Please share what you chose to use after Singapore 6B ...

[tjlcc]

Just thinking ahead.  :)

 

There are many options out there, and I'm looking for some ideas and perspectives from people who have "been there and done that."

 

Please share what you chose for your children.  Do you have any regrets?

 

Thanks.

[Julie of KY]

My oldest went from SM 5B to AoPS Algebra (the prealgebra book was not out at that time). My second son went from SM 5B to AoPS Prealgebra. He is doing AoPS Algebra now, but will probably do the geometry sections of the Singapore New Elementary Math series.

[Julie in MN]

In 7th grade, my son finished Singapore 6B, along with extensive math facts practice through fractions, a small math team with competitions, and a tiny bit of NEM (the negative numbers portion). 

 

I decided NEM was too difficult for *me* to schedule (or ds to cooperate with), some of which was just the normal jump in amount of work after elementary.  I think the new Discovering Math is parsed out by Jennifer Hoerst (of the HIGs), so it might have been easier for me, but not sure.  The other problem I had was doing a lot of "prealgebra" units in Singapore when I'm not inclined to do that (negative numbers in isolation just didn't mean a lot to my son, better for us to learn them in context of larger problems).  Not sure, maybe I'd have liked Discovering if I'd tried it.  I love Singapore Primary.

 

So for 8th grade, I went to something I *know* I like -- Math Relief algebra.  That program is exclusively algebra and I really like the idea of a teacher just and only teaching what he's gifted at, rather than trying to do it all.  Anyways, we used Math Relief Algebra (and Algebra 2 in 10th).  It was a great fit for my kids and me.

 

9th Geometry with Jacobs and then switched to Teaching Textbooks

10th Math Relief Algebra 2, plus added some AOPS at the end of the year (not ds's cup of tea)

11th College Algebra & Precalc, both dual enrollment

12th Calculus I, dual enrollment

 

Julie

[texasmama]

My older son went from SM 6B into AoPS pre-A, and my younger son went from SM 5B into AoPS pre-A, with both doing equally well in the program.  I used Key to Algebra (the first four books) as a bridge during the summer prior to starting the pre-A.  We are well into Chapter 5 of the pre-A. 

 

I don't have any regrets with the younger son.  I'm still not sure that AoPS is the best fit for my older son, as his frustration tolerance is lower than younger's, and it takes him longer to grasp new concepts.  I have offered the possibility of a different program to older son (or doing math separately from younger son, as they are combined right now).  He declines both of these.  My younger son is well-suited to the style of AoPS.  He will be 11 next week.  Older is 13, but they have very different learning styles.  That the older is struggling more is not a surprise to me.  As long as he is willing to struggle and can puzzle through it, I believe the experience is good for him, but I remain open to his feedback and will make a change with no problem if he seems to need it.  One day at a time over here.  :)

 

I have presented to my boys that this is an experiment to see how we like AoPS, and I have also told them that the Algebra program is an "easier to understand" program than the pre-A.  I will be honest - both have struggled at places in this curriculum.  However, I like it, and they both choose to continue it.  I will likely use some more of the Key to Algebra books during this summer coming up, in addition to using the summer to continue to work on pre-A. 

 

As I understand, the AoPS geometry course is a very difficult program, so I have Chalkdust geometry on the shelf with a tentative plan to use it.  Although I personally did pretty well in Algebra, Geometry was not my strongest math so I will need the curriculum to do most of the teaching.  I fear that we might all be in over our heads in AoPS Geometry.

 

ETA:  I loved SM and have used it from K Essentials through 6B.  (Didn't love the books 6A and 6B).  Making this change was hard for me because of this, but I didn't want to continue with SM because of the nontraditional sequence beyond level 6.  I have found moving to AoPS to be a surprisingly simple transition for me, and I am a humanities gal and not a STEM one at all, so I think this says something positive about the program, whatever that may be.  lol

[AngieW in Texas]

oldest:
Jacobs Algebra

Jacobs Geometry

Kinetic Books Algebra II

Larson's Precalculus

 

middle:

combination of Jacobs Algebra and Kinetic Books (dropped Jacobs halfway through because she decided she liked KB better)

Jacobs Geometry (no KB geometry available at that time)

Kinetic Books Algebra II

Lial's Precalculus (really wanted to be able to stick with KB, but they still don't have precalculus)

 

I liked Lial's Precalculus better than Larson's Precalculus.

 

ETA:

I liked Singapore 6A/6B.  My youngest used Singapore only until the end of 5A, but it wasn't a good fit for her. Finding a good math fit for her was very difficult. MUS worked sort-of okay for Algebra I and has worked much better for Geometry. I don't like MUS in general, but I have to use what works for my youngest and MUS seems to be it.

 

Singapore was a great fit for my two older girls and so was Kinetic Books.

[Kendall]

After Singapore 6B

 

Oldest- NEM (it was a very hard transition)

Next-  a few units of Key to Algebra then NEM, then Geometry then redid Alg 1 fast with Foerster

Next- had an extra year so we did Russian Math 6 (Ch1-4) then Foerster Alg 1(took 2 years 7-8th and supplemented with NEM and did nearly every word problem)

 

Using MEP rather than Singapore with the next ones and plan to go to Foerster Alg 1 after that

[Lori D.]

DS1:

 

Singapore 6A/B

1-semester "skim review" Saxon Algebra 1/2 AND 1 semester Singapore's NEM

Jacobs Algebra 1

Jacobs Geometry

Abeka Consumer Math

Foerster's Algebra 2

 

For us, Saxon was never an option other than a supplement from a different perspective up through Pre-Algebra. Saxon is not a good fit for DS1 (single topics broken into too many fragmented bits of instruction scattered too many lessons apart). And I don't care for Saxon's abstract presentation. Also, to ME, Saxon appears to focus on memorization of equations, and then "plug and chug" when you see the wording of the word problem match up with the equation you memorized. Saxon works great for many families; not a good fit for us.

 

While DS1 liked NEM, it was taking a HUGE amount of time/effort from me to learn it alongside him, in a way that the Singapore Primary did not. I think if I had gone through the program in advance of DS1, and learned the math from that point of view we could have done it; but it was just taking SO much time for me to struggle through jumping in and helping when DS1 was getting stuck -- just did not have that much time for me to devote to it.

 

DS1 LOVED both years of Jacobs and both were very intuitive for me to teach/assist.

 

Foerster's Alg. 2 was "okay" — it was somewhat similar in approach as Jacobs, and it did have some problemsolving that really stretched us — but not enough hand-holding for this teacher. ;)

 

We only needed math through Alg. 2 at that time for college prep for DS1. (Requirements changed 2 years after he graduated). Also, he was very much headed towards Fine Arts/Humanities, and was not interested in STEM fields, or higher math or harder science, so we focused on his interests, rather than going for Pre-Calc/Trig, and had no math in the senior year.

 

Wish AoPS had been around when DS was going through the high school maths, as we would have given it a whirl. If we had needed the Pre-Calc/Trig, we might have tried Lial's. Or, more likely, would have gone with dual enrollment at the local community college.

 

 

DS2, our math struggler, used Singapore Primary up through 6A/B only as a supplement to MUS. After that it was straight MUS (with Jacobs Algebra for one year).

[tjlcc]

Thank you, everyone.  I greatly appreciate your replies.

 

 

While DS1 liked NEM, it was taking a HUGE amount of time/effort from me to learn it alongside him, in a way that the Singapore Primary did not. I think if I had gone through the program in advance of DS1, and learned the math from that point of view we could have done it; but it was just taking SO much time for me to struggle through jumping in and helping when DS1 was getting stuck -- just did not have that much time for me to devote to it.

 

 

 

Yes, time is something I'm short on too.  Math is not my strong subject, although my husband is wonderful with it.

 

I took ACE Math from K-12, which was crippling, IMO. :)

 

I'm curious as to why so many chose not to complete Singapore 6?  Unnecessary review?

[texasmama]

I hated SM6. I found it not well-explained, and neither ds nor I understood it well as written. Embarrassing to say, but I understand AoPS pre-A just fine so I think it was level 6. I decided after that to skip level 6 with my other two kids.

[Melissa B]

After having eldest dd use Singapore 6A, I decided to drop Singapore 6 except for the CWP book for all the younger kids. We do Saxon and Singapore through Singapore 5B and then switch to Saxon and Life of Fred. I don't foresee going past Saxon Algebra 2/ LOF Geometry for any of the children as they will likely all dual enroll, but I do have Saxon Advanced Math, just in case. I've been very happy with this set-up and my only regrets have to do with times that I have deviated from the plan.

[Lori D.]

 

I'm curious as to why so many chose not to complete Singapore 6?  Unnecessary review?

 

 

Odd man out here. We used all of Singapore 6A/B with DS1 and much of it as supplement with DS2 who was using MUS as his spine math. We liked 6A/B; we saw it as focus / practice and going deeper with problem-solving, with introduction of some new types of word problems. While we also liked 5A/B (exposure to interesting/unusual topics, such as tessalations), we thought of it as being "lite".

 

However, we had copyright early 2000 U.S. editions (just textbook and student workbook -- no Teacher Guide, CW, or HIG available at that time), so the Singapore levels may have changed quite a bit by now... Also, we did not have access to AoPS, which may make Singapore 6A/B seem redundant...

[ChristineP]

We completed all of 6A and 6B.  Then Key to Algebra book as prealgebra.  Followed by the regular sequence of Algebra, Geometry, etc.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Odd man out here. We used all of Singapore 6A/B with DS1 and much of it as supplement with DS2 who was using MUS as his spine math. We liked 6A/B; we saw it as focus / practice and going deeper with problem-solving, with introduction of some new types of word problems. While we also liked 5A/B (exposure to interesting/unusual topics, such as tessalations), we thought of it as being "lite".

 

However, we had copyright early 2000 U.S. editions (just textbook and student workbook -- no Teacher Guide, CW, or HIG available at that time), so the Singapore levels may have changed quite a bit by now...

 

This describes us. Also, I taught middle school math for years (and high school math one year), so I had no problem understanding the material. We went from 6B to Dolciani Pre-algebra.