When people say their math program is considered a grade level ahead. . . .

[lorisuewho]

What do they mean? I noticed many people on this board think their particular math program they are using is very strong and "probably a grade-level ahead."

 

Are we comparing the programs to what is expected on a standardized test? to common core? to what each person remembers from their own childhood of being in school?

 

I taught public school for many years and I've used my share of math programs, but I would hesitate to say anything is "ahead." Programs just vary on their methodology and scope and sequence, imo. That is unless we are comparing each program to a specific standard for each grade level.

[Farrar]

Some people feel Singapore Primary Math is ahead.  It does have a couple of things earlier than other programs for a year or two, but it's not a huge way ahead kind of thing.  And some programs - Miquon and Beast Academy, for example - introduce topics that aren't usually taught to younger grades - but the actual math isn't so far ahead, IMO.

 

I hear a lot more that a program - Teaching Textbooks, for example - is behind, than I hear that one is ahead.

 

I think they are comparing to a standard though - either to Common Core or to an unscientific average of typical public school programs.

[Dana]

Some people feel Singapore Primary Math is ahead.  It does have a couple of things earlier than other programs for a year or two, but it's not a huge way ahead kind of thing. 

 

Although the word problems in CWP in particular are significantly ahead IMO.

Based on what I see in the math courses I teach at the cc and when I've shown some problems to friends who also teach there, my son was doing problems in CWP 5 that our students in precalculus classes wouldn't be able to do. It is possible that it's just our area, but I think CWP does an outstanding job at teaching word problems and is far ahead of what's being done at the majority of schools and the majority of programs.

 

I don't see it to the same level with just the text & workbook in Singapore, but add in IP and CWP, and it's really solid and advanced IMO.

[Arcadia]

Singapore Primary Math Standard edition is closely correlated to California State Standards. It is at grade level for my boys since we are in California.

ETA:

My school district is using EnVision Math anyway and the teachers supplement.

[Samiam]

The best way to compare is to look at the scope and sequence of the programs being compared.   If most maths in a certain grade level are teaching this, and this other math taught it sooner (and other things sooner) then it's considered ahead.  For example, let's say Math A teaches mutliplication/division in 2nd grade....but most other Maths don't bring those up until 3rd grade....and Math A would have taught higher level addition, in order to have their students ready for multiplication, very early 2nd grade, if not 1st grade, etc......so Math A generally introduces and teaches topic earlier than other maths....it's considered "ahead".    Teaching Textbooks tends to get the label "behind" because when comparing Scope and Sequence, it's generally not introducing topics, and getting in depth, until a year behind other Maths.  

[go_go_gadget]

IMO, a program is a ''grade ahead'' if, as others have said, the program teaches topics that are, in most other S&S's, taught during the subsequent grade level, rather than the grade level marked on the book. If a book, such as BA, teaches concepts ahead (like the distributive property), but the overall content of the book is on grade level, it's a challenging grade level book, not a year ahead. 

 

But since there isn't a precise definition of what is taught at each grade level, such distinctions will always be a bit arbitrary.

[SwallowTail]

I figured out that Horizons Kindergarten B was at ealst a first grade workbook based upon what all the first graders we know are doing and based upon my friend's recent use of Saxon for her daughter, which had the same material as we are covering in Horizons.  The reason this mattered to me at all was b/c I thought we were behind in math, when apparently, we are operating at or around grade level. :shrug

[Crimson Wife]

Our virtual charter requires me to correlate what my kids are doing in Singapore with the CA state standards. For practically all the MAJOR topics, Singapore is ahead of the state standards by the mid-elementary level. Now it may certainly be true that any particular PS in CA could be using a program that has a similar S&S (e.g. they are also ahead) so that Singapore is not ahead of what is being taught at that PS. However, I know from observing PS kids complete their homework at the library or in various waiting rooms that Singapore is quite a bit ahead of the program being used in my district. The 5th grade book being used in my district has similar problems to the 3rd grade Singapore book.

[acsnmama]

When my son was in Kindergarten, he did Horizons 1, then after realizing it was too much review and the same 'ole same 'ole, we moved on to Singapore 1A/1B. In first grade, he completed Singapore 2A and some of 2B. We will be continuing with 2B in 2nd grade and moving into 3A/3B. With that said, after Kinder, I debated on switching to Teaching Textbooks, when I realized that they only had it for Grade level 3 and up, I thought it would be out for us for another year, until I read people saying that it's "a year behind" or what I would rather say is, "on target" but my son was going into 2nd Grade math. I used the placement test for TT, and he did test into TT3. However, we decided to stick with Singapore.

 

Some math programs ARE behind others. They also teach differently. My son doesn't care for repatition, he excells with a mastery program. I do believe Singapore is "ahead" in many ways. I'm doubtful his peers in the local public schools are where he is at in Math. But then again, he is working a grade level higher than his "grade." 

[Tanikit]

I feel that all children should go at their own pace and that we should stop worrying so much about grade levels and how far ahead or behind a program is so long as our child is coping with what they are being taught and so long as the teaching is really good. What if the child is due to go back into public school? Well then they will have to adapt, maybe there will need to be some help from home to adapt whether they are behind or ahead. We are so concentrated on that number on the front of the book that we forget that math is really about quantities - the ones inside the book and all around us. Who cares what grade level they are or if they are ahead or behind - it is more important that they actually understand what has been taught whether that is ahead or behind. Who wants to be average - why not just be the best they can be?

[8filltheheart]

After reading this thread, I just wanted to share that I don't believe Horizons or SM/MiF are a year ahead.  And for sure, they both have much different S&S in the younger yrs, though by 4th grade, they match up pretty well.   (last yr when we hit book 5b of MiF it was all review of materials dd had covered over the yrs in Horizons, whereas 5A was more challenging b/c of the multi-step word problems)   I think the issue is more how they are teaching the subjects they are teaching and what sort of foundation they are providing for children to use their math skills any time they need them vs. math is math in a textbook.

 

Having gone all the way through Horizons with basically 6 kids (#6 is in the 6th grade book), having our oldest go through all of the SM PM books, and our 6th grader has used Math in Focus for 3 yrs now......I see overlap in how many of the concepts are presented.   With Horizons you can't just flip through a book and "see it" b/c it is spiral and concepts are presented and solidified over multiple yrs vs. SM/MiF being mastery and concepts are right there in a chpt.   Horizons does not have anywhere near the word problem strategies or complexity of multiple step word problems that SM has, but Horizons does teach processes conceptually and in many cases I like heir conceptual explanations better--at least for me they are easier to explain and help my kids understand what they are doing.

 

Regardless.....at the end of 6th grade, the programs land students with a solid background in elementary math concepts. (which should be the goal of any elementary math program)   They are ready for simple algebra.   Prealg in 7th is fairly normal.

 

When I evaluate math programs, my concern is mostly focused on whether or not the skills being learned translate into real world understanding or if they can only do the problems if they are presented in the same way as in the textbook.   If they can't take what they are supposed to be learning and actually use it, nothing else about the program is really going to matter and when they hit high school level math they are going to struggle b/c understanding the basics is vital (and assumed.)

[jennynd]

 my DD who was working SM 2 last year was completing my DS's 3rd grade PS school homework. That tells me that SM is a year ahead

[lorisuewho]

But since there isn't a precise definition of what is taught at each grade level, such distinctions will always be a bit arbitrary.

I think this idea here is what made me start this thread. I kept asking myself, "A year ahead of what?" "A year ahead of what your neighbor's nephew's son is doing in his public school book?" I don't think we can say a program is behind or ahead based on what one school in the country is doing for one grade level.

 

The question is (similar to what 8 Fill the Heart said): Where does the program end up at? To just compare where one program is at in second grade to another is a bit ridiculous to me and gives people a false impression.

 

 

I feel that all children should go at their own pace and that we should stop worrying so much about grade levels and how far ahead or behind a program is so long as our child is coping with what they are being taught and so long as the teaching is really good. What if the child is due to go back into public school? Well then they will have to adapt, maybe there will need to be some help from home to adapt whether they are behind or ahead. We are so concentrated on that number on the front of the book that we forget that math is really about quantities - the ones inside the book and all around us. Who cares what grade level they are or if they are ahead or behind - it is more important that they actually understand what has been taught whether that is ahead or behind. Who wants to be average - why not just be the best they can be?

Yes.

[MotherOfBoys]

When people say strong, behind, or ahead it helps me to compare if I'm switching. Like I completed Saxon Math 1 with my son and he understood and scored well but when we switched to MM I had to repeat 1 because the placement test encouraged it. Saxon was behind, in my situation.

 

Another example but not as good: We also did Saxon Phonics 1 but when I switched to Climbing to Good English (grammar/phonics) and Pathway Readers he still needed 1st.

[RootAnn]

I've definitely seen a shift in math programs toward introducing certain concepts earlier than they were even 10 years ago.

 

Some programs introduce certain concepts earlier but don't hit others much at all until the end of their elementary sequence. If you are only looking at one of those concepts, you could say that program was ahead/behind. For example, A Beka introduces division facts in their second grade book. (The concept is introduced earlier, but the actual 24/4=? problem isn't included until 2nd.) This used to be 'early' from a fact-based perspective. However, A Beka doesn't do much from a geometry perspective until 4th. That's pretty "late," in my mind.

 

You will see quite a few references saying A Beka is "ahead" in the early years, but slows WAY down in the 4th grade book & that's why it ends right about where all the other math programs end up at the end of 6th (or, in A Beka's case, in 7th if you choose to do their Basic Mathematics book before moving to 8th/Pre-Algebra).

 

I agree that it doesn't really matter. Heck, as homeschoolers, we can have our kids go at their own pace.

[Murphy101]

Honestly?

 

I think the person is just looking for validation or something.

 

If it's teaching their kid math and the kid is progressing, then I don't care what grade level they claim to be at.

 

For that matter, even if it isn't doing that I'm not likely to comment.

 

I am very much NOT a fight to keep up with the jones' kind of person in any area of life. So much so that I could live next door to the jones' for 7 years before even knowing that they are the jones'. *shrug* Maybe I lack ambition. Idk.

 

I'm rather myopically focused on doing what works for my kid(s).

[Walking-Iris]

I also don't think it matters. When I decide on a math book to use, I look for ease of use. Is it easy to understand from the teacher's pov and the student's pov. Is it sequential, building on previous knowledge and going deeper, or does it jump around too much or move ahead into complex math too fast? Does it give enough review, or too much, or not enough? Is the layout simple or busy? Does it ask for too much busywork, or are the lessons too short? 

 

Honestly I don't care what public school kids, at least locally where I am at, are doing. My dh has subbed in the middle school for years, and he's the GED instructor at our local cc as well. He has had to do enough math with students at both those levels to know that what we're doing at home is far superior. I think it boils down to the nature of the individualized education more than what a math program offers. 

 

Whatever math book a homeschooling family uses depends on their individual needs. Some need spiral, some need mastery, some need to move on faster, some need to take their time. 

 

Honestly the SM is "the best thing in the world!!!!" trend is a tad ridiculous. It's a good program, but it's just math! I don't think any one gets any special validation for doing SM (or anything else) and I certainly don't think anyone needs to be secretly judged for using something "behind" ( TT). If it works and the kid is learning, then it's good. What is working for one family might not work for another. 

 

I do glance at standards to make sure we are at least a year behind or a year ahead, if not right on grade level with learning certain math topics. My ds can move ahead pretty fast with some math topics, but others he still struggles with. So grade level is some what meaningless to me. 

 

I've come to think more in terms of what kids can learn in developmental age ranges (3-6, 6-9, 9-12 etc. ) rather that the public school model of a graded year based on birthday. 

 

 

[Penelope]

I don't think Singapore is that much ahead, but for some reason it does bother me when some curriculum providers tell parents it is and have the kid wait to start Singapore 1A in second grade. This approach probably could have the student end up in the same place, because an average to bright second grader could probably fly through the 1 and 2 levels quickly and still end up finishing 5 at the end of fifth grade. But to mislead people and say that it's find to do one level a year because Singapore is ahead is not right. That might be okay if you keep the standard of twenty years ago and don't want your student to hit algebra until ninth grade. But many college bound students today are going to be doing so a year earlier.

[NittanyJen]

I don't think Singapore is that much ahead, but for some reason it does bother me when some curriculum providers tell parents it is and have the kid wait to start Singapore 1A in second grade. This approach probably could have the student end up in the same place, because an average to bright second grader could probably fly through the 1 and 2 levels quickly and still end up finishing 5 at the end of fifth grade. But to mislead people and say that it's find to do one level a year because Singapore is ahead is not right. That might be okay if you keep the standard of twenty years ago and don't want your student to hit algebra until ninth grade. But many college bound students today are going to be doing so a year earlier.

Ummm in the Singapore sequence, even if you finish level 5 in 5th grade, and don't skip level 6 (a review year) level 7 in an integrated pre-A/Algebra/geometry year. You would not be waiting for 9th grade to begin algebra.

 

I would still never tell somebody to wait a year to start Singapore (and in all my time on these boards and locally I have never actually heard that advice before this post gave it as a bad example) but I wanted to correct the above misinformation.

 

I agree with most of the PP... unless you are trying to head back to public school, in which case you would be comparing to your state standards, you need only worry about your child and whether he is mastering the material at your current pace. I do think Singapore comes out ahead in terms of depth of understanding vs most of the other programs ***as presented by the book*** but that is easily messed up or corrected compared to any curriculum by the person presenting the material. LOL just look at the varied responses to the content of the Life of Fred elementary series (everything from 'wow, so much in here it's crazy!' to 'my kid read it in a week it was so light').

 

Much depends on presentation and fit for the child and teacher. The only thing that really matters is the fit between the goals for that child and the outcome.

[Penelope]

Ummm in the Singapore sequence, even if you finish level 5 in 5th grade, and don't skip level 6 (a review year) level 7 in an integrated pre-A/Algebra/geometry year. You would not be waiting for 9th grade to begin algebra.

 

I would still never tell somebody to wait a year to start Singapore (and in all my time on these boards and locally I have never actually heard that advice before this post gave it as a bad example) but I wanted to correct the above misinformation.

It is not misinformation. You misunderstand what I wrote.

 

I was ONLY talking about the advice to do Singapore one level behind. You may not have heard of it, but I know of at least two programs that have recommended in the past, and still may, to use Singapore but to start 1A in second grade because they think it is a year ahead.

 

Of course those that use it on level (NOT the people that take the, IMO, wrong advice of these curriculum providers) are going to end up in algebra by eighth grade or even before if they use it at one level per year.

 

 

.

[Guest]

Just popping in to agree with Penelope about certain curriculum providers suggesting you wait to begin Singapore 1 until 2nd grade. I just read it last night on a very popular curriculum provider's website. :)

 

Edited because I was not addressing the OP.

[Samiam]

I feel that all children should go at their own pace and that we should stop worrying so much about grade levels and how far ahead or behind a program is so long as our child is coping with what they are being taught and so long as the teaching is really good. What if the child is due to go back into public school? Well then they will have to adapt, maybe there will need to be some help from home to adapt whether they are behind or ahead. We are so concentrated on that number on the front of the book that we forget that math is really about quantities - the ones inside the book and all around us. Who cares what grade level they are or if they are ahead or behind - it is more important that they actually understand what has been taught whether that is ahead or behind. Who wants to be average - why not just be the best they can be?

 

Of course.  Sure, we should all just do what our children can do, and let them work at their own level. Grade level isn't a big deal.  Sure, that's a common philosophy of homeschoolers, myself included.  

 

But the question is what makes a math be considered "ahead" or "behind".     So regardless of our personal philosophies, this question isn't about that.  So our personal philosophy of letting the child work at the level they are ready for has no bearing on the conversation.   OP wasn't asking that.  No one asked if we should push our children to be on grade level. Or hold them back to make sure they stay on grade level. 

 

 

 And in fact, the grade level on a math book DOES come into play when one goes and buys the curriculum.  If you are starting with a 2nd grade level student, it's helpful to look at the grades levels of that curriculum, that match up, as a starting point.  So I'd start at the 2nd grade math book and look at it to determine if my child was ready for it, or needed to start a grade level, or a grade higher, based on the child's abilities AND based on what that particular curriculum has the student working on at that grade level.  So that is why it is important to note the grade levels a curriculum is marked with.   Any curriculum shopper who says they DON'T pay attention to the grade level of a curriculum especially Math, when shopping is confusing, frankly.    So you just pick up any ol'Math book and dig in?  Or you try to find a book that is where your child is ready for....and if I'm teaching a  6 year old, it just makes sense to start at that grade level as a jump off point of shopping...to see if my child is ready for that.   I'm not saying you must purchase the exact grade level that your child  is labeled for. 

[AimeeM]

No clue. Maybe they're comparing it to their local public schools?

All of them end up in the same place, really - the elementary programs ready a child for algebra. All of them (or that's their goal, anyway).

 

When I say that a program is "ahead", I generally mean "make sure your kid takes the placement test before buying; this program tends to RUN AHEAD of other curricula, scope and sequence wise, and your child may be lost if you just jump in at their given grade".

[Pen]

The current standard "on schedule" S&S, IMO, ideally puts a child who will be headed to college or any job requiring much math at Algebra 1 in 8th grade or at the latest 9th grade--this is earlier than it was when I was in school.  

 

Personally, I would consider a program "ahead" if it will prepare the child (assuming the child and it to be a good fit for each other and that the child is learning and not just moving through book levels) for algebra earlier than 8th -- that is "ahead" if the child will have all basic fundamentals of math and arithmetic through prealgebra in place earlier than 7th grade, and "behind" if it will not prepare the child to be in algebra by 9th grade at the latest.   Thus if I were using a program that tends to run "behind" because it fit my child well, but wanted to be at Algebra by 8th, say, I would know that the program would need to be done in an accelerated way to get where I would like my child to be.  If I were using one that is "ahead" though, we might want to take it more slowly.  This information might also apply to an understanding of where my child would likely be as compared to required state testing that our state has when doing any particular program.

 

This is not to say that a child cannot have a perfectly good life if they never get to algebra at all, but things like college entrance--even for someone who does not plan on any STEM type field-- could be hindered by not doing so by 9th grade at latest, and having at least some Geometry done by the time PSAT, SAT and other testing will be done.  There are many excellent careers where just having a good grasp of math through pre-algebra is still sufficient.  I know travel and real-estate agents and people in less mathy trades areas, for example, who are doing very well on a pre-algebra level of math.

 

I think a sense of "ahead" or  "behind" is helpful to know in using materials and planning for myself--we are 'do the next thingers', but in fact, how long I devote to a subject depends on progress toward goals.   For example, we used MUS at one point, but went through it more quickly than a book per year so that we stayed more on track to what our state testing would be doing (still not perfect because MUS has a very different S&S and our state had fractions and decimals and percents being tested in grade 3.   We could have done a single book in one school year by working only 1/2 hour per day--and might have felt good about that--but then would have been "behind" where I thought we needed to be, so we did 1 hour per day and moved as fast as 1 hour per day allowed.    I think some people get upset with MUS because doing only the one book per year does not then match to testing requirements, but do not realize that they could  use it if it is a good fit for their child, but do it faster if the child is able to do that and have the benefits without being "behind".  That is an example of how I think the knowledge can help.  I know another family similarly using TT because it is a good fit for a child, but speeding it up to be more where they think the child should be at a certain point for the child's aims in life.

 

And I think this sort of information is also helpful for parents who may be new to homeschooling.   I have known people to be thrilled that a child was moving along quickly in material, but not realizing that the material itself was not quick compared to what many others were doing, or vice versa, upset that their child placed in a lower level than they thought the child should be, not realizing that the chosen curriculum tends to be labeled with a lower number than others at the same level.

 

I do not think this sort of information is helpful if it is used as a form of bragging, however.

[chaya]

I pulled my ds out of school in the fifth grade. he was working in saxon 76, which I called 'a grade ahead' because it was ahead of what the kids his age were doing in school.

 

now I will be hs'ing my next ds, primarily because he 'was not performing at grade level' in school even though I know he's a smart kid (really-not because I'm his mom or anything!). I'm planning to use Math on the Level which I am calling 'at  his level' and I think that makes a whole lot of sense.

 

sometimes I wonder if the grade levels on the book covers are like womens clothing sizes - tweaked to make us feel good about ourselves. todays size 6 is what a size 10 measured 20 years ago. and if you shop ann taylor you know that a size 2 skirt fits like a size 4 from another brand. marketing ploy : )

[NittanyJen]

It is not misinformation. You misunderstand what I wrote.

 

I was ONLY talking about the advice to do Singapore one level behind. You may not have heard of it, but I know of at least two programs that have recommended in the past, and still may, to use Singapore but to start 1A in second grade because they think it is a year ahead.

 

Of course those that use it on level (NOT the people that take the, IMO, wrong advice of these curriculum providers) are going to end up in algebra by eighth grade or even before if they use it at one level per year.

 

 

.

We are having two different conversations :)

 

The misinformation is that a child starting Singapore a year late would not get to algebra until 9th grade.

 

I agreed with you in my post that doing so is completely unnecessary.

 

That I had not seen such advice before is not a denial that such advice does not exist; just that it is not particularly common. A following poster said it was advised in a popular provider. I can accept that as true. If it is advised by a religious provider, that would be why I had not seen the advice-- I have perused some of those offerings, but certainly not all, as we use primarily secular sources.

 

I hope that clears up any confusion! Please contribute if you feel we continue to talk past one another... I do so hate misunderstandings.

[Laura Corin]

When Calvin was doing SM, he was getting great marks on the Texas TAAKs tests at least a grade higher (I can't remember if it was one or two).  That may well say an awful lot about the state of Texas education (if my contacts there are to be believed) but it does show that SM is ahead of some standard or another.

 

ETA: I checked - after finishing SM 3B, Calvin passed the TAAKs maths 4th grade test.  After finishing SM 4B he was at the 82nd percentile on the TAAKs maths 5th grade test.  He is a very bright kid but maths is his worst and least enjoyed subject.

 

L

[zenjenn]

My assessment:

 

People on the WTM forums are, on average, skewed in their perception of what "grade level" is. A lot of us are nerdy and bookish and were probably placed in the most advanced groupings in school (whether we were aware of it or not), and/or were raised in an area with an educated demographic.

 

So I think you more frequently hear a program (especially math, which is more universal and objective) is "behind" because many people evaluating the curricula just have higher default expectations.

 

In reality in a classroom, there is usually math going on at two or three (or more) different levels at least.

 

Just have your kid learn the stuff, and move forward at their own pace.

[Penelope]

We are having two different conversations :)

 

The misinformation is that a child starting Singapore a year late would not get to algebra until 9th grade.

.

Not to beat a dead horse, but year 7 is not a full algebra one course. Algebra 1 topics, as far as I can tell, would not be completed until NEM 2 or DM 8. (I haven't thought about a kid who goes through the entire integrated math sequence. I don't know if that student could do calc or would miss topics and need "pre calc" and then calc).

 

So, a child completing the books a year lower than their stated grade would:

 

Finish Singapore PM 1-6 by the end of seventh grade.

DM or NEM begin in eighth grade. Complete algebra course (yes, that is imprecise but speaking of typical topics in US schools for a first year course) not completed until ninth grade.

 

Or, NEM 1-4 done in eighth through eleventh grades. Does that allow AB Calculus in twelfth? I'm not sure.

 

But most people don't use DM or NEM, at least probably not a lot of those who are listening to xyz curriculum company advice as to where to place the children in math.

 

So they finish PM 6 in seventh grade. pre-algebra eighth. Algebra 1 ninth. However, you are right that it is possible to get to algebra 1 in eighth by skipping PM 6. :) I don't know that every parent would know get can do this, but maybe the information is out there well enough.

 

I used to see and hear the "ahead" advice about Singapore a lot. I don't know if it was certain homeschool speakers or companies that spread this, or what, but I used to hear a lot that a child was in a book 1-2 years behind their grade level because Singapore is so far ahead. (Not that there is anything wrong with working at their own pace and being behind an arbitrary scope and sequence, just that the reasons given for it don't make sense to me).