Another switching math curriculum question...RS B to ?

[nature girl]

I finished RS B with my 1st grader last month (I tailored it, not using the lessons directly since they didn't hold her attention well, but teaching the concepts.) Since then I've been stalling because I'm not sure what to do next. I know it would be easiest to move on to C, but I'm itching to try something new...

 

Those of you who have switched after a year or two of RS, what did you switch to and how painful was the transition? (I'm tempted by Singapore because DD loves manipulatives, but even the idea of juggling all the books wears me out...) Also looking at CLE. (I'd try anything but MM, because I know the workbooks and small writing would drive DD crazy.)

[sbgrace]

I switched to Singapore (actually Math in Focus as it turned out in the end) after B. Then I really missed the way RS presented concepts compared to Singapore, so I switched back to complete half of C (subtraction I think?), then I moved to Math in Focus through half of 5th grade.

 

FAN Math, Process Skills and Problem Solving are great books, and can help a child learn the Singapore way to handle word problems. I like them as a supplement to many programs, including CLE. They are small, so starting at the beginning of the program to learn the procedures isn't painful. If you switch to Singapore and she struggles to get up to speed in word problems, this resource could help.

 

I like CLE, but the conceptual teaching isn't as solid as RS or Singapore. I add conceptual instruction to CLE along with the FAN math for word problems, and it works well. But it is work on my part to add that instruction. If you try CLE, I think you need FAN math or another quality word problems source for sure because it is weak in that area. There will also probably be portions where you would want to add conceptual instruction, if that is important to you.

 

I do love the spiral nature of CLE. We switched in 5th grade, and if I were teaching another I might switch earlier. But I do add instruction for concepts.

 

My kids wilt at just the look of Math Mammoth, which I do own. It's strong conceptually--I'd say equal to Singapore in that respect. It was not a go here, but that wasn't because of quality. It was just too much--visually over-all and in the quantity of problems.

 

 

Edited April 4, 2016 by sbgrace

[Kiara.I]

If you could hang on through C, you could switch to Beast Academy...

[kirstenhill]

If you could hang on through C, you could switch to Beast Academy...

This is what I did with DS9 - He did RightStart B in Kindy, and then sped through C in the first five or six months of first grade, then we went to BA

 

With DS7, we finished B maybe six or eight weeks ago. I am going through C with him but we may skip some sections (I don't think he has much interest or attention to detail for the drawing section, which is a huge chunk in the middle of C). We will (I think) move on to BA sometime next fall after he has done "enough" of C.

 

DS7 will likely need more review than DS9 does, so we may add in another program for review...or maybe just Prodigy Math will be enough review.

[nature girl]

Thank you! I feel like RS has given her an excellent foundation, but I'm worried that she'll become too dependent on the "RS way" of thinking, and have a hard time transitioning to anything else. The order in which it teaches skills also feels a little off to me right now...and from what I've seen of C, I don't think it'll make it any easier for her to transition.

 

I'd never heard of FAN, thank you, I'll definitely check it out! The lack of anything but very basic word problems has always been something that bothered me...I do want to use Beast when she's ready, I know she'd love it (wish they'd hurry up with BA 2!) but I also wonder, if she just had RS and BA behind her, whether transitioning after BA would be difficult. I haven't done an in-depth analysis (and realize I probably should), but I keep having these niggling suspicions that basic skills are being missed.

[3 ladybugs]

I first of all don't understand switching if it is working. I know RS doesn't go that high but surely they tell you what they recommend to go to from there right?

 

I am using Shiller with my son. It is pretty much all manipulative but it goes to high school level so it isn't a bad thing in my book. I looked at BA, more as a curiosity then anything and then I had my DH look at it as he has a higher degree then me (associates vs PhD) when I didn't get it to see if I was missing something. I and we, don't understand the appeal of it. 

 

I know Shiller isn't popular. I think it mostly has to do with the initial cost and that they have you purchase 3 years at once. They are seeing that model isn't for everyone, and have done things to reduce the cost of the program. I honestly think it is a HUGE value but it is hard to commit to something for 3 years at a time. I get that. It was scary for me too when we switched. 

 

If RS is working for your child I would take the free assessments of Shiller to your child now. Then look at RS C and see if they match up to the holes in your child's education. If so, I would then go on to Shiller F (if your child needs fractions) or Shiller 4. Once you get to Shiller 6 you are at high school and they just released a high school math (Algebra I think...). Yes it uses manipulates, but I would rather my child at this age be dependent on that, then not understand math at all. Trust me, I am not going to be sending my child to college with any more manipulatives then a scientific calculator and a solid knowledge of math and how to make a slide rule. ;)

[sbgrace]

Thank you! I feel like RS has given her an excellent foundation, but I'm worried that she'll become too dependent on the "RS way" of thinking, and have a hard time transitioning to anything else. The order in which it teaches skills also feels a little off to me right now...and from what I've seen of C, I don't think it'll make it any easier for her to transition.

 

I'd never heard of FAN, thank you, I'll definitely check it out! The lack of anything but very basic word problems has always been something that bothered me...I do want to use Beast when she's ready, I know she'd love it (wish they'd hurry up with BA 2!) but I also wonder, if she just had RS and BA behind her, whether transitioning after BA would be difficult. I haven't done an in-depth analysis (and realize I probably should), but I keep having these niggling suspicions that basic skills are being missed.

 

I would not worry about dependency on the RS way of thinking. It's absolutely solid, and kids have transferred to many different types of programs having used nothing but RS.

 

I do like FAN math, even added to RS, for word problems.

 

If RS is working, I would stay the course. I don't think she'll have trouble switching when the time comes.

 

That said, if you're interested in Singapore, you can transition now. You will have to go back probably, as they do subtraction earlier than RS. I doubt she's had a lot of subtraction in just B.

 

RS is a really great program, particularly B through half of C, imo.

[Cake and Pi]

I gotta agree with the others.  If RS is working, why switch?  It's a solid program.  You won't have gaps or problems doing things their way if you stick with it.

 

My oldest did 1st edition RS A-E and then switched to BA 3C.  The placement said he could have started in BA 4A, but I was opted for a little "review" to ease the transition.  But since BA does things so differently and takes concepts much farther than other maths, he really didn't repeat much.  The transition was very very smooth though!

 

My second son did 2nd edition A through the 1st half of C, then we switched back to 1st edition C (to the beginning of it.  1st edition C covers a lot more than 2nd edition C) and pulled out BA 3A off and on when I thought it would be a good continuation of what we had already done in RS.  The two went well together and reinforced each other nicely.  I think doing it this way helped to ease DS#2 into the challenge of BA.  He's now in the last 20 lessons of 1st ed. RS C and just started BA 3B.  Originally, I said we'd just switch to BA once he finished RS C, but now I'm thinking we'll do bits an pieces from RS D intermittently with the rest of BA 3 and THEN switch completely to BA, but we'll see how things go.  

[nature girl]

Thank you all for your thoughts! Lace, if we were going to stick with RS, do you think moving to 1st edition for C would work? We've been in 2nd edition...I've heard iffy things about both editions of C, that C is scattered, that 2nd edition has a lot of review of B, and doesn't cover subtraction thoroughly. But I'm tempted by 1st edition, since I could get it cheaper, and I'd hate to spend so much money on 2nd edition when you and others seem to be saying that half of 2nd edition C isn't useful.

Edited April 4, 2016 by Anna's Mom

[eternallytired]

I did RS-2ed A-C for my oldest before switching to BA.  I loved A and thought B was the best thing ever, but C seemed really light (basically only geometry as new content, hardly any teaching of subtraction and waaaay too much addition review) and he sped through in a couple months--and only working a couple times a week at that.  He was asking for more challenge, so we moved into BA3.  I've got to say, even though he loves it and I think it's awesome--fun and challenging and great skill development--I don't think it's for everyone.  For example, my daughter freezes up easily doing math for some reason, and I think the challenge level in BA would absolutely kill her joy.  She enjoys listening to the guides when we read them, but she's not interested in doing the practice books, and I'm not pushing it.  I may have her do some pages simply for the critical thinking later on, but she would not learn well from BA.

 

DD did RS-2ed A-first part of C.  At that point she was grumbling about all the games and just wanted to do a worksheet and be done, so I decided to switch her.  I moved into Singapore 2A based on some recommendations on here, and it went very smoothly.  If anything, SM2 was a little on the easy side--she probably could have jumped to SM3 conceptually if I weren't so worried about her stress level.  I only purchased the practice books; they have a decent balance of problem types at an average difficulty level, and we've had no problem with me walking her through a problem or two and then her taking off on her own.  If I need to, I haul out our RS manipulatives to help demonstrate concepts first.  I'd only get the additional books if I felt we needed more challenge or more word problem practice or more review.  The font size, the number of problems per page, the arrangement of problems, the illustrations, the variety of activities and games...all of it seems very well-planned and works well for DD's personality.

[sbgrace]

OP, I used the first edition RightStart. If RS C has changed drastically in the 2nd edition, I can see why you thought it might not be helpful.

 

The 1st half of RS C 1st edition covered subtraction in a way I preferred to other approaches I saw. It sounds like things may have changed.

[scoutingmom]

We do edition 1 RS. Ed 1 of C does a good job of subtraction. Our family finds level C very long... I've done 3 kids so far and it took 1.5 years for all 3. I've also found my kids forget a bit of the multidigit subtraction by the end of the iyear (after drawing and the ntro to multiplication.) I think next student will be given 1 subtraction problem a week or so during that time....

 

Sent from my SM-T530NU using Tapatalk

[Cake and Pi]

Thank you all for your thoughts! Lace, if we were going to stick with RS, do you think moving to 1st edition for C would work? We've been in 2nd edition...I've heard iffy things about both editions of C, that C is scattered, that 2nd edition has a lot of review of B, and doesn't cover subtraction thoroughly. But I'm tempted by 1st edition, since I could get it cheaper, and I'd hate to spend so much money on 2nd edition when you and others seem to be saying that half of 2nd edition C isn't useful.

 

Yes, it would work to switch from 2nd edition B to 1st edition C.  The only complaints I ever really remember reading about 1st edition C were about how it was too much to cover in a single school year.  That and the drawing lessons seem to be a love-them or hate-them kind of thing, but they're in both editions of level C.  Personally, I like levels A and B, but I loooove level C (in 1st edition).  I'm a fan of the drawing lessons, and the way they go about teaching multiplication just totally blew my mind.  My kids *understand* multiplication by the end of level C better than I did coming out of engineering college.  

 

Everything you said about 2nd edition C I agree with -- too much review, not enough subtraction, not enough time spent on new content, and I'll add to that list that they changed the method used for paper-and-pencil subtraction from 1st edition C (in a way I was unhappy with) and they didn't epically build up to multiplication as was done in 1st edition (which is probably my favorite part of level C).

 

1st edition C is a solid school year of work for most kids.  Many people say it takes more like a year and a half, which is why, I suppose, they moved a big chunk of the content from C into D in second edition.  

 

Now, no matter what you do, all RS levels in both editions have a section of review at the beginning.  I think this is pretty standard for most maths because they assume kids are starting back up after a summer knowledge dump.  So something like 15 of the first 29 lessons are straight up review of stuff learned in level B, though the warm-ups are not all necessarily review for those particular lessons and 2nd edition B introduces a few topics not touched on in 1st edition B (like multiplication).  1st edition C very thoroughly covers mental subtraction, reviews mental and paper-and-pencil addition, and teaches the multiplication tables through 10x10 (but some additional strategies for 7s, 8s, and 9s are taught in level D), and the last 20ish lessons focus on fractions and division (which is a much bigger focus in level D).  There's also a lot on area and perimeter, skip counting, and geometry.

[Cake and Pi]

Sorry, forgot to include paper-and-pencil subtraction in that ^^^  list.  1st edition C definitely teaches that too, lol.  

[Targhee]

If you could hang on through C, you could switch to Beast Academy...

We hung on through 2/3 of C with DS and couldn't take it anymore. We started Beast Academy part way through 2nd.

 

Singapore is a great option. We like both Stadards and US editions of Primary Mathematics. Standards has more built in review.

 

Beast Academy is excellent, and I think Singapore is a good segue into BA (that's what middle DD did)

[Kiara.I]

Thank you all for your thoughts! Lace, if we were going to stick with RS, do you think moving to 1st edition for C would work? We've been in 2nd edition...I've heard iffy things about both editions of C, that C is scattered, that 2nd edition has a lot of review of B, and doesn't cover subtraction thoroughly. But I'm tempted by 1st edition, since I could get it cheaper, and I'd hate to spend so much money on 2nd edition when you and others seem to be saying that half of 2nd edition C isn't useful.

 

We're using 2nd edition.  I think it's just fine.  We're about halfway through D now.

Yes, I'm sure you could switch to RS ed. 1.

 

I didn't find C to be any more scattered than any other level.  It's a common criticism of RS that it jumps around, but to be honest it's never bothered me.  And also, their jumping around is usually VERY carefully thought-out.  It's often deliberate in order to let a concept percolate for a while, or to solidify it in another way.

 

As to depending on the RS way of thinking, I'm not sure I understand that.  RS teaches very clearly to solve problems in lots of different ways, offering different strategies so that the child learns multiple options--and usually settles on the one that makes the most sense to them, while still practicing the others every now and then.  It teaches a flexibility of LOTS of ways to think about numbers and patterns, and that would only seem to be an asset.  I'm not understanding what the way is that you're concerned about.  Could you expand on that?

[PagesandFields]

We switched to Math Mammoth... I put off getting mm forever because I was really skeptical... But it was a perfect next step... And contains more practice, which I wanted.... I will say that we switched to 1, not 2... And we do them concurrently... He was really ahead in math, still needed practice and learning, but wasn't ready to make the second grade leap... I switched mainly because I will start RS A with my younger and I didn't think I would be able to do RS with both, MM can be done a LoT more independently...we tried Singapore, didn't like it.. Tried Miquon, didn't like it...