Keys to Algebra as Prealgebra

[Staceyshoe]

Yet another parent here with a math question. :)  We're doing Singapore 5 this year with the plan of moving on to AOPS for algebra.  I've read a few threads stating that AOPS prealgebra was more wordy and frustrating for children than the AOPS algebra course.  My ds doesn't enjoy arithmetic (though his academic work is fine) and has some exposure to mathematical reasoning, which he adores.  His WISC shows extremely high ability in mathematical reasoning as well.  I have my eye on AOPS for him but am not sure it is the right step after Singapore 5 because 1) his frustration tolerance is very low, and 2) while he loves mathematical reasoning and can't wait to move beyond arithmetic, he will be taking on some tougher/more time-consuming courses next year.  His goal is always to finish and have free time, and he's still young so I don't *want* him spending hours and hours everyday on schoolwork. 

I thought about using Keys to Algebra as a prealgebra course, and then moving on to AOPS Algebra the following year (when he has another year of maturity and has adjusted to other academic changes/challenge). 

Thoughts?  Is this a good plan?  Is Key to . . . too much review after SM 5B?  Should we start Keys to . . . after SM 5A?  Or is the idea of Keys to . .as a prealgebra course just not the best idea?

[MamaSprout]

Kind of in the same boat. I have heard that 5b's geometry is worth sticking with Singapore through 5b.

[quark]

My experience is that Keys to works best when paired with a problem solving curriculum. (ETA: Keys to alone would have been too simple for my DS)

 

Keys to worked as a great practice bridge for us (we didn't take a year to finish it, and we stopped after fractions, decimals, percents, some measurement, and only about 3 or 4 books of algebra, and we didn't do it as pre algebra, only to introduce more practice) but I wouldn't do Keys to then go to AoPS directly unless you have a huge leap in maturity because I think the leap in thinking is too huge for some kids. I haven't used Dolciani prealg, only the algebra 1, but based on the Dolciani algebra 1, I am guessing (perhaps wildly) that Dolciani pre-alg will be a better bridge to AoPS than Keys to if done alone.

 

If working with another problem solving curriculum on the side, then doing Keys to and moving on to AoPS might be smoother.

 

Edited to add more detail.

[EKS]

The Keys are very procedural.  I wouldn't use them with a gifted math student except for supplemental practice.  I'd take a look at Jacobs Algebra instead. 

[Dmmetler]

I used keys last year with DD along with LOF pre-Algebra. It did the job as far as giving her a book with "algebra" on the cover that she could do quickly, and gave her a year to grow up a bit before starting AOPS Pre-A.

[MamaSprout]

Have you looked at Zaccaro Real World Algebra or Jousting Armadillos?

[Staceyshoe]

Hmmmm . . . I feel like I'm not finding the "right" fit.  I haven't looked closely at the more traditional algebra/pre-algebra programs (Jacobs, Dolciani, Forester) since I was pretty sure we'd give AOPS a go.  Maybe I should take a look at some of those pre-algebra texts. 

LOF didn't work well in the past (no retention) but could be different this time, especially since ds can't wait to get to pre-algebra and algebra.  A lot of the reviews of Zaccaro mention real world application as a strength of the program, but ds is already getting a lot of that through Derek Owens' Physical Science this year.  I think it would be more of the same.  Jousting Armadillos looks very intriguing and different.  I am sure it would capture ds's interest.  Would this be adequate preparation for AOPS algebra?  Or perhaps we should try AOPS pre-algebra and see whether it works for us? 

Nothing makes me feel as indecisive as facing decisions about educational fit.

[EKS]

BTW, Derek Owens' prealgabra course is quite good.  It's a review of arithmetic with enough algebra thrown in to make it interesting.

[Element]

Kind of in the same boat. I have heard that 5b's geometry is worth sticking with Singapore through 5b.

 

We're in that boat too, more or less.

 

This post was helpful to me. I have a bored ds10 in 5A and was thinking of jumping ship before 5B, since he passed the AoPS Pre-A pretest and has a high frustration tolerance. We both love geometry, though, so we probably just need to stick it out.

[Staceyshoe]

BTW, Derek Owens' prealgabra course is quite good.  It's a review of arithmetic with enough algebra thrown in to make it interesting.

 

I don't know why, but it never even occurred to me to look at his math courses.  This is why I need these boards! :)

[8filltheheart]

Hmmmm . . . I feel like I'm not finding the "right" fit. I haven't looked closely at the more traditional algebra/pre-algebra programs (Jacobs, Dolciani, Forester) since I was pretty sure we'd give AOPS a go. Maybe I should take a look at some of those pre-algebra texts.

 

LOF didn't work well in the past (no retention) but could be different this time, especially since ds can't wait to get to pre-algebra and algebra. A lot of the reviews of Zaccaro mention real world application as a strength of the program, but ds is already getting a lot of that through Derek Owens' Physical Science this year. I think it would be more of the same. Jousting Armadillos looks very intriguing and different. I am sure it would capture ds's interest. Would this be adequate preparation for AOPS algebra? Or perhaps we should try AOPS pre-algebra and see whether it works for us?

 

Nothing makes me feel as indecisive as facing decisions about educational fit.

I am totally baffled by the bolded. I know nothing about DO's physical science or even Zaccaro, so my comments are based on familiarity with physical science courses and applied alg problems in general. Unless he has incorporated an applied algebra program into his physical science curriculum, I can't imagine it being more of the same. The strength of Foerster alg 1 lies in its applied real world problems, but my kids have never encountered similar problems in their science texts they are covering at the same age. Typically math courses should precede science courses in level coverage of equivalent type concepts.

 

Fwiw, all the angst about what one should use to prepare for AoPS is really misplaced. A solid mathematical foundation should allow a strong math student to jump into AoPS even midstream. There is no single right answer. For less mature students that aren't ready for the frustration of the challenge problems, using different courses for levels until they mature does not mean they can't enter AoPS in higher levels and not only succeed, but thrive. My ds never used SM, never used AoPS alg or geo and jumped into their alg 3 never looking back. So, no need to fret that you have to find the right answer now.

[MamaSprout]

Fwiw, all the angst about what one should use to prepare for AoPS is really misplaced. A solid mathematical foundation should allow a strong math student to jump into AoPS even midstream. There is no single right answer. For less mature students that aren't ready for the frustration of the challenge problems, using different courses for levels until they mature does not mean they can't enter AoPS in higher levels and not only succeed, but thrive. My ds never used SM, never used AoPS alg or geo and jumped into their alg 3 never looking back. So, no need to fret that you have to find the right answer now.

 

This is really helpful!

[boscopup]

1) his frustration tolerance is very low, and 2) while he loves mathematical reasoning and can't wait to move beyond arithmetic, he will be taking on some tougher/more time-consuming courses next year.  His goal is always to finish and have free time, and he's still young so I don't *want* him spending hours and hours everyday on schoolwork.

 

1) I've found that AoPS has helped with the frustration tolerance issue here. I have my son work at the white board with me watching, and I question him as needed. The first chapter, I had to hold his hand a lot. We're toward the end of the 3rd chapter (taking it really slow, apparently :lol:), and he basically does it on his own now, as I watch. I cannot believe how long he can sit and think about a problem now, when he used to melt down if he couldn't find a solution instantly.

 

2) AoPS takes as long as you let it. We do the Problems one day, Exercises the next. If there are a LOT of exercises, we'll split it into two days. Review sections are split into 2-3 days, as well as Challenge sections. My son doesn't work more than about 30-45 minutes on AoPS. Working through the book myself (I think I got through chapter 7), I have not yet encountered a problem that takes hours to do. I think that's in the upper level books, not the PreAlgebra. :) My son has some other math as practice (CLE Math 500), which takes about 15 minutes to do a full lesson. That keeps his elementary math skills sharp, so things don't drop out of his 9 year old head. So in total, he does roughly an hour of math per day, max. Some days we just do the CLE and never get to PreA, and that's fine too. He did math those days, just not "new" concepts. ;) I also pull out Dolciani PreA if we need drill and kill for a concept. He can do that completely on his own. All the odd problems from one full section takes him about 30-45 minutes. We do either Dolciani or AoPS most days, but not both in the same day. So again, just an hour spent on math each day total. And your son may not need the extra practice that my son needs, so 30-45 minutes might work for you if you need it to. Just set a timer and say, "We'll do math until the timer goes off." Pick up the next day where you left off.

 

[Dmmetler]

In my case, I wasn't comfortable jumping into AOPS Pre-algebra with a 7 yr old who, up to that point, really hadn't put pencil to paper much in her prior math instruction, so taking a year of lighter pre-algebra (and giving her LOF) let her build her writing skills and skills at solving a problem set in a separate notebook. I'm not sure she wouldn't have been fine with AOPS Pre-Algebra last year, but at the same time, I'm not sure she would have had the frustration tolerance for chapter 2 of AOPS PA at almost 8, but did at almost 9, and I think the size of the book would have been overwhelming. Singapore just LOOKS friendlier because of all the small books and the bright colored pages.

 

I waffled on whether to go to AOPS PA or Algebra this year, and I suspect, given the relative ease at which she's doing PA that she could have done the algebra, but she's enjoying it and getting enough out of it  that I don't feel it's a waste of time, and this has turned out to be a difficult year otherwise as far as academic load goes, so having math be review and enrichment rather than a lot of new topics is a good thing for her right now.

[Staceyshoe]

 Unless he has incorporated an applied algebra program into his physical science curriculum, I can't imagine it being more of the same.

 

I don't have other courses to compare to, but so far the class honestly seems to contain more math than science.  It's designed to be taken in 8th or 9th grade (so probably at the same time as prealgebra?  I'm not sure what grade is typical for prealgebra/algebra these days.).  If you watch the 3-minute sample video here, you can see what the course is like:  http://www.lucideducation.com/?p=PhysicalScience.php

[8filltheheart]

I don't have other courses to compare to, but so far the class honestly seems to contain more math than science.  It's designed to be taken in 8th or 9th grade (so probably at the same time as prealgebra?  I'm not sure what grade is typical for prealgebra/algebra these days.).  If you watch the 3-minute sample video here, you can see what the course is like:  http://www.lucideducation.com/?p=PhysicalScience.php

 

I didn't take the time to watch the video, but upper level science without math wouldn't be a standard science course.  It by no means that it replaces math in a math course.   A good math course is applied math.   A weak math course is only solving equations.   The entire purpose behind math is to use the concepts being taught.   You don't negate one b/c of the other.   Both are necessary for a good education.  (FWIW, math is the pre-req for the vast majority of science courses simply b/c the math skills are vital for success.)

[Staceyshoe]

I *am* seeking both good math and science courses--just trying to find the math course that would be the best fit for my kiddo.  That's all. ;)

[chiguirre]

LOF didn't work well in the past (no retention) but could be different this time, especially since ds can't wait to get to pre-algebra and algebra. 

 

I just told Trinqueta that SM 6 was pre-algebra and Discovering Mathematics starts algebra (and geometry). She was satisfied with that answer and since I like the looks of DM that's where we're headed. Unless you strongly want a book that says Algebra on the cover, you can continue with SM. Even if your son will eventually go to b&m high school, you'll have enough time to get through the DM series and be ready for pre-calc or calc.

[Calm37]

I used Keys to Algebra with my oldest and she then went directly into Jacobs Algebra. We didn't take a lot of time with it, though. Just did Keys in the 2-3 summer months before her 8th grade year. I felt it prepared her very well for Jacobs.

[8filltheheart]

I *am* seeking both good math and science courses--just trying to find the math course that would be the best fit for my kiddo.  That's all. ;)

 

I guess I am not stating the obvious very well.   My pt is to pick a math program that meets his math needs.   If Zaccaro meets what he needs, then go for it.   I would not eliminate it as an option b/c of what he is doing in science.   

[8filltheheart]

I *am* seeking both good math and science courses--just trying to find the math course that would be the best fit for my kiddo.  That's all. ;)

 

I guess I am not stating the obvious very well.   My pt is to pick a math program that meets his math needs.   If Zaccaro meets what he needs, then go for it.   I would not eliminate it as an option b/c of what he is doing in science.