Can you go from SM 5 or 6 into AoPS Algebra?

[FairProspects]

Good idea? Bad idea? If we did not want to use AoPS Pre-Alg, would there be another suggestion for pre-algebra? What should I consider when thinking about this?

 

Ds also does Math Circles and private tutoring with a mathematician, an additional logic/math class, and a 3D math in art class. He has done HOE, the BA available, and we will finish Patty Paper Geometry before starting. I'm not overly worried about his problem solving abilities. He prefers fewer, harder math problems.

 

Is this plan workable or do we really need a bridge from SM to AoPS?

[wapiti]

Editing because I misread your title.  Generally, I'd probably want to do a prealgebra between SM 5 and AoPS Intro to Algebra but I can't say about SM 6 - I don't have a feel for what's in there.

 

There are a lot of prealgebra choices.  Besides AoPS, I tend to prefer the mid-80s Dolciani, Prealgebra, An Accelerated Course (very straightforward).  There have been threads about the series based on Jacobs that starts with Jousting Armadillos, but that series is spread out over more years, IIRC.

 

From what you've written about his problem-solving experiences, AoPS sounds perfect.  What I might wonder for your ds's case is whether he may have essentially done what's in the prealgebra, not necessarily in SM but in his other activities.

 

Topics I'd want to have covered before Intro to Alg:

 

- negative numbers

- solving single variable equations and inequalities

- exponents and square roots (arithmetic with both and especially using prime factorization to simplify square roots)

- ratios/fractions/decimals/percents

 

Sorry I edited this to death but my original post didn't make sense...

[Dana]

My son moved from SM 5 to a basic alegbra course with me (cc level) and we're doing AoPS algebra now in 6th.

He's forgotten most of what we did in the algebra course anyway :(

 

I think if you've been doing IP and CWP you could try skipping to Algebra.

 

I would agree with a lot of prior practice with arithmetic with negative numbers before algebra with AoPS.

[Julie of KY]

My oldest son did just fine going from SM 5 to AoPS Algebra (before the prealgebra book was out). Most kids would not be ready for that transition. Either need to work on more fundamentals such as exponents, negative numbers, fractions, etc. Some just need more maturity before jumping into AoPS Algebra.

 

My second son went from SM 5 to AoPS Prealgebra, then needs Dolciani algebra before AoPS algebra, because he doesn't like the constant challenge of AoPS.

 

I'd say if you think your son might be ready, get the book and start. If he resisting or not understanding, either slow down or pick something else up for awhile.

[FairProspects]

So negative numbers looks like the biggest gap I need to fill right now. He has figured them out on his own, but not done a lot of formal practice. I think I will take a look at Intro to Alg. then. We still have a few months before this transition but I was just wondering.

[Alice]

My son is in Singapore 6B now. I had him start doing Alcumus and found that there a few gaps that Singapore hasn't really covered: negative numbers, exponents (all the rules for how to manipulate them) being the two that stand out. He has them conceptually figured out but hasn't done any formal practice or learning about them. 

 

You might try Alcumus to see how he does, there are a lot of pre-algebra problems and you could see how he does with them. There is also an AOPS algebra pre-test (which you probably already know about). 

 

 

[kiana]

I would prefer to take a standard PS pre-algebra text (very cheaply available on amazon.com) and work through the chapter tests, covering any topics where the child misses a question. If he knows everything from pre-algebra already, it shouldn't take more than a couple of weeks, and this would uncover any gaps before beginning algebra.

[lewelma]

My older D's went from SM5 to aops intro algebra, but it was not an easy transition. He was 9, so it might have been a math maturity thing, but there were definitely tears which resulted in me hiding the book.

 

Ruth in NZ

[Dmmetler]

Having decided to move laterally to AOPS Pre-Algebra, I'd really suggest getting the PA book, even if you end up looking at some of the sections and jumping to the review/challengers. There's a LOT in that book that is not in SM through 5B, even in the IP/CWP (and that wasn't in LOF Pre-Algebra, either), and the depth that those new topics (or topics that were barely brushed on, like exponent rules) is taught is much, much deeper than in what she'd done before. If AOPS Intro Algebra expects that level of understanding coming in, it could make the book very frustrating.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[sunnyday]

So negative numbers looks like the biggest gap I need to fill right now. He has figured them out on his own, but not done a lot of formal practice. I think I will take a look at Intro to Alg. then. We still have a few months before this transition but I was just wondering.

 

Have you seen the pre-test for Intro to Algebra or the post-test for Pre-Algebra? Those might help your decision making.

[Dana]

It is not just negative numbers.  SM at those levels does not cover exponents, routes, absolute value, rules of divisibility, and possibly others (not enough coffee yet).  A lot of those things are sort of reviewed in AoPS A1, but I believe they expect that it is not the first time one has seen those concepts.  So, while AoPS does cover exponents, the focus is not really on the absolute beginning stuff. 

 

I'm assuming you mean SM PM.  Maybe Standards is different.  I have not seen it.

 

Standards does do negative numbers in 5B.

I think divisibility rules were done with prime factorization - maybe 5A?

[boscopup]

Standards does do negative numbers in 5B.

I think divisibility rules were done with prime factorization - maybe 5A?

 

I found that the negative numbers work wasn't nearly as much as what was expected in AoPS Prealgebra, though that was easy to deal with. Exponents was our big lack, due to just not having done very many problems with them. My son felt comfortable with exponents, I thought. Then he started doing that chapter in AoPS, and boy did he need more practice! I used Dolciani (which I got for $6 shipped off Amazon) to fill in the exponents practice gap. Then AoPS became much easier!

 

Divisibility rules is covered somewhere in Singapore Standards 4, iirc. I know the divisibility rules sections of AoPS Prealgebra were super duper easy for my son. That was his favorite chapter so far! I think that chapter was mostly review for him, which made it easier to do the problem solving aspect of the problems (since they're much harder than anything Singapore did).

 

[Chrysalis Academy]

this is kind of a digression, so I apologize . . . but why do you suppose AoPS PreA covers exponents so very . . . thoroughly . . . at this level?  I haven't seen any other PreA text that does more than introduce the basic concepts.  Even the Algebra texts I have don't go quite this deeply into it.  I get that AoPS is all about going deep, but do people feel like it's necessary to go that deep into exponents before you begin Algebra 1? I'm curious particularly because this seems to be a chapter that most kids have the most difficulty with.

[boscopup]

this is kind of a digression, so I apologize . . . but why do you suppose AoPS PreA covers exponents so very . . . thoroughly . . . at this level?  I haven't seen any other PreA text that does more than introduce the basic concepts.  Even the Algebra texts I have don't go quite this deeply into it.  I get that AoPS is all about going deep, but do people feel like it's necessary to go that deep into exponents before you begin Algebra 1? I'm curious particularly because this seems to be a chapter that most kids have the most difficulty with.

 

I figured they would build on it in Intro to Algebra, but I haven't seen that yet. That is a good question!

 

I too was surprised at the difference between exponents in Dolciani and AoPS. They were worlds apart in difficulty! But my son handled the AoPS chapter fine toward the end after getting all that drill and kill of the very basics from Dolciani. AoPS went much further in "problem solving" than Dolciani did, and maybe that's the difference, especially given the goal of AoPS. ;) I imagine my younger kids going through BA first will have better experiences with the exponents in AoPS.

 

[Chrysalis Academy]

I figured they would build on it in Intro to Algebra, but I haven't seen that yet. That is a good question!

 

I too was surprised at the difference between exponents in Dolciani and AoPS. They were worlds apart in difficulty! But my son handled the AoPS chapter fine toward the end after getting all that drill and kill of the very basics from Dolciani. AoPS went much further in "problem solving" than Dolciani did, and maybe that's the difference, especially given the goal of AoPS. ;) I imagine my younger kids going through BA first will have better experiences with the exponents in AoPS.

 

 

Yeah, I'm not knocking coming to understand exponents deeply, but it seems like it's a funny place in the S&S.  Honestly, it's the biggest thing that's kept me from diving into AoPS with dd, and it worries me about having her start with Alcumus, too.  Maybe it's a flaming sword or hedge of rose thorns that you just have to be intrepid enough to pass through.   :lol:   Or something.

[lewelma]

Younger ds sunk on that chapter, and I decided not to push forward with aops preA . It *is* more than in the intro algebra book and I think it needs to be revised. The books do have different authors and I'm not convinced that the S&S was fully compared between the books.

 

Ruth in NZ

[wapiti]

Yeah, I'm not knocking coming to understand exponents deeply, but it seems like it's a funny place in the S&S.  Honestly, it's the biggest thing that's kept me from diving into AoPS with dd, and it worries me about having her start with Alcumus, too.  Maybe it's a flaming sword or hedge of rose thorns that you just have to be intrepid enough to pass through.   :lol:   Or something.

  :lol:  :lol:

 

My guess is just that exponents had to come before number theory which had to come before.... something.  Square roots at the very least.  Exponents come at a similar place in Dolciani.

 

As for the depth, I look at it as being much more fleshed-out than the exponent coverage in Intro to Alg, though if we don't count the first lesson, I guess it would only be 2 lessons in alg vs 3 lessons plus a summary in prealgebra.  And, I have to remind myself that it was written more for math-talented 6th graders than for math-talented 4th graders.  Somehow my dd managed to do ch 2 alone in 5th grade easier than ds managed to do it together with me in 4th, even though he probably has the overall greater math talent.  Possibly, I learned more than either of them :tongue_smilie:

 

IIRC, really just the first two lessons are particularly hard, 2.1 with the bit about square of a sum, and 2.2, with the long (long for someone who's new to exponents) set of exercises ending with expressing things as a power of 2.  It might help to break that one up into two separate lessons, I don't know.

 

Honestly, I wouldn't let that stop you from starting your dd if you think she's otherwise ready.  Just go. slow. in that area and if it's too much, move on with a plan to return later.  I think the chapter does a great job demonstrating big-picture problem solving.

[crazyforlatin]

this is kind of a digression, so I apologize . . . but why do you suppose AoPS PreA covers exponents so very . . . thoroughly . . . at this level? I haven't seen any other PreA text that does more than introduce the basic concepts. Even the Algebra texts I have don't go quite this deeply into it. I get that AoPS is all about going deep, but do people feel like it's necessary to go that deep into exponents before you begin Algebra 1? I'm curious particularly because this seems to be a chapter that most kids have the most difficulty with.

It's actually necessary because Intro to Algebra exponents is harder. Silly me, I was thinking of going even deeper with exponents with Intro to Algebra after Pre-A's Chapter 2. I looked at it and dropped it rather quickly. I would have used Dolciani, but Pre-A does have exponents mixed into their exercises in subsequent chapters. And, I bought DM 8A, and what do you know, first thing is about exponents. Lots of practice there, harder than Dolciani's pre-A (as expected since it's more of an algebra level work, perhaps) but DD hates DM. I don't know why as I like it a lot. It has challenging problems reminiscent of AOPS.

[kohlby]

Though we didn't leave that curriculum for AoPS, we did move from another one without issue so I thought I'd chime in.  My son did math-u-see Pre-Algebra.  We were about halfway through MUS Alg I when I realized it was so watered down that we really needed to leave it.  MUS Alg I is under college prep level, forget about honors, so I wouldn't call it Alg I at all for this group of students.  We went into AoPS Intro to Alg.  There was one thing he hadn't covered in Pre-Alg that we had to get up to speed, and that was going into as much detail with exponents.  But that was easy for me to spend a little time teaching and then he was set.  There was a transition time with AoPS - but it had to do with him going from math being too easy to having to work at math and adjusting his attitude and expectations.  It was very worth it!   So, if your child has a gap from another program and is an advanced math thinker, you may be able to bridge the gap fairly easily.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

Yeah, I'm not knocking coming to understand exponents deeply, but it seems like it's a funny place in the S&S.  Honestly, it's the biggest thing that's kept me from diving into AoPS with dd, and it worries me about having her start with Alcumus, too.  Maybe it's a flaming sword or hedge of rose thorns that you just have to be intrepid enough to pass through.   :lol:   Or something.

 

There's some truth in that!  Once past the flaming sword and hedge of rose thorns, it's relatively smooth sailing.

 

Except, of course, for the occasional ROUS. . .

 

[snowbeltmom]

Have you seen the pre-test for Intro to Algebra or the post-test for Pre-Algebra? Those might help your decision making.

 

Imo, the AoPS pre-tests are not a good indicator of a student's "readiness."  The tests are too easy.

 

[snowbeltmom]

Younger ds sunk on that chapter, and I decided not to push forward with aops preA . It *is* more than in the intro algebra book and I think it needs to be revised. The books do have different authors and I'm not convinced that the S&S was fully compared between the books.

 

Ruth in NZ

 

Ruth, what edition of the Introduction of Algebra text are you using?  After my two boys, our copy of Introduction to Algebra was pretty beat up, so I purchased a new book for my daughter.  I was surprised to see that the new edition contained three sections in Chapter 1 that were not addressed in the book my boys had used.  The three additional sections were exponents, fractional exponents, and radicals.

 

Imo, the level of difficulty of the problem sets was equivalent between the pre-algebra and the algebra book.

 

If a student is having difficulty with Sections 1.6, 1.7 or 1.8 in the Introduction to Algebra book, I would feel comfortable skipping those sections and revisiting them when the child is more mature.  Also, if the student is having trouble with this topic in the Pre-algebra book, I would not worry about it and move on.  The student will encounter the topic again in the algebra book.