WHY oh why does AoPS have to be so WORDY-it's meant for engineer types!

[HappyGrace]

Grrrrr....sorry for the vent.

 

Anyone else have this problem? I am looking at it for my mathy, engineer-minded boy and even MY eyes glaze over, and I am a word-oriented female!!

 

How do you make this work for non-wordy boys?

[regentrude]

The reason it is "wordy" is that the book is meant to be used without a teacher, so every.single.word a good teacher would say when explaining the concept has to be in the book.

Since the books aim at thorough conceptual understanding and not rote drill, this level of explanation is necessary.

 

ETA: Time and time again, DH and I found that the book explains it exactly the way we would have explained it if we were teaching the concept. I have not found explanations to be redundant.

 

ETA: I do not think AoPS is "meant for engineer types". It is meant for students who want a deeper conceptual understanding of mathematics and who enjoy solving hard problems.

[Caroline]

I don't think engineers are non-wordy people, being one, married to one, having raised one. AOPS has amazing explanations of concepts. It doesn't have extra words. Just the necessary ones.

[mom2bee]

Its not meant for aspiring engineers, it is meant for aspiring mathematicians.

[mommymilkies]

We had the same issue.  My VSL was reduced to tears over it.

[8filltheheart]

I don't think it is meant for engineers or even for word-loving, strong math-oriented girls.  I think it is the perfect match for kids who love math and math theory/proofs.  

[JanetC]

I don't think it is meant for engineers or even for word-loving, strong math-oriented girls. I think it is the perfect match for kids who love math and math theory/proofs.

My word-loving, strong stem-oriented DD absolutely loves AOPS. She went through most of intro to algebra avoiding the proofs, but eventually caught on. She loved the challenging problems and the "we don't talk down to you" vibe from the start.

 

AOPS defies easy categorization, but IMHO AOPS kids are born, not made. You really can't "make it fit" when it doesn't fit your particular child. Nothing to be embarrassed about if it doesn't fit your situation: it really only appeals to a quirky subset of students.

[crazyforlatin]

Are you using pre-A or algebra? Now, I often heartily defend the wordiness of pre-A but it is a lot to take in as a transition book from any of the elementary programs that I know. It takes time to adjust with so many aspects - the words, the problems, the approach. People seem to love it or hate it here. There's no happy medium apparently. From what I can see so far, algebra is better (not the font as I like large font for DD), seems to be more concise or less wordy than pre-A. This actually bothers me a bit, and we were both wondering over the brief paragraphs. Fewer authors, few words :).

 

Is it really the wordiness that bother the kids or is it comprehending what's written? Some parts require re-reading, maybe even some translation on your part, perhaps? Maybe watch the videos first? RR is very charming - I think DD could watch him all day (but not charming enough for some kids here, LOL), and it could really be useful in understanding what's written.

 

ETA: I may have misunderstood what you wrote - your boys are not using it yet, correct?

[Arcadia]

Maybe watch the videos first? RR is very charming - I think DD could watch him all day (but not charming enough for some kids here, LOL), and it could really be useful in understanding what's written.

 

There is videos for only slightly over the first half of the intro to algebra book (up to chapter 13). We were thinking of watching the video for AP, GP and realized that the videos don't cover the whole book.

 

ETA:

The prealgebra book is more wordy than the algebra book. The AoPS books are less wordy than the public school high school science books :)

 

ETA:

After the prealgebra videos, my kids won't interested in the intro to algebra videos anymore. They find the tone, format too predictable. My kids tend to prefer videos narrated but without humans.

[crazyforlatin]

There is videos for only slightly over the first half of the intro to algebra book (up to chapter 13). We were thinking of watching the video for AP, GP and realized that the videos don't cover the whole book.

Richard Rusczyk better get his act together if he plans to keep his fan base.

 

Well, we don't often watch; it's more like a treat, like hey DD, wanna see how RR explains this concept or, hey DD, time to see if you can refine an imitation of him. Yeah, she likes to mimic the way he talks and gestures. It's mainly to just watch him - his enthusiasm is contagious. Not sure if anyone here noticed that in one video, however, he wasn't his usual self, kind of subdued.

[HappyGrace]

Sorry, I guess I was generalizing to say "engineer types", but *my* engineer type is not wordy and also not a strong reader (which we are working on) so this would have him in tears. I was looking at the Pre-Algebra for him for 7th grade.

 

It helps to realize it's for a quirky subset, thanks! I still may consider doing it together, with popcorn reading it at first (he reads a paragraph, I read a paragraph) and see how it goes.

 

 

 

 

 

[wapiti]

Sorry, I guess I was generalizing to say "engineer types", but *my* engineer type is not wordy and also not a strong reader (which we are working on) so this would have him in tears. I was looking at the Pre-Algebra for him for 7th grade.

 

It helps to realize it's for a quirky subset, thanks! I still may consider doing it together, with popcorn reading it at first (he reads a paragraph, I read a paragraph) and see how it goes.

 

FWIW, if he learns well through solving the lesson problems (which IMO is the whole idea), the reading of the lesson problem solutions (where all the words are) isn't that big a deal and may go faster than you think, as a lot of what's in the solutions he will already understand. I do think it may be very helpful - particularly for a student who isn't a strong reader - to look through the solutions together, with you, to confirm what he learned and to make sure he notes anything special and anything he may have missed when solving the lesson problems. On the other hand, if he doesn't do the lesson problems, then reading the solutions especially slowly and carefully becomes much more important.

 

Enjoy the prealgebra text - I love that book :) (I would say that, for the most part, we skimmed through the solutions together rather than reading every word. As my kids were younger, I didn't really trust them to do that part on their own - they'd just skip over the solutions to the exercises).

[Chrysalis Academy]

 

 

ETA: I do not think AoPS is "meant for engineer types". It is meant for students who want a deeper conceptual understanding of mathematics and who enjoy solving hard problems.

 

But it's not the only choice for students who want a deeper conceptual understanding of mathematics and who enjoy solving hard problems.  Right?  

 

It's also for students who really enjoy math on a theoretical level, who really want to wrestle with it and grapple with it, and who are willing to spend a lot of time on math.  Perhaps to the exclusion of other topics, as one can't necessarily do each of one's subjects to this same level of depth.

 

It's also for students who enjoy the discovery method rather than more direct instruction.

 

Your student can meet the first criterion - want a deeper conceptual understanding of mathematics and enjoy solving hard problems - but not the second two.  

 

IMHO, at least.  There are a lot of great options out there.  I don't think a parent or a student should feel that AoPS is their only option, even if their goal is the one regentrude so eloquently stated.

[regentrude]

But it's not the only choice for students who want a deeper conceptual understanding of mathematics and who enjoy solving hard problems.  Right?  

 

It's also for students who really enjoy math on a theoretical level, who really want to wrestle with it and grapple with it, and who are willing to spend a lot of time on math.  Perhaps to the exclusion of other topics, as one can't necessarily do each of one's subjects to this same level of depth.

 

It's also for students who enjoy the discovery method rather than more direct instruction.

 

Your student can meet the first criterion - want a deeper conceptual understanding of mathematics and enjoy solving hard problems - but not the second two.  

 

IMHO, at least.  There are a lot of great options out there.  I don't think a parent or a student should feel that AoPS is their only option, even if their goal is the one regentrude so eloquently stated.

 

Oh, I agree that AoPS is definitely not the only option for math.

However, when it comes to hard problems, what other program offers the same level of challenge?

 

Also, it is not correct that using AoPS has to mean spending more time on math. My kids do not spend more time on math than other students, and definitely not to the exclusion of other subjects.

[ErinE]

Pre-Algebra is more wordy and in a different tone than Intro to Algebra. The pre-A text almost seems too adult, using twelve words when five would do. I immediately noticed that Intro to Algebra is far more conversational.

 

My DS took a few chapters to adjust to Pre-Algebra. There were a few explanations that I had to reword for him. Yet, the Pre-Algebra book is very thorough. During a particularly tough day, DS complained that the problems quickly go from easy to difficult. I explained that he could do 20 easy problems or he could show his understanding by doing ten more difficult ones. He preferred the latter option.

 

I'd encourage you to try it if only because the problems sets are really good. DS was struggling with the square root chapter so I looked for similar practice problems in another pre-algebra text I own. There was nothing similar even though the other text is a good one.

 

The AoPS problems also build problem solving skills, number sense, and dedication. There are a number of large X-s over DS's work as he realized the original answer wasn't correct. He'll try different approaches even some I hadn't thought of. He's resists my help since he wants to figure it out on his own and when he gets a starred problem he feels like a rock star.

 

There's also nothing wrong with using a standard pre-Algebra text and using AoPS for algebra.

[8filltheheart]

But it's not the only choice for students who want a deeper conceptual understanding of mathematics and who enjoy solving hard problems.  Right?  

 

It's also for students who really enjoy math on a theoretical level, who really want to wrestle with it and grapple with it, and who are willing to spend a lot of time on math.  Perhaps to the exclusion of other topics, as one can't necessarily do each of one's subjects to this same level of depth.

 

It's also for students who enjoy the discovery method rather than more direct instruction.

 

Your student can meet the first criterion - want a deeper conceptual understanding of mathematics and enjoy solving hard problems - but not the second two.  

 

IMHO, at least.  There are a lot of great options out there.  I don't think a parent or a student should feel that AoPS is their only option, even if their goal is the one regentrude so eloquently stated.

 

I agree w/your assessment, Rose, with the exception part of the bolded.   My ds took as many as 10 credit hours per yr while using AoPS.   I absolutely do not let my kids skew their studies to the exclusion of being well-rounded across subjects.   I do agree, however, that they cannot do each of their subjects to the same level of depth as AoPS, nor would I imagine most people wanting to.   

 

I shared with Rose via PM what my hindsight thoughts are about AoPS and its academic role in our homeschool.   I used to wonder if our oldest would have taken a different path if he had had the opportunity to use AoPS vs. Foerster.   Of course, all my wonderings took place during the past 4 yrs while his younger brother was in high school and watching the various younger ds made.  [With the exception of the crisis when their dd was born prematurely while they were visiting us and ds had to travel back and forth b/c his dd was in the NICU in Richmond and they lived in TN, I hadnt been around our oldest ds for more than a week or two/yr until recently.   They now live 10 mins away.   Being around him all the time now and reflecting on his personality and thinking about the 2 boys' personalities,] I think Kathy was right a couple yrs back when she told me that I had not made a mistake with our oldest and Foesters.

 

My reflections basically come out here:  oldest ds is a tinkerer.   He is definitely a hands-on applied science/math type of guy.   ChemE suites him to a T.   He builds things like biodiesel vats (?? can't remember when he called it) and brews beer at home.   That is who he is and definitely whoe he was.  Youngest ds, otoh, it a theorist through and through.  He has notebooks full of thought experiments, loves philosophy, and is completely obsessed with astrophysics and theoretical physics.   

 

I see the 2 math paths as similar.   Foersters is a fabulous applied math program.   It is full of real world situation word problems that challenge students to apply what they are learning and to ensure that they absolutely understand the concepts behind the process.   AoPS is a fabulous proof/theory program that makes sure that students understand all of the whys behind the math they are using.   2 different personalities and 2 different approaches.   BUT.....2 very strong math students that both have complete mastery of the math concepts that they employ.

[Butter]

I don't think AOPS is for a quirky subset at all.

 

You don't have to read every word.  If they get it just fine on their own, they can move right on to the next problem.

[Chrysalis Academy]

Oh, I agree that AoPS is definitely not the only option for math.

However, when it comes to hard problems, what other program offers the same level of challenge?

 

 

 

That's certainly true.  So for a student that doesn't thrive with the discovery method of instruction, another option might be to follow up another text with the challenge problems from AoPS and/or Alcumus.  

 

I like to think this will work out ok, as this is the path we've chosen for now. . .  ;)

[Arcadia]

So for a student that doesn't thrive with the discovery method of instruction, another option might be to follow up another text with the challenge problems from AoPS and/or Alcumus.

If you haven't bought the Intro to Algebra book, you might want to look at the Volume 1: the Basics book instead. I borrowed the library copy for the book and solution manual and most likely would use chapter 25 & 26 as a unit test for prob & stats for my kids just to check retention.

[Chrysalis Academy]

If you haven't bought the Intro to Algebra book, you might want to look at the Volume 1: the Basics book instead. I borrowed the library copy for the book and solution manual and most likely would use chapter 25 & 26 as a unit test for prob & stats for my kids just to check retention.

 

Actually I have the Intro to Algebra book, but thanks for the tip - I've been looking for something for probability and statistics.  We may just end up using the chapters from PreA.

[Kathy in Richmond]

Oh, I agree that AoPS is definitely not the only option for math.

However, when it comes to hard problems, what other program offers the same level of challenge?

 

If you're looking for challenger problems built into the curriculum, then yes, I've never seen a curriculum with as many toughies as AoPS.

 

Before the AoPS texts were written, we (me+my kids) got our challenge fix by playing around with MathCounts, AMC, USAMTS, etc, problems on the side. AoPS now incorporates a good many of those contest math problems in the texts & organized by topic.

 

Either way gets you to a similar endpoint.

[wapiti]

He likes to dive in and do math not read about it.

FWIW, I think that's exactly what AoPS intends, that the learning comes from doing rather than reading. Rusczyk said:

 

I got the idea for the structure of these books when I was listening to a talk by a friend of mine who was explaining how he learned math, just the way I did. We learned by doing lots of problems and then assembling all the problems in our head somehow. These books are structured by giving the problems at the beginning of each chapter instead of at the end. So, instead of doing “Lesson, lesson, lesson, copy,†we say, “Problems! Figure out how to do them, and then we’ll show you how we did them, and you can compare.†That way the math becomes their math instead of math that somebody else told them. Even more importantly, they’re learning how to tackle new things, which is more important than the things they are actually tackling.

(Ruzcyzk talk at the 2009 Math Prize for Girls, p. 19.) "Problems! Figure out how to do them" refers to the Lesson Problems that begin each lesson. "Then we'll show you how we did them" refers to the Lesson Problem Solutions that include plenty of words, just in case a student needs any or all of the thorough explanations.

 

Eta, in our house, I might characterize our use of the Lesson Problem Solutions as something we "look at" or "look through" rather than "read word-for-word." That may be different from a student using the book on his or her own. Or maybe it's just a VSL thing.

[letsplaymath]

Sorry, I guess I was generalizing to say "engineer types", but *my* engineer type is not wordy and also not a strong reader (which we are working on) so this would have him in tears. I was looking at the Pre-Algebra for him for 7th grade.

 

It helps to realize it's for a quirky subset, thanks! I still may consider doing it together, with popcorn reading it at first (he reads a paragraph, I read a paragraph) and see how it goes.

 

We did the book together and skipped much of the reading, like this:

1. Dd did as many of the gray problems at the beginning of a section as she could, on a lap-size whiteboard, narrating as she did it or explaining when I asked a question.
2. For the ones she got right, we skimmed the lesson to see if they offered any new or interesting insights. Or if I would have done it a different way, we might compare methods.
3. For the ones she missed (or hadn't seen that type of problem before), we read the book's explanation more closely. I generally either read aloud sections or paraphrased them---didn't make her read.
4. When we were sure she understood the lesson problems, we did the exercise sections together, Buddy Math style.
5. Because we were checking each other as we went, we only rarely needed to look up the solutions.

We continued this through the prealgebra book and about a third of the way into the algebra, then she decided she was ready to work on her own.

[elegantlion]

I have to be hands off a lot so far this year, ds is learning math. A few minutes ago he remarked how long he'd spent trying to work out a problem, realizing he already knew - it was said with almost a smile on his face. 

 

I really wish we'd tried AoPS before this year. I know some math, but my method and terminology is not always where it needs to be to facilitate. I'm glad the teaching is in the book. I'm seeing his desire to wrestle with math concepts improve already (we're on our fourth week of school). 

[daijobu]

I can't really "read" math unless I'm sitting at a table with a nice pen and blank pad of paper.  (ETA: a Diet Coke on ice also helps)  Then I write/copy the equations as they appear in the book, making certain that I follow their line of reasoning.  Writing keeps me focused and forces me to not skim.   This is true for AoPS, as well as MathCounts and AMC.  Anything with hard stuff.  

 

The AoPS books are quite dense, so it really helps to draw and write in my own style with plenty of white space, no paragraphing but lots of arrows and indentations.  

 

When working through the problems at the start of each section, I read aloud what is written while drawing diagrams and writing equations on a pad with my dd looking on.  Often I'm asking her Socratically what she would do next.  I read through the explanations emphasizing important points.  The she completes the exercises independently.  HTH.  

[raptor_dad]

Oh, I agree that AoPS is definitely not the only option for math.

However, when it comes to hard problems, what other program offers the same level of challenge?

 

 

I like AoPS... but since you asked ;)

 

Some of Tanton's Thinking Math series have similar challenge. http://www.jamestanton.com/?page_id=20

 

Not quite a single curriculum but if you use the vintage Dolciani's or equivalent and supplement with the Gelfand books you also get plenty of quite hard problems. 

 

ETA: Tanton may be more wordy than AoPS... certainly more chatty and philosophical.

[lewelma]

Pre-Algebra is more wordy and in a different tone than Intro to Algebra. The pre-A text almost seems too adult, using twelve words when five would do. I immediately noticed that Intro to Algebra is far more conversational.

 

I completely agree with this.  Different authors.

[kiana]

I like AoPS... but since you asked ;)

 

Some of Tanton's Thinking Math series have similar challenge. http://www.jamestanton.com/?page_id=20

 

Not quite a single curriculum but if you use the vintage Dolciani's or equivalent and supplement with the Gelfand books you also get plenty of quite hard problems. 

 

ETA: Tanton may be more wordy than AoPS... certainly more chatty and philosophical.

 

There's also some vintage texts which offer a very good level of challenge, although most of them are so OOP it's difficult to piece together a curriculum.

 

I also think it would be quite reasonable to make a challenging high school course sequence by using a standard, rigorous enough text and supplementing with the original AOPS problem-solving texts (as that's what they were intended for). 

 

I do think that mathy kids should *try* AOPS because I consider it supremely awesome, but it certainly isn't a fit for everyone and there are plenty of other options which will also prepare even a child who wants to be a theoretical mathematician. 

[Chrysalis Academy]

There's also some vintage texts which offer a very good level of challenge, although most of them are so OOP it's difficult to piece together a curriculum.

 

I also think it would be quite reasonable to make a challenging high school course sequence by using a standard, rigorous enough text and supplementing with the original AOPS problem-solving texts (as that's what they were intended for). 

 

I do think that mathy kids should *try* AOPS because I consider it supremely awesome, but it certainly isn't a fit for everyone and there are plenty of other options which will also prepare even a child who wants to be a theoretical mathematician. 

 

 

Now, that there is a brilliant idea!

[MamaSprout]

We had written off AoPS for Dd because of the wordiness. Coming out of Singapore it was too large of a shift. Which was odd because she reads books about math for pleasure.

 

We decided to do another year of "elementary math" to let things marinate a bit before moving into PreA, and even after 4 weeks of Math Mammoth 6 as a spine, her tolerance for wordiness has improved. A lot.

 

She not really learning new concepts, just gaining confidence, speed and independence.

 

Still not going to do AoPS for PreA, though. But rethinking Intro to Algebra.

 

So maybe some kids sort of grow into the AoPS style?

 

Question: assuming you start AoPS in fifth/ sixth grade, how many books a year do most students work through? There seem to be more classes/ books than years.

 

Thanks!

[kiana]

We had written off AoPS for Dd because of the wordiness. Coming out of Singapore it was too large of a shift. Which was odd because she reads books about math for pleasure.

 

We decided to do another year of "elementary math" to let things marinate a bit before moving into PreA, and even after 4 weeks of Math Mammoth 6 as a spine, her tolerance for wordiness has improved. A lot.

 

She not really learning new concepts, just gaining confidence, speed and independence.

 

Still not going to do AoPS for PreA, though. But rethinking Intro to Algebra.

 

So maybe some kids sort of grow into the AoPS style?

 

Question: assuming you start AoPS in fifth/ sixth grade, how many books a year do most students work through? There seem to be more classes/ books than years.

 

Thanks!

 

It would depend somewhat on your child's interests. Books like C + P and NT are outside the normal scope and sequence, and so would be electives that I might omit for a student who has goals which require getting to calculus faster (like one who wants to do physics). One who wants to do CS, on the other hand, might want to do the discrete math books I just mentioned and omit some chapters from precalc instead. Some books are also only a semester (again, both CP and NT should be one-semester courses).

 

[wapiti]

So maybe some kids sort of grow into the AoPS style?

 

IMO, yes that's possible.

 

Question: assuming you start AoPS in fifth/ sixth grade, how many books a year do most students work through? There seem to be more classes/ books than years.

 

I'd think about your regular secondary math sequence and then add in the extra, optional books (Intro to Counting and Probability, Intro to Number Theory) as time and interest allow.

 

There's more than one way to involve AoPS - for example, as mentioned above, a student could use some other program for the regular sequence and use Art of Problem Solving 1 and 2.  Or a middle school student might try the MathCounts online course without using any AoPS text at all, just to get introduced to the flavor.

[MamaSprout]

So what is Algebra 3?

[kiana]

So what is Algebra 3?

 

Any topics from honors algebra 2 omitted from the beginning algebra textbook, the algebra half of an honors pre-calculus class, plus some supplemental topics that are not commonly taught in standard high school math classes.

 

For example, I have never seen a standard high school course that discussed the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality or delved into functional equations.

[wapiti]

So what is Algebra 3?

 

http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/361425-aops-or-college-algebratrig/?do=findComment&comment=3742293

[MamaSprout]

http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/361425-aops-or-college-algebratrig/?do=findComment&comment=3742293

Thanks- I never would have found that one!

[wapiti]

Thanks- I never would have found that one!

 

LOL I saved the link a long time ago, knowing I might want to read it again.  Googling is easier than using the search feature here, so here are more that might help you:

 

http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/502281-quick-questions-on-aops-algebra/

http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/360449-aops-sequence-alg-3/

http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/503987-need-info-on-aopss-algebra-3-class/

http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/498117-moving-to-aops/

http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/206591-aops-sequence/

[lewelma]

Question: assuming you start AoPS in fifth/ sixth grade, how many books a year do most students work through? There seem to be more classes/ books than years.

 

 

 

This thread might help  AoPS pace

[lewelma]

dp

[MamaSprout]

It would depend somewhat on your child's interests. Books like C + P and NT are outside the normal scope and sequence, and so would be electives that I might omit for a student who has goals which require getting to calculus faster (like one who wants to do physics). One who wants to do CS, on the other hand, might want to do the discrete math books I just mentioned and omit some chapters from precalc instead. Some books are also only a semester (again, both CP and NT should be one-semester courses).

 

If a student wanted to take AP Physics C their Junior year, where would they need to be in AoPS? Would they be able to do it concurrently with AoPS Calculus considering the extra depth/ scope of the material? Most sequences I see have it after AP Calc BC.

[kiana]

If a student wanted to take AP Physics C their Junior year, where would they need to be in AoPS? Would they be able to do it concurrently with AoPS Calculus considering the extra depth/ scope of the material? Most sequences I see have it after AP Calc BC.

 

You should really ask regentrude this. Math is my specialty, not physics. 

 

Personally I would rather have calculus before calc-based physics. The extra scope and sequence does not matter so much -- they need to be able to do lots of derivatives in mechanics and lots of integrals in e+m. This applies especially with the need to finish the course before the AP exam.

 

It should work, though, if pre-calculus is finished in time to begin calculus in the summer. The student could do the calc 1 sections in the summer, in the fall do mechanics + the calc 2 sections, and in the spring calculus would be finished, so the student could focus on e+m and exam prep. 

 

There is a pre-calculus outline in the link quoted above which indicates which sections are really necessary to complete calculus and which are bonus. 

 

Some schools do run them concurrently (my graduate school did) but the students I spoke to who were taking them concurrently were pretty uniformly negative about how they wished they had waited a semester. 

[Kathy in Richmond]

Another option is to break up AP Physics C over two years since the exams are separate anyway.

 

Take C Mechanics concurrently with calculus in 11th grade & C E&M with Multivariable Calc the following year.

 

I'd still get a head start on calculus over the summer before grade 11, or else delay the start of Mechanics till mid-year.

[Luckymama]

Another option is to break up AP Physics C over two years since the exams are separate anyway.

 

Take C Mechanics concurrently with calculus in 11th grade & C E&M with Multivariable Calc the following year.

 

Ds took C Mechanics concurrently with Calculus AB in 11th grade. He took E&M in 12th grade (with AP stats as his school didn't offer BC).

 

It worked for him :)

[Mukmuk]

This thread struck a cord and helped me to appreciate how hard the reading must be for ds.

Ds is math loving but has visual issues/is dyslexic. He reads a lot, and while he absolutely loves the style of questions in AOPS, he finds the reading to be difficult. His usual method is to plunge straight into the problems, very often not check if he's on the right track, and then do the exercises. I mark the exercises and talk him through his errors. He's fine by the time he hits review/challenge. Lately, I've had better success in encouraging him to read the problem solutions, but only because he's made more errors than usual. It's not a bad thing! After the initial frustration, he's set about to improve his hit rate by reading the book. I hope he keeps at this slower pace (not that he was fast :)). I'm hoping that with this level of challenge, he can develop a learning style that is beneficial for him in the long run.