BlessedMom Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 If you are knowledgeable about the various High School Algebra 1 options, would you please list them according to their rigor? Hoping to find 3 or 4 options each that fall in the rigorous, average, and less rigorous categories, or any other category break down that might be more accurate. I am some what familiar with Saxon, Horizons & Lial's so if those could be added to one of the categories it might be helpful as a point of reference for me. Thank you. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkT Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Foerster Algebra 1 is more rigorous than Saxon Algebra 1 see the pinned Math thread for some details 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunshine State Sue Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 This is my opinion. I have used Foerster, Life of Fred, and Math-U-See Algebra 1. for super geniuses only: AoPS solid: Foerster - rigorous Life of Fred - challenging Jacob Lial Dolciani Chalkdust Saxon weak: Math-U-See Teaching Textbooks VideoText 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhudson Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I think Sue is pretty right on. On the list of solid rigor, I would also add Thinkwell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regentrude Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Rigorous = AoPS. I have not seen any curriculum that compares. I disagree that it is for super geniuses only - the teaching is absolutely superb, and a student who is interested in math, has strong pre-algebra grounding, and thrives on the discovery method will do well without being a genius. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mom22ns Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I think Sue did a great job. I might put Foerster's as being on a step by itself behind AoPS, with all the rest of that group together as on-level and solid. I think you can rank the weak with the newer version of TT being the strongest of the weak and MUS being the weakest. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlessedMom Posted September 18, 2015 Author Share Posted September 18, 2015 Thank you all, your thoughts & opinions have been helpful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodGrief Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 I will disagree with the ranking of Teaching Textbooks as "weak." My current high school senior used the Teaching Textbooks program through Alg 2. She scored a 76 on the PSAT math section her freshman year, the fall after completing TT Alg 2, with no additional prep, and a 750 on the Math 2 SAT subject test in spring of that year. She went on to earn high "A"s in all her math classes, including two years of Derek Owens (precalc and Calc AB; she scored a 5 on the AP exam for Calc AB that year), and two semesters of university classes (Calc 2 and 3 at the university.) She got an 800 on the math portion of the SAT junior year. I think Teaching Textbooks provided a fine foundation for upper level math classes. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 I think Sue did a great job. I might put Foerster's as being on a step by itself behind AoPS, with all the rest of that group together as on-level and solid. I think you can rank the weak with the newer version of TT being the strongest of the weak and MUS being the weakest. :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pegasus Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 I think Teaching Textbooks provided a fine foundation for upper level math classes. We've had a similar experience after using MUS all the way through. It worked great for us as evidenced by how DD has done in college courses since. I've seen these same discussions over the weakness of high school level MUS for several years. *shrug* Everyone has their own opinion. :grouphug: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
athomeontheprairie Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 I don't usually find myself on the high school board, I ended up over here by the wrong click of a button... Can I ask something? Sue, I have video text on my shelf. You listed it as being weak. Others agreed. Can you tell me why? What should I know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunshine State Sue Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Sue, I have video text on my shelf. You listed it as being weak. Others agreed. Can you tell me why? What should I know? I have no experience with Video Text. I based my opinion on the reviews I've read on this board. I could be wrong. HTH! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homemama2 Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 I'm also curious about Video Text being considered weak. I was thinking about using it next year for my oldest for Algebra and thought that I had heard it was a strong program. I certainly don't want to spend all that money on a weak program!! Could you elaborate? ETA: I think we posted at the same time. :laugh: I'll search for some reviews Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
athomeontheprairie Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 I'm also curious about Video Text being considered weak. I was thinking about using it next year for my oldest for Algebra and thought that I had heard it was a strong program. I certainly don't want to spend all that money on a weak program!! Could you elaborate? ETA: I think we posted at the same time. :laugh: I'll search for some reviews I've had difficulty lately searching. Please share a link if you find a highly informative post! most of the links I turn up are in list form (aka, what you are doing for your x grader for the upcoming school year) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Rigorous = AoPS. I have not seen any curriculum that compares. I disagree that it is for super geniuses only - the teaching is absolutely superb, and a student who is interested in math, has strong pre-algebra grounding, and thrives on the discovery method will do well without being a genius. I agree with this. My son is using AOPS Algebra and did their PreAlgebra last year. He is definitely not a genius and not really even that much of a math lover. But the method does really fit his personality and he very much enjoys it and it's a great fit for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiana Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 VT's scope and sequence is different from a traditional sequence, so if you only cover the first half of their algebra you will be missing important parts of a standard algebra 1 course. By the end of their algebra you've covered everything from algebra 1 and 2 with the exception of trigonometry (included in some algebra 2 courses). It isn't a problem if you do algebra 1 and 2 there, but it is a major issue if you change curricula between algebra 1 and 2. This would apply especially for someone who's going to take algebra 2 in a class rather than at home. It is like changing in/out of MUS elementary in comparison with a sequence such as Saxon that does some of everything each year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jann in TX Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Rigor-- what a loaded word... Yes, some math programs are CLEARLY more rigorous than others... this does NOT mean that a student using a less-rigorous program is doomed to poor test scores and a future as a non-STEM major. I've taught from what I would consider a weak program (ABeka) and had 2 students earn perfect scores on their SAT tests... I guarantee it was not because of my stellar teaching! :laugh: These students USED math in their every day lives--both were what I call 'natural math students'. I've had many students transfer into my classes from a more 'rigorous' program that had literally sucked the life out of them--the most rigorous is not always the BEST program. Some programs may be considered 'rigorous' by some but content-wise they are average... the 'rigor' comes from the way the concepts are presented-- or NOT presented as well as the content and depth/challenge of the material. Lets say a student uses a weaker program and makes a perfect score on the SAT... an average student using that same program would most likely make an average score and a struggling student- a less than stellar score. If an average student is placed into a rigorous program they may rise to the challenge or they may just do OK...if a struggling student is placed into a rigorous program they will probably experience unnecessary failure... It was a bit easier 20 years ago when I began homeschooling my oldest... there were only 2 or 3 programs available to homeschoolers... now we have what may seem like an endless choice in math programs-- and there is more than one correct answer. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunshine State Sue Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 I've had difficulty lately searching. Please share a link if you find a highly informative post! Let me encourage you to start a new thread asking for people's experience with VT. :p You want to hear from those who have actually used it. Good luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AEC Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Rigorous = AoPS. I have not seen any curriculum that compares. I disagree that it is for super geniuses only - the teaching is absolutely superb, and a student who is interested in math, has strong pre-algebra grounding, and thrives on the discovery method will do well without being a genius. +1 It helps if expectations can be tempered a bit such that they don't expect to get 95% of the chapter review questions right for all chapters. You're not likely to do so, and that's OK, and it doesn't mean you didn't learn the material. I'll also add that IME, AoPS pre-alg is more difficult (for the target audience) than AoPS Alg1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mom22ns Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Rigor-- what a loaded word... Yes, some math programs are CLEARLY more rigorous than others... this does NOT mean that a student using a less-rigorous program is doomed to poor test scores and a future as a non-STEM major. I've taught from what I would consider a weak program (ABeka) and had 2 students earn perfect scores on their SAT tests... I guarantee it was not because of my stellar teaching! :laugh: These students USED math in their every day lives--both were what I call 'natural math students'. I've had many students transfer into my classes from a more 'rigorous' program that had literally sucked the life out of them--the most rigorous is not always the BEST program. Some programs may be considered 'rigorous' by some but content-wise they are average... the 'rigor' comes from the way the concepts are presented-- or NOT presented as well as the content and depth/challenge of the material. Lets say a student uses a weaker program and makes a perfect score on the SAT... an average student using that same program would most likely make an average score and a struggling student- a less than stellar score. If an average student is placed into a rigorous program they may rise to the challenge or they may just do OK...if a struggling student is placed into a rigorous program they will probably experience unnecessary failure... It was a bit easier 20 years ago when I began homeschooling my oldest... there were only 2 or 3 programs available to homeschoolers... now we have what may seem like an endless choice in math programs-- and there is more than one correct answer. I was considering trying to say this. Thank you for doing it so well. I know families who have used MUS & TT all the way through with great success (both in standardized test scores and college math). That doesn't change the fact that one doesn't cover standard scope and both lack challenging problems that keep them in the bottom group when rigor is discussed. If someone asks about the most rigorous math, I will happily discuss the rigor of each program. However, choosing a math program based on its rigor alone is like choosing a spouse based on hair color alone. It is far from the only pertinent piece of information. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiana Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 I was considering trying to say this. Thank you for doing it so well. I know families who have used MUS & TT all the way through with great success (both in standardized test scores and college math). That doesn't change the fact that one doesn't cover standard scope and both lack challenging problems that keep them in the bottom group when rigor is discussed. If someone asks about the most rigorous math, I will happily discuss the rigor of each program. However, choosing a math program based on its rigor alone is like choosing a spouse based on hair color alone. It is far from the only pertinent piece of information. Lovely. I also was trying to think of how to say that until Jann summed it up. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.