Why is Right Start A sequence driving me so crazy?

[lacell]

Not sure what this says about me, but I cannot stand the layout of RS A. When a concept is introduced, my natural inclination is to follow it completely to its logical conclusion and then move on to the next thing. I have a hard time touching on several topics at a time. So I find myself doing something we like and then searching for that same topic throughout the following pages and skipping the rest. Why is is this such a problem for me I wonder? I thought RS was incremental mastery. I do tend to like to focus on one thing at a time and have trouble multi-tasking. I always loved summer school, because I could take one class at a time and really immerse myself in it. I want to make sure the next curriculum we buy will not cause me this issue. I imagine that it's going to be an issue with an common core aligned curriculum?

[lacell]

For an example, I love the presentation of Gattegno Math. I could just read it to the student. But presenting Miquon ties me up in knots.

 

[PeterPan]

Ok, a few things.   :D  One, it's driving *you* crazy, but is it driving your *dc* crazy?  Thing two, is your placement in level A IQ and age-appropriate?  You mentioned in your other thread that you'd be looking at the BJU gr 1 and 2 math.  So you're doing RS A with K5 and 1st this year?  You may just plain be placed incorrectly.  You might be happier if you jumped up to level B.  They have a return policy...

 

Fwiw, when I read this post, what popped into my mind was that you're looking for MUS.  :)

 

Edited December 21, 2015 by OhElizabeth

[lacell]

It only drive ME crazy. But I avoid it and don't teach it. Perhaps I'm just lazy, but I want open and go. I don't want to have to read and think through the lesson before presenting it every day, because that doubles the time. Right now I am just reading through all Level A and trying to internalize the teaching methods and apply in my own way. It seems scripted programs only work for me if they are written to the child. I have trouble "translating it to the child" with three noisy children in the background. We are definitely ready to move beyond A; just using it as an example. I have an almost 7 year old (2nd-3rd grade conceptual understanding, 1st grade knowledge of basics), an almost 5 year old (K-1st grade level math) and an almost 3 year old (not even starting except playing with c-rods).

[Kiara.I]

RS IS open-and-go, for me, anyway.  Just open, start at the top, and read straight through, talking to the child as you go.

 

So, here's the thing about what RS does.  It introduces a concept.  But then, it jumps to something different for a while.  This is because most people do better if a concept percolates on the back burner for a while.  AND, usually RS switches to a related topic that shows or uses the concept in a different way, thereby increasing the understanding of the concept without pushing it forward to the next concept for a bit.

 

Then, when you come back to the next step in the original concept, it has been solidified and mastered so that the child is ready to leap ahead.  It's actually pretty brilliantly done, I think.  ;)

 

It does sound like it's not your cup of tea. You would prefer a straight mastery approach.  For me, the value of the way RS conveys concepts to the student and builds mastery was well worth me accepting the way they do it. You'll have to decide whether it's worth it to you or whether another style would be a better fit for your children.

[ajfries]

I haaaaaaated RS A. I dreaded math every single day and found myself skipping it. Couldn't finish it. It was like the curriculum had ADD. But Level B is SO much better.  Skip A & go straight to B. If/when concepts get too advanced for the kiddos, spend a week or so playing the card games and just letting the concepts percolate. 

[Monica_in_Switzerland]

Like you, RS drove me batty.  Level B is better than A, but even level B jumps all over the place.  

 

I taught my oldest using RS B, then immediately jumped into Singapore (1b, just to get used to SM methods, but he zoomed through to 2).  I scribed for him when necessary through the end of SM2.

 

With my second, I did NOT use RS B, but tried to teach SM1 in a "RS way".  I got the mastery program I could teach well, and she got the hands-on manipulative heavy RS teaching methods.  

 

I think of our RS B year as a year of teacher training in teaching elementary math for me.  Now that I know how to teach some of the basic concepts of base 10, parts-whole, etc, I can move on to a program with a sequence I like better.

 

I very strongly feel that finding a program that fits the TEACHER is as important as finding a program that fits the STUDENT.  If the teacher doesn't enjoy teaching it, it either won't get done, will get done poorly, or will make everyone miserable.  

[kalusignan]

RS IS open-and-go, for me, anyway.  Just open, start at the top, and read straight through, talking to the child as you go.

 

So, here's the thing about what RS does.  It introduces a concept.  But then, it jumps to something different for a while.  This is because most people do better if a concept percolates on the back burner for a while.  AND, usually RS switches to a related topic that shows or uses the concept in a different way, thereby increasing the understanding of the concept without pushing it forward to the next concept for a bit.

 

Then, when you come back to the next step in the original concept, it has been solidified and mastered so that the child is ready to leap ahead.  It's actually pretty brilliantly done, I think.   ;)

 

It does sound like it's not your cup of tea. You would prefer a straight mastery approach.  For me, the value of the way RS conveys concepts to the student and builds mastery was well worth me accepting the way they do it. You'll have to decide whether it's worth it to you or whether another style would be a better fit for your children.

:iagree:

I also find RS very open and go.

 

I also find that my dd NEEDS time to let a concept simmer on the back burner before coming back to it, usually in a slightly different way. She did horribly with mastery-based curriculum. It was like beating a dead horse when they don't 'get it' right away.

 

That being said, I think the curriculum should be a good fit for you, as the teacher, AND the student. Maybe consider how your children learn best and try a different approach. Math-U-See or Math Mammoth both seem like programs you might like.

[sbgrace]

I found RS open and go just as the person above mentioned. I just took one lesson at a time.

 

It was, for me, a program where I just had to trust the program to get us to mastery.

 

I think it does do that, but I was constantly frustrated that couldn't see where we were headed over-all. I felt like I was in a bunch of trees with no clue of the forest essentially, and it bugged me a lot.

 

I tried to switched to Singapore a few times. The problem for me was I really think RS's way of presenting the basic operations is just superior. So I would go back each time until we got through the first 1/2 of C, when I finally left for good.

 

So, basically, I really disliked teaching RightStart. It didn't teach the way my brain prefers to tackle learning, which I believe is similar to yours. But I really liked the foundation it gave my kids. So if I was rewinding time, I would still do RS again.

Edited December 21, 2015 by sbgrace

[PeterPan]

You know what Cathy Duffy says about this... Mistakes in curriculum are tuition in the School of Home Ed.  :D  In other words, it happens.  Sell it and move on.  :)

[lacell]

Well I don't know if the curriculum has ADD but I already do and I don't need any help being confused :laugh:

[lacell]

Monica can I love that post? Why isn't there a love button :001_smile:!

[lacell]

Is activities for the AL abacus any different in terms of layout? I don't have B. I could sell A and buy the Activities book.

 

[lacell]

We are already going to be doing CLE which is spiral, so I'm not too worried about retention.

 

[scoutingmom]

Is activities for the AL abacus any different in terms of layout? I don't have B. I could sell A and buy the Activities book.

The activities book is ordered with sections on numeration, addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, and other topics. Possibly some others, this is by memory. The sections go from basics and work up in order. HOWEVER, there is just how to teach the concept, and just a bit of worksheets.... it goes great with their card games. But it is up to the teacher/tutor when to move on, what order to do things, how to get enough practice etc. It is not scripted and just shows you the basics.

 

Sent from my SM-T530NU using Tapatalk

[waa510]

Another thing that might help you get an overview that gives the larger scope of what is taught in Level A and how to teach it: They do lots of free seminars on How to Teach Level A, B, C, etc. They also do seminars on general RS methods and ideologies with teaching math. I did much better at teaching RS when I had an idea of where we were going with it. I had to learn to trust why the heck we were teaching it this way and just roll with it b/c 5-7 lessons later it would all come together and made sense. If you check their website, they have a TON of pre-recorded webinars (live ones start back in January) I'd at least do that to see if that helps you wrap your head around teaching it. 

[Porridge]

Right Start drove me crazy as well. It wasn't just that the topics jump around, I also found it difficult to navigate between teacher manual, worksheets, game books, and manipulatives. However, I love the conceptual methods  taught in RS. I ultimately changed to Singapore but adopted a lot of RS methods.

[eternallytired]

RS-A drove me nuts on that front, too.  I would read about three or four lessons at a time, just looking at one of the topics, and then teach that one topic in one sitting before moving on to another topic.  But I can see why you might not want to do that.

 

I adored level B, though.  It had some review at the beginning of every lesson (which I just skipped unless I thought they needed it), but overall it seemed way more coherent and it gave my kids an awesome foundational understanding of math.  ODS is a natural with numbers, but DD strikes me as more like me--a solid student, but not brilliant at math or anything--and yet she's more comfortable manipulating difficult problems into simpler ones than I am sometimes, coming up with ways of thinking of things that I wouldn't have considered--because I was merely taught to attack the problem as-is and not taught to ponder what I already know and how that can help me to figure out something new or difficult.  But no program is perfect for everyone, so if you think B would drive you equally nuts, find something that will get done without giving you a migraine.  :-)

[EmilyGF]

I went into RightStart agreeing completely with her philosophy. I wanted a Montessori math that was actually doable in the homeschool. So when I thought things were crazy, I'd go reread the principles and keep going. I figured she knew better than me.

After going through A-C with three kids (and D with two and E with one) I am confident that the first books are not haphazard. They are very carefully designed and that design has become more evident as I have reused them and understood more of their depth.

 

Emily

[scoutingmom]

RS-A drove me nuts on that front, too. I would read about three or four lessons at a time, just looking at one of the topics, and then teach that one topic in one sitting before moving on to another topic. But I can see why you might not want to do that.

 

I adored level B, though. It had some review at the beginning of every lesson (which I just skipped unless I thought they needed it), but overall it seemed way more coherent and it gave my kids an awesome foundational understanding of math. ODS is a natural with numbers, but DD strikes me as more like me--a solid student, but not brilliant at math or anything--and yet she's more comfortable manipulating difficult problems into simpler ones than I am sometimes, coming up with ways of thinking of things that I wouldn't have considered--because I was merely taught to attack the problem as-is and not taught to ponder what I already know and how that can help me to figure out something new or difficult. But no program is perfect for everyone, so if you think B would drive you equally nuts, find something that will get done without giving you a migraine. :-)

Yes, I have 4 kids in RS... 2 in level E (that started in B), one almost done C, and one in B (they started in A). We are in Edition 1. Everything has been really well thought out, and things are connected.

 

Sent from my SM-T530NU using Tapatalk

[Holly]

I couldn't stand teaching RS A either.  :blush:  I could have struggled through it with only one or two kids, but we had 3 at the time (and were planning on more), so the thought of using it long term made me want to cry!  We switched to Singapore (which I mostly enjoyed teaching), but eventually settled with MUS since it was a better fit for DD.  I liked either of the programs.  With MUS, we usually watch the videos (or they watch on their own).  I may work through a problem or two with them if needed, but that's it.  Singapore was a little more teacher intensive.  With all three programs, I've had to re-learn much of the math I learned as a child, since they are all done a bit differently.  

 

I do like the RS manipulatives and Math Games...we still use both of these!  There are times where I wish we'd just stuck it out with RS (instead of jumping around so much), so I recommend you consider any changes carefully.

[lacell]

I couldn't stand teaching RS A either.   :blush:  I could have struggled through it with only one or two kids, but we had 3 at the time (and were planning on more), so the thought of using it long term made me want to cry!  We switched to Singapore (which I mostly enjoyed teaching), but eventually settled with MUS since it was a better fit for DD.  I liked either of the programs.  With MUS, we usually watch the videos (or they watch on their own).  I may work through a problem or two with them if needed, but that's it.  Singapore was a little more teacher intensive.  With all three programs, I've had to re-learn much of the math I learned as a child, since they are all done a bit differently.  

 

I do like the RS manipulatives and Math Games...we still use both of these!  There are times where I wish we'd just stuck it out with RS (instead of jumping around so much), so I recommend you consider any changes carefully.

 

Do you mind me asking why you regret it? Is it gaps or something else I might not have considered?

 

[chaya]

I find RS level A to be open and go. sometimes I do read ahead to get a sense of why on earth are we doing this now, but mostly its ok for me. I much prefer it to some of the other curricula we've attempted with my older children. my perspective is a bit reversed, I began hs'ing older children and then gradually kept pulling my younger kids (in reverse order, lol) out of school. so this is my fourth hs'ed kid but my first gr.1 student.

my older kids came out of school with tremendous math anxiety and gaps like swiss cheese. so we've had to do alot of healing, confidence building and remedial work. this is our first year with RS and I try to encourage my older kids (grades 3 and 7) to watch my first graders lessons so that they can get the solid foundation without making them feel that they are going back and doing first grade work.

The other day, my 7th grader said to me that he wishes he had been taught math this way (RS A) from the beginning. the 3rd grader agreed wholeheartedly.

so that's enough for me to stick with it. good to hear B is better (we're doing C and D with the older ones right now, those are ok but the kids didnt have the benefit of A so they are still learning to internalize the abacus way of doing things).