how does MIF compare to Signapore?

[MistyMountain]

I know Math in Focus is based on the Signapore method but what are the similarities and differences especially with the techniques they use?

[SilverMoon]

The most obvious difference I've seen is MiF has more babysteps than Singapore. For some kids Singapore makes big jumps and for others MiF has too many steps.

 

I used MiF with a mathy, intuitive 8yo for about a year. She did great but complained about the babysteps, so I switched her to SM. So far so good.

 

They both have a lot of parts. For MiF we used the textbook, workbook, and enrichment book. I never felt the need for the TM, but I would probably buy the answer key if I used it again. For SM we have the textbook, workbook, IP, CWP, and answer key; some would say I also need the HIG.

[OneStepAtATime]

Agree, MiF has more steps.  For some students those extra steps make the material much more accessible and friendly while for others they are irritating and boring.  Depends on the child.

 

The other difference I noticed is that MiF has more white space around the problems.  It was more visually friendly for both of my kids.  For some kids the extra white space is not needed.

 

I found MiF easier for me to implement but that was for my specific children and my specific teaching style.  Of the two, I found MiF less fiddly.

 

That being said, both are well done programs.  

 

(FULL DISCLOSURE:  We ended up switching to CLE coupled with Beast Academy and CTC math for various reason but I keep MiF around for supplements and a different perspective.)