needed is right in the workbook to the student. The TM does have extra problems and the occasional tip to help you out though. Drill work is a key part, with skip counting practice, flashcards, and drill sheets used everyday. Problem solving skills are not great, IMO.

 

I think both programs are stellar programs. What works best would depend on your child. If your child doesn't easily forget how to do things and likes thinking challenges, then I think BJU would be a great fit. If your child tends to forget things easily, then CLE probably would fit better.

 

We have switched over to CLE because my DD tends to forget easily. She needs that excess of review for something to stick. She doesn't master something in a few lessons. She has to see it over and over and over again to remember and to learn how to apply it. She also has a hard time with remembering her facts, so working on them each day was beneficial. Yes, she knows why and how to add and multiply, but doing so quickly and accurately has required drill. We do have to supplement CLE with some problem solving skills. We add some practice with word problems, or games, or applications 3-4 times a week. Also, I teach the lessons to her and am able to add in a bit of work on the concepts behind what we are learning.

 

This year, we had finished our CLE math and still had a few weeks left. So I pulled out the BJU for her to work further on a few topics. While she did like that there was less to to on the worksheet, she did get tired of studying the same thing each day. The lessons also got long for her attention span.

 

BJU did work really well for my son though. He didn't need much extra practice. He could easily apply the concepts to working the math. He didn't get bored. It was a better fit for him just because he didn't need as much review.

[jer2911mom]

Thank you! I'm having a hard time deciding what would be best for my dd. She has used CLE 100 and 200. The facts practice has been really good for her. She doesn't seem to need all the review. This year we started crossing off half of any like problems, and if she got those right, she didn't have to do the other half. We also started cutting out quizzes about halfway through the year. She was still able to do well on the tests. We have also done Singapore on the side and I'd really like to just use one program. If we stay with CLE, I feel like we need to continue with Singapore to make sure we have the conceptual teaching. I have not been pleased with how CLE has toward the end of 200 stopped teaching with base 10 pictures and has started just teaching the algorithms. I'm not sure why they decided to do this. The place value work prior to the middle of 200 was excellent, as was the conceptual teaching overall. I'm trying to get a feel for how much CLE doesn't teach concepts going forward.

 

My dd doesn't seem to care for doing the same thing each day. She likes variety. I kind of feel like the BJU lesson itself might be overkill. It looks like it might border on too many examples compared to CLE having too much review. I really want our teaching to be conceptual, which is why I am considering BJU. I don't like the overly complicated TM, the prep time required, the TM written to a classroom, having to print things off a CD, and how crowded both the TM and the worktext pages are. It honestly hurts my eyes, especially coming from CLE. What I'm trying to get a feel for is whether or not the conceptual teaching in BJU is worth the extra effort and adjustment to overcrowded materials. Is the teaching that much better/stronger than CLE's?

 

Thanks,

Kathy

[jer2911mom]

:lurk5:

[sixpence1978]

I would say that each kid is different. If she doesn't need the same amount of review as CLE and you are wanting more of a conceptual approach, then you might want to look at BJU. If she already does well with Singapore, is there a reason you don't just go that route. Singapore is a great program and you have a lot of options, Primary, Standards, Math Mammoth, Math in Focus. These may be more homeschool friendly TM-wise. It is really easy to add drill in if it is needed.

[Guest]

I bought the DVD's for BJU which are fun for all my kids to watch. I have done CLE 100, 300-600 with varying kids. BJU with DVD is so much better at explaining and showing whta to do. There is a daily fact review on the screen that my kids love. The pages are colorful but not crowded. I do have my younger kids doing the Reviews pages as well as the WorkText pages becasue I wanted them to have more practice on the daily concepts. We had come from R&S so i was used to LOTS of drill. Overall, we love BJU with the DVDs. There is no way I could teach it on my own.

[ondreeuh]

Singapore is a great program and you have a lot of options, Primary, Standards, Math Mammoth, Math in Focus.

 

Math Mammoth is not a Singapore Math program. The author is Maria Miller.

[1pageatatime]

I bought the DVD's for BJU which are fun for all my kids to watch. I have done CLE 100, 300-600 with varying kids. BJU with DVD is so much better at explaining and showing whta to do. There is a daily fact review on the screen that my kids love. The pages are colorful but not crowded. I do have my younger kids doing the Reviews pages as well as the WorkText pages becasue I wanted them to have more practice on the daily concepts. We had come from R&S so i was used to LOTS of drill. Overall, we love BJU with the DVDs. There is no way I could teach it on my own.

 

 

Hi, I'm wondering which levels of BJU DVDs you've used? Thanks! :)

[Guest]

 

 

Hi, I'm wondering which levels of BJU DVDs you've used? Thanks! :)

 

I am using 2nd and 7th. I am teaching Kinder cause how can it be, right? This is our first year using it and I wish we had found it sooner. It would have saved me so much frustration and money.

[jer2911mom]

I would say that each kid is different. If she doesn't need the same amount of review as CLE and you are wanting more of a conceptual approach, then you might want to look at BJU. If she already does well with Singapore, is there a reason you don't just go that route. Singapore is a great program and you have a lot of options, Primary, Standards, Math Mammoth, Math in Focus. These may be more homeschool friendly TM-wise. It is really easy to add drill in if it is needed.

 

 

Thanks. I feel like Singapore is not rounded enough and I would need something like CLE or BJU alongside it. Because BJU is so teacher-intensive, I think CLE is a better fit for rounding out Singapore. I want more review, more scheduled facts practice, more drill, and more incremental teaching than Singapore provides. Singapore does a great job at teaching the concepts and really challenging the kids to "think", but it really is lacking on scheduling out facts practice and daily review like CLE does. I felt like CLE 100 was stronger and more thorough than Singapore 1A/B, honestly. I've seen too many people lately talking about how their kids don't know their math facts and they are having to work on it over the summer. That is not an issue with CLE because it is all scheduled out for you and is painless. I really think you need both conceptual teaching and scheduled facts practice with daily review in the early years.

 

We tried MIF 2A this spring and I've decided I prefer Singapore PM. MIF has too many workbook pages at once and too many textbook problems. I liked the critical thinking activities and the chapter wrap-ups it provides, but it is very uneven in the way it distributes its assignments. Some days there are no assigned pages and others there are 4-8 and sometimes more. It was unbalanced in that way. Also, I found myself not teaching with the manipulatives with it because the examples in the TM were the exact same ones in the textbook and it felt silly to demonstrate what was already shown in the textbook. I was much more inclined to use the manips with Singapore PM. I like the graphics and visuals better in MIF, but I like the approach better in Singapore PM. I didn't think it was wise for MIF to teach bar modeling in the first half of second grade. And it wasn't simple bar modeling, but required them to do regrouping and know their math facts while also being able to draw a model of a two-step word problem. It was trying to pull together too many concepts at once too early, in my opinion. Just learning how to draw a brace is a new skill for most kids. Also, it felt like that chapter was written by three different people who drew the models differently and didn't communicate with each other. You would only see this if you had the TM and saw how the solutions were all drawn so differently. It was really frustrating. I think I prefer how the HIG is written directly to homeschoolers.

 

We did MM 1A in 1st grade and did not care for it. I felt it moved too fast before the kids had a chance to learn their math facts. The format doesn't work for us, either.

 

I am leaning toward the Singapore/CLE combo for now. I just wanted to see if there were any other opinions out there.

 

Thanks again,

Kathy

[jer2911mom]

I bought the DVD's for BJU which are fun for all my kids to watch. I have done CLE 100, 300-600 with varying kids. BJU with DVD is so much better at explaining and showing whta to do. There is a daily fact review on the screen that my kids love. The pages are colorful but not crowded. I do have my younger kids doing the Reviews pages as well as the WorkText pages becasue I wanted them to have more practice on the daily concepts. We had come from R&S so i was used to LOTS of drill. Overall, we love BJU with the DVDs. There is no way I could teach it on my own.

 

 

Thanks, glad to hear it is going well for you guys. Do you feel there is not enough review on its own at the lower levels, then? What do you find beneficial about the Reviews pages?

[sixpence1978]

 

Math Mammoth is not a Singapore Math program. The author is Maria Miller.

 

I know it isn't a Singapore Math program, I just threw it in the list because I would say it teaches similarly. It is more on the conceptual side of math learning versus a traditional program.

 

OP, it sounds like you have a good solution. Good luck!