Which grade school math did you stick with?

[Slache]

And why? Any regrets?

[Beaniemom]

So far CTC math has been the one that stays. I like that we have access to all the grade levels at once so the child can work at the level they are at. There are quizes that can be used to gauge mastery. It also only presents one problem at a time so my adhd child is not distracted.

[OneStepAtATime]

So far a combination of CLE with CTC.  And some Beast Academy thrown in.  Still find all three really great.  We also supplement with Key to Fractions/Decimals/Percents/Metric for trouble spots in those areas specifically.

 

ETA:  I forgot to answer the other questions...

 

Why?  CLE provides the spiral and consistent review the kids both need.  It also presents the information in a format that works well for our family.  It also interweaves many different topics so we aren't stuck on something the kids don't like for weeks on end.  I really like the way many of the concepts are explained and I love the flash card system for review.  It is beautifully done.  Probably better than any other flash card review system I've seen.

 

CTC gives the kids access to math material and video explanations from Kindergarten through Calculus so when they hit a particularly troubling spot in CLE, if my explanation isn't working they can hop on CTC.  They also like doing a short lesson in CTC daily even if not assigned just to keep info fresh.  We all use it, even me.  It can be spiral or mastery.  After each lesson we can print out the page of our work to see where we made mistakes and what the mistake was.  Helps with review.  We can also print out the explanation including any graphics presented in the video.  We put those printed pages in our math notebooks for reference as needed.  The kids sometimes need a video explanation but Khan didn't work for them.  CTC has very clearly laid out, uncluttered graphics that work better for our family (but we all have vision issues so that may be a factor.  Since I can buy the family license through Homeschool Buyer's Co-op at a pretty good rate then set up as many student accounts as I need it has been really helpful here.

 

Beast Academy has been great as a supplement on the side because it approaches a lot of concepts in a very deep, unusual (for us), conceptual way that makes us all think differently about math.  It would not work here as a spine but it works well as a supplement.

 

Also, at the beginning we did Ronit Bird material to fill in some serious gaps once the kids were pulled out of school (years ago now).  DD is dyscalculic so she really needed the extra scaffolding.

 

No regrets with any of these.

Edited April 29, 2017 by OneStepAtATime

[Mr. G]

Which grade school math did you stick with?

Math Mammoth. Done cooperatively, rather than independently.

 

Why?

It fit my teaching style and our life-style needs.

It was an ideal tool for me to use with my kids.

It provided thoughtful practice that usually re-enforced what and how I taught ("usually." There were a few exceptions, but it didn't impede things. The things that I'd taught differently, I just had my kids do it my way.)

 

Any regrets?

Not a single one.

 

 

 

 

[2_girls_mommy]

Rod and Staff, the entire program. I like everything about it. 

[snowbeltmom]

Which grade school math:  Singapore Textbook, Workbook, and CWP

 

Why: I like its approach to problem solving

 

Regrets: Zero.  

[cintinative]

Which grade school math: Math in Focus text, workbook, extra practice workbook

 

Why: I like its approach to problem solving (stole from pp)

 

Regrets: Maybe should have really looked at Singapore as it was cheaper but didn't want to switch once I had started. Not a big fan of doing Pre-Algebra for three years so we are switching after Course 1.

 

[HomeAgain]

We've done 2:

 

MUS - it was concrete, low stress and helped my oldest really grasp numbers. He moved to AOPS after completing MUS pre-algebra and Stewardship, then moved to public school and math competitions. I don't have any regrets with it, though I also didn't know a lot of what was available. This was over ten years ago. We started with Saxon, and I only knew of about three others: A Beka, BJU, and....well, doesn't matter. MUS was a breath of fresh air.

 

MEP - my youngest used this. I needed cheap and this fit the bill. It also fit his learning style. We attempted MUS but he hated everything about it: the pace, the blocks, the mastery approach. I tried Mathematical Reasoning and it was another bust. MEP tapped into his strengths of mental math and logic, with concessions for his attention span. Each activity was only a few minutes unless he wanted longer. He ran through years 1-3, and we skipped through 4&5 to cover whatever he had trouble on. Eventually he moved to a mixture of MUS' epsilon, zeta, and pre-algebra, rotating through in a spiral. We don't plan on continuing with MEP secondary, switching to Beast Academy 3 instead. It will be a nice, deeper review for him.

[deerforest]

Beast Academy was the only thing we did in its entirety. We used pieces of others, but just to supplement and never as successful as BA.

[MinivanMom]

Which grade school math? Singapore with Singapore CWP.

 

Why? I like the way it introduces concepts, and I love its approach to problem solving.

 

Any regrets? None. All of my kids have used Singapore from K-6B, and I've been very, very happy with the foundation they've gotten in math. My one super-mathy kid is also using Beast Academy on the side, but he does that for fun in his spare time because he just can't get enough math.

[RootAnn]

Abeka Arithmetic

Why? Because it lays things out for me in the early years in a systematic way that my engineering mind can handle. It is flexible so I can add the whys and hands-on demonstrations as needed, but has all the review built in that my kids need.

 

Any regrets? Eldest used it (except for a one year foray into CLE) all the way through Algebra 1. In hindsight, their Algebra 1 was not a rigorous enough program for her. She had some catching up to do at the beginning of Alg 2 when she started Foerster this year, but handled it well. My dd#2 is doing their Pre-A this year and all the rest of the kids will stop after their Arithmetic 6 and use something different for Pre-A. The DVD teacher that dd#1 used for Pre-A and Alg 1 was probably what led to DD#1 LOVING math so much, so I don't regret that. 

 

By the time my last kid goes through each level, I'm done teaching it. I'm happy to see the TM go away. I think I'll feel the same way about anything I've used at least three times by the time my last one gets through it.  :coolgleamA:  I equate it to someone who has written a really good essay or book who is forced to revise & edit and revise & edit so many times that they never want to see it again once they finally let it out of their hands. (Sometimes, we don't appreciate such things until several years have passed.)

[Gentlemommy]

Miquon for k-2 and then CLE. I loved Miquon for its uniqueness and the how rods helped to cement basic arithmetic. I love CLE for its ease of use and it's spiral review. No regrets.

[melmichigan]

CLE for the early math facts (I also love the flashcard system), then SM. 

 

[Ellie]

I never found any that I liked. Because 30 years ago.

 

Today, I would probably start with Rod and Staff, with the plan of eventually going to Saxon.

 

A fall-back would be Miquon, preceded by Mathematics Made Meaningful, but only if it seemed as if my dc needed manipulatives.

[SkateLeft]

#1 used Houghton Mifflin Math Steps and Singapore Primary Math. #2 used Singapore Primary Math. #3 used Singapore Math Standards Edition.

 

All three of them went on to higher levels of math with no issues, and my older two are STEM majors, so no regrets at all.

 

#4 uses Calvert Math. He still has few more years with it, but it works for him, so no regrets. 

[8filltheheart]

I have used Horizons for K-6 six times, through 5th/1st/K for the next three (my 5th/1st graders and Ker being my granddaughter). Obviously no regrets bc I have used it with all of them. My older kids have all been well-prepared for high school up math.

[Guest]

RightStart and Saxon. No regrets with either except how involved RS is, in terms of teaching time. But both have been completely solid and I use RS through C before switching to Saxon 5/4.

 

I'm on my third kid on this track and not tweaking a thing even with the teacher intensiveness. If it ain't broke don't fix it!

Edited April 30, 2017 by Arctic Mama

[Laura Corin]

Singapore with first child. Galore Park with second. Both worked well. No regrets.

[kolamum]

MUS, because it worked. :)
No regrets, aside from not starting with it sooner. 

[lexi]

RS

Why: because it has worked well for all of my kids - my child who struggled in math and my mathy kiddo. It makes sense to them and I feel it's given them an amazing foundation. Plus, their mental math abilities are amazing.

Regrets: none. My only regret is that I spent a year and a half trying MUS for my oldest only to find that it did not work well at all.

RS is teacher intensive but I'm ok spending time on math. The levels get less parent intensive as you move through the program. And I have my older kids play games with the younger ones. So that helps a ton. Also, the levels are so easy to teach and I don't have to review them ahead of time because they are fairly scripted. I've really loved our time using RS.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Child #1: Ray's Arithmetic through 5th grade, then Rod and Staff for sixth and seventh, then Saxon Algebra, then Teaching Textbooks Alg 2, Geometry, and Pre-Calc/Trig. He aced college Calculus this past semester. He was a National Merit Finalist, obviously with an excellent math score on the SAT. No regrets.

 

Child #2: Ray's Arithmetic through third grade, Math Mammoth for 4th to 6th, TT for Pre-Alg through high school. I regret TT for this boy, but it couldn't be helped due to life circumstances. He got solid A- and B+ grades in TT, and placed "college ready" in math (also did well on WorkKeys and Accuplacer) but does not understand abstract math as well as his brother did. His temperament and aptitude are far different, but I also think he would have benefited from a very strict, very efficient teacher who could give him personal feedback.

 

Child #3: Ray's Arithmetic through third grade, R&S for fourth through seventh, Saxon for all of high school. Once he got over the developmental hurdle for Algebra, and accustomed himself to Saxon's style (with Art Reed DVDs), he became an A+ student. No regrets.

 

Child #4: Horizons from K-6, not sure where we're headed for Pre-Alg through high school. No regrets. I would not recommend Teaching Textbooks, although it worked out for my most mathy kid (who had a very solid foundation).

 

 

 

Summary - no regrets for Ray's, Horizons, Rod and Staff, Saxon. Teaching Textbooks can work for some students but it's not my first choice, and the only program I have any regrets about. I never used it for elementary, and wouldn't; the success of all four of my children comes from having a teacher (myself) who is very, very involved on a daily basis.

[MerryAtHope]

Horizons Math 1-6 worked well here. We liked the variety of topics and the way it continued to review topics. I think it gave my kids a solid foundation, but I didn't mind teaching a topic as needed (Levels 4-6 have instructions written to the student but the lower students don't).  Sometimes the upper two levels made some "jumps" that confused my oldest, and I made sure to do a Pre-algebra that included fraction and decimal review to solidify some of those topics for that reason. (He loved Math-U-See in the older grades, and wishes we had used it all the way through--but he was very anti-manipulatives at a young age and also anti-black and white pages--so I'm not positive it would have worked for him back then--hard to say!)

[Slache]

Child #1: Ray's Arithmetic through 5th grade, then Rod and Staff for sixth and seventh, then Saxon Algebra, then Teaching Textbooks Alg 2, Geometry, and Pre-Calc/Trig. He aced college Calculus this past semester. He was a National Merit Finalist, obviously with an excellent math score on the SAT. No regrets.

 

Child #2: Ray's Arithmetic through third grade, Math Mammoth for 4th to 6th, TT for Pre-Alg through high school. I regret TT for this boy, but it couldn't be helped due to life circumstances. He got solid A- and B+ grades in TT, and placed "college ready" in math (also did well on WorkKeys and Accuplacer) but does not understand abstract math as well as his brother did. His temperament and aptitude are far different, but I also think he would have benefited from a very strict, very efficient teacher who could give him personal feedback.

 

Child #3: Ray's Arithmetic through third grade, R&S for fourth through seventh, Saxon for all of high school. Once he got over the developmental hurdle for Algebra, and accustomed himself to Saxon's style (with Art Reed DVDs), he became an A+ student. No regrets.

 

Child #4: Horizons from K-6, not sure where we're headed for Pre-Alg through high school. No regrets. I would not recommend Teaching Textbooks, although it worked out for my most mathy kid (who had a very solid foundation).

 

 

 

Summary - no regrets for Ray's, Horizons, Rod and Staff, Saxon. Teaching Textbooks can work for some students but it's not my first choice, and the only program I have any regrets about. I never used it for elementary, and wouldn't; the success of all four of my children comes from having a teacher (myself) who is very, very involved on a daily basis.

May I ask which levels of Ray's you used at what ages? I'm very drawn to Ray's.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

May I ask which levels of Ray's you used at what ages? I'm very drawn to Ray's.

 

It's been awhile, so I hope I'm remembering this correctly:

We used Primary, Intellectual, and Practical. It's a little tricky to figure out the sequence - search for Hunter's threads here on how it's set up. The tricky part is Intellectual with Practical - you sort of use Practical as a spine, and then find more practice problems in Intellectual, if that makes sense.

 

Also, see the Eclectic Manual of Methods for Teachers, which can be found in Google books.

All of my boys used Ray's Primary as their first math program, entirely orally/conversationally, and with manipulatives (such as buttons in a muffin tray, walnuts or stones in baskets). Primary is the book I'd never, ever skip. They were anywhere from 4 to 7 years old for that, grades pre-K through 2nd or so.

 

We used problems from Intellectual as word problem practice, at the chalkboard, through 3rd and 4th, for those who were also doing something else like Horizons or MM. I cherry-picked from problem sets, and didn't cover any topics they hadn't seen in their main curriculum.

 

The boy who went all the way through Intellectual and Practical (and he was only doing Ray's), was done with it by the end of sixth grade. He did not do 100% of the banking lessons in the back of the book.

Edited April 30, 2017 by Tibbie Dunbar

[SilverMoon]

.

Edited September 23, 2023 by SilverMoon

[MDL]

We have used MUS all the way up through 6th. (Youngest still in Beta, but he is very mathy and getting bored with MUS). I wish I'd supplemented with BA earlier, and slower.

 

Other regrets: I kinda wish I hadn't bought all those manipulatives. I bought two sets of blocks, then the fractions, then the decimals. Fraction overlays were outright loathed. Decimals have not been touched and the only real use for the blocks has been building ships and tanks to infuriate me by wasting time[emoji36] I also regret buying the entire LOF collection. They don't like being made to do the "your turn" and revolted against it.

Edited April 30, 2017 by MDL

[Cake and Pi]

I haven't stuck to any particular grade school math.  I switch things up as needed and have found that each kid needs something a little different.  I've used and enjoyed RightStart, Beast Academy, and MEP at different times and with different children.

 

I did use Right Start 1st edition in its entirety with DS#1.  It was mostly easy to make nearly entirely verbal to accommodate his fine motor delay.  No regrets about RS, though I didn't love levels D and E.  RS wasn't a great fit for my very visual, anti-auditory DS#2, so he didn't make it all the way through.  DS#3 wants a lot more worksheets than RS provides, so he bounces back and forth between RS and MEP (which would have  been a major fail for DS#1 and DS#2, but fits DS#3 quite well).  Beast is *the* math for my DS#1, but only good to supplement with for my DS#2.  We'll see how DS#3 takes to it.

 

I'm happy we have a ton of different math manipulatives.  We use them all.  I'm a better, more versatile teacher for my experience with different math programs various ways of introducing topics.  

 

 

[Slache]

It's been awhile, so I hope I'm remembering this correctly:

We used Primary, Intellectual, and Practical. It's a little tricky to figure out the sequence - search for Hunter's threads here on how it's set up. The tricky part is Intellectual with Practical - you sort of use Practical as a spine, and then find more practice problems in Intellectual, if that makes sense.

 

Also, see the Eclectic Manual of Methods for Teachers, which can be found in Google books.

All of my boys used Ray's Primary as their first math program, entirely orally/conversationally, and with manipulatives (such as buttons in a muffin tray, walnuts or stones in baskets). Primary is the book I'd never, ever skip. They were anywhere from 4 to 7 years old for that, grades pre-K through 2nd or so.

 

We used problems from Intellectual as word problem practice, at the chalkboard, through 3rd and 4th, for those who were also doing something else like Horizons or MM. I cherry-picked from problem sets, and didn't cover any topics they hadn't seen in their main curriculum.

 

The boy who went all the way through Intellectual and Practical (and he was only doing Ray's), was done with it by the end of sixth grade. He did not do 100% of the banking lessons in the back of the book.

Hunter had been very patient as I've harassed her repeatedly with questions. I should really buy her lunch. I've read EMM and own Beechick's guide, I just like hearing what others are doing. Thanks!

[freesia]

I have used Horizons for K-6 six times, through 5th/1st/K for the next three (my 5th/1st graders and Ker being my granddaughter). Obviously no regrets bc I have used it with all of them. My older kids have all been well-prepared for high school up math.

Same here- but only two kids through sixth and two more coming up the ranks. I love the spiral aand the teaching in the text.

[JudoMom]

Saxon.

 

My only regrets are the times I tried different things because I was bored.

 

It's a solid program that has prepared my boys well.

[Crimson Wife]

Your kids are very young so I really think it's hard to know what is going to work best for them in the long run. What worked best for my kids in the primary grades was Right Start because it was so "hands-on". As they got a bit older, however, they stopped needing a manipulative-heavy program and RS didn't move fast enough. So I switched them to Singapore.

 

My oldest did Right Start B & C, then Singapore 3A-8A, followed by Lial's Basic Algebra, & then outsourcing math to the community college.

 

My 2nd did Right Start B and the subtraction part of C, then Singapore 2A-6B, followed by Elements of Mathematics.

[Susan in KY]

Singapore, both Primary Math (with CWP and IP) and Math in Focus (through grade 8). Provided a solid foundation, and I'm immensely grateful I didn't skip around at least for one subject. :)

 

Susan

Edited April 30, 2017 by Susan in KY

[Momto6inIN]

Math Mammoth 1 - 7 (including pre-A)

 

It's great on concepts, has plenty of practice built in (we cross out about half the problems sometimes) and prepares them well for algebra. And it's cheap I bought all the levels once as a download and can print them out each year for all my kids and elementary math is taken care of forever.

 

We do make minor tweaks, such as we don't do the geometry chapters after about 4th grade and do some other misc supplements for that instead, and we add in some Life of Fred for some fun extra practice with fractions and decimals and percents.

 

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

[EKT]

We have used Math U See from the beginning and I definitely plan to keep using it because it just plain works for us. (My oldest daughter is finishing up 4th grade, so we have used MUS for five years now - Primer to Delta.) We love the manipulatives, the DVDs, the mastery approach, just all of it. I feel like my kids are really understanding math from the ground up in a way I never did (I struggled with math my entire schooling career). I also feel like the workload is very manageable; we complete one lesson per week and it feels like the perfect amount. 

 

Mystie Winckler writes a lot about Math U See on her blog. (You can search her blog for MUS posts.) I basically agree with everything she says about MUS, so if you're interested in learning more, I'd head to her site!

 

ETA: No regrets at all! I feel lucky to have found "the one" that works for us from the very beginning and I think my kids have benefitted from not switching around. Both my girls would tell you they enjoy math; it hasn't been a scary or difficult subject for them. (Challenging, yes, but it never feels impossible or miserable to them. They always seem to go into a lesson with a belief that they will "get it," and so far, they always do!) 

Edited April 30, 2017 by EKT

[Clear Creek]

Oldest - Rod & Staff

 

Middle - Math-u-see then Horizons

 

Youngest - Math-u-see then Rod & Staff

 

My only regret with any of them was not starting my middle with MUS earlier. She "used" R&S for two years, but didn't learn a thing. Her math learning began in 3rd grade with MUS. I guess I also regret trying LOF with my oldest for a short time in 5th grade...she figured out the answers were in the back of the book and just copied them down for math each day until I figured it out. So we went back to R&S, lol.

 

R&S is extremely thorough and has a strong emphasis on mental calculations. It also has word problems in just about every lesson from 3rd grade and up (my oldest was so good with word problems after using R&S that the word problems in Foerster Algebra didn't make her blink). It is good for the average to strong math student. Math-u-see has a non-formulaic presentation of concepts and is very good for the student who needs to be able to practice a concept with manipulatives in order to learn it. It is great for early learners who are ready for math that will teach the concepts but not be overwhelming in lesson length, and for struggling to average students. Horizons moves very, very incrementally through topics, at a slower pace than other math programs (some topics are on grade level, but the majority are presented about one year after they are covered in R&S). There is no teaching of mental calculations, so it is good for struggling learners. I would not use it with an average or strong math student; the coverage is too shallow compared to so many other math programs. 

[8filltheheart]

I have used Horizons for K-6 six times, through 5th/1st/K for the next three (my 5th/1st graders and Ker being my granddaughter). Obviously no regrets bc I have used it with all of them. My older kids have all been well-prepared for high school up math.

I want to add one thing to my post. I teach. I don't rely on texts to teach. I always interact with my kids so I know exactly what they understand and what they don't. I work with them until concepts are mastered. So I think a lot of texts can accomplish mastery of elementary concepts. I just happen to really like Horizons sequence and agree that it seems simple in progression but leads to solid understanding.

 

I really like Hands On Equations as a supplement for 3rd-5th.

[LMD]

Singapore and Beast Academy. As soon as BA came out, we have loved it. I am beyond thrilled that level 2 will be out in time for child #3 to use it all the way through. He's my most naturally mathy child yet and is nearly done with Singapore 1 (well, an Australian version of Singapore which is almost exactly the same word for word, I just preferred the format)

 

My second choice would be MEP - but needing to print is a hurdle for us at present.

[happypamama]

Saxon for one kid -- She appreciated the incremental progress and the straightforward no nonsense approach. No cutesy pictures or attempts to be fun, just the facts. The frequent spiral was great for her. She used it from 4/5 through Algebra I.

 

Singapore for another kid -- He doesn't like a lot of words and tends to think in a mathematical way similar to Singapore. He also picks up math concepts quickly and doesn't need a lot of repetition. He used Singapore from 2 through 5.

 

Fwiw, I like math and am pretty strong in it, so I found both to be easy to teach with. Both kids did very well on their standardized tests, and both are using AOPS this year (geometry and pre-algebra) and doing well. (I love AOPS myself. It's just fun.)

[momtofive]

CLE for 1st-3rd grades, then on to Saxon 5/4 and up through high school.

 

CLE lays a great foundation, and is very easy to teach. I love their flashcard system for learning math facts, as well.

 

Saxon has been a great math to transition to after CLE, as it's very solid, has incremental lessons that give them just a big enough "bite" of new material, while cycling review in a way that seems to make the concepts really stick. We are finding using the Saxon Teacher cd's, and Art Reed dvd's to be an excellent combo for effectively teaching Saxon. ;)

[8filltheheart]

Horizons moves very, very incrementally through topics, at a slower pace than other math programs (some topics are on grade level, but the majority are presented about one year after they are covered in R&S). There is no teaching of mental calculations, so it is good for struggling learners. I would not use it with an average or strong math student; the coverage is too shallow compared to so many other math programs.

I strongly disagree with this assessment of Horizons. My kids are most definitely not struggling math students nor have they finished elementary math with a shallow understanding of concepts.

 

Horizons is all I used with my older kids. Nothing else at all. (I didn't start using HOE until my 5th child.) They have all been strong upper level math students.

 

Fwiw, I personally would not recommend Horizons for struggling learners. A lot of struggling learners need a mastery approach vs spiral bc spiral doesn't give enough practice. Just a different perspective.

Edited May 1, 2017 by 8FillTheHeart

[SilverMoon]

I very much disagree with that Horizons statement as well. My 9yo is a strong math student but also very Stubborn so two different math books work best. She has bounced back and forth between Horizons and Singapore or Math in Focus with ease. The level is comparable across the board with those three programs.

 

My middle schoolers went from Horizons to AoPS, Foerster, and Math Olympiad and have excelled.

[8filltheheart]

I very much disagree with that Horizons statement as well. My 9yo is a strong math student but also very Stubborn so two different math books work best. She has bounced back and forth between Horizons and Singapore or Math in Focus with ease. The level is comparable across the board with those three programs.

 

My middle schoolers went from Horizons to AoPS, Foerster, and Math Olympiad and have excelled.

Lol! I remember our conversation about stubborn kids! My 9th grader did the same in 4th-6th (the bounce between Horizons and MiF w/o issue. (Yeah, I didn't bother going into chemE/math/physics majors. ;) )

[Saddlemomma]

Horizons Math; no regrets at all.

[ByGrace3]

I used a different K program for each child.

Oldest used Saxon1 

Middle used RS A

Youngest used SM Essentials

 

All followed those up with Math Mammoth. Oldest has completed 1-6, middle has completed 1-4, and youngest is in 2. 

 

I am very impressed with the math foundation my oldest 2 have and am confident in MM for elementary math foundation, 

 

My only regret was Saxon for my oldest. Too much workbook, too long of lessons, not enough conceptual understanding. Both RS and SM were perfect for the kids I used them for and led into MM well,

 

[SilverMoon]

Lol! I remember our conversation about stubborn kids! My 9th grader did the same in 4th-6th (the bounce between Horizons and MiF w/o issue. (Yeah, I didn't bother going into chemE/math/physics majors. ;) )

 

 

Yes,  your posts led me to try it. So she really did grow out of needing two different approaches? There is hope?  :p We're in our second year of this. It keeps her moving forward and reduces stress. lol

[Julie Smith]

Singapore Math.

No regrets.

 

[Spring Flower]

My two oldest have completed Singapore and Beast. No regrets except I wish I had started earlier for my oldest. We started with Saxon for her and it was a good fit for me, bad fit for her. We plan to use AOPS all the way through high school. 

[Clear Creek]

FWIW, my opinion of Horizons was based on my personal experience with using Horizons math 4-6 with one student and Rod & Staff math 3-5 with another. For the last two years I have taught one lesson of Horizons math to one child and one lesson of Rod & Staff math (one grade lower) to another child every day. Since I am using the two programs concurrently, the differences really stand out to me. So yes, based on my personal experience, I believe one goes deeper than the other. That doesn't mean that one can't use Horizons and have a student that succeeds with higher math; obviously that is not the case :001_smile:  I just don't think that I as the teacher should have to add as much to the lessons in Horizons as is necessary to reach the same level of depth and cover the amount of mental math that is already included with R&S; so in my family, with a student that is not struggling in math, I prefer to use R&S. I am not teaching anyone else's kids math, so my preferences don't extend to anyone else's family, lol.

[susie]

Saxon for all 5 of my DS through 8/7.  Solid--my older DS's scored very well on SAT and my ps high schooler is in honors advanced geometry his freshman year. Easy to implement.  I know some home schoolers skip parts of Saxon lessons.  We do everything the curriculum lays out, from all the fact practice tests, mental math, problem solving, lesson practice, and all the mixed practice problems--for every lesson--plus all the tests and investigations.  It has prepared my kiddos very well.

 

 

No regrets.

[idnib]

Singapore.

 

I like the way it develops number sense and gets kids thinking algebraically even if it's not explicit. Bar diagrams are great.

 

No regrets about using it, but I do dislike all the flipping around in the Home Instructor's Guide. Sometimes I read how to teach, then flip to the back for mental math, then to another place for those answers, then back to the exercise in a different book, then another page for the answers to that, etc. I wish it used paper less efficiently but put everything in order of use.