How easy/difficult is it to use Singapore EB and Right Start A together?

[Rainbows]

Do Singapore earlybird and Right Start level A pair well together or would that be too confusing for DS?

 

He is 5, seems to "get" math pretty well....we are quickly and easily working through the Kindy workbooks I bought from our local teacher store. I plan on trying the Singapore books with him

 

It seems most people pair Singapore with Miquon or Math Mammoth but both of those start at the 1st grade level. I like the idea of Right Start and know that I wouldn't want to do it alone (DS does like workbooks too much to not have any) but would like to try it along side Singapore if its not too hard to pull off

 

Anyone know of the scope/sequence are similar or would I have to jump around a lot?

 

thanks :001_smile:

[Capt_Uhura]

HHmm if I remember correctly, SM EB teaches a lot of counting. RS discourages counting but rather emphasizes seeing the quantities. If your son is very mathy, you might consider starting with RS B. It was the entry level for RS, RS A was written later for those wanting to start earlier. RS B has more worksheets in it. The scope and sequence for RS and SM primary series is different. It would be easier I think to use RS as a spine, and jump around in SM as you need to. For instance, subtraction is taught later in RS than in SM and division is taught later in RS as well. But by the time the child gets there, he's already been there b/c of the way RS teaches addition and multiplication.

 

Believe me, by the time you get to RS C, there is plenty of worksheets! And I had a 5yr old who loved nothing more than filling out worksheet after worksheet after worksheet....they soon get over it, or at least mine did.

[Rainbows]

 

Believe me, by the time you get to RS C, there is plenty of worksheets! And I had a 5yr old who loved nothing more than filling out worksheet after worksheet after worksheet....they soon get over it, or at least mine did.

 

I had to laugh at this part :lol:

Its funny, DS hates to practice handwriting, but so far loves workbooks....silly boy!

[nmoira]

HHmm if I remember correctly, SM EB teaches a lot of counting. RS discourages counting but rather emphasizes seeing the quantities. If your son is very mathy, you might consider starting with RS B.

Yes. EB teaches counting on as a an addition strategy, a practice which is strongly discouraged in RightStart. However, I think the point is moot as from your description you'll probably find that EB is far too easy for your son.

[Rainbows]

Yes. EB teaches counting on as a an addition strategy, a practice which is strongly discouraged in RightStart. However, I think the point is moot as from your description you'll probably find that EB is far too easy for your son.

 

I think that 1A/1B will probably be way too easy, but I can hang onto them for younger son if that's the case.... I think he may fit into the 2A/2B books but won't know for sure until I see them. Seems like jumping into the Primary math may be too big a step right now (from what Ive read online)

 

Im such a visual person and if I could hold the different math programs in front of me and look over them it would help greatly...but just seeing 1 sample page is not enough for me, kwim?

[Spy Car]

I haven't used Right Start. I have looked at a lot of samples, Power Point presentations, etc.

 

To me it looked like an interesting approach, however, it seems to me like the author of RS (more or less) insists that you follow her pedogological method for the program to be a success. And the RS method is directly at odds with many of the methods in Singapore (as far I can tell).

 

I don't know if the RS method really is better (most of the parent reports seem to be glowing) but mixing approaches that are somewhat antagonistic or working at cross purposes would make me pause.

 

And I say this as someone who likes hitting math from multiple perspectives.

 

I'm "thinking out loud" here, so if what I'm saying strikes anyone as "erroneous" please don't hold your tongue. Like I say, I haven't used RS. But if I choose RS, I think I'd stick with RS (and do things the RS way). Does this make sense?

 

I really like Miquon with Singapore.

 

I also recently purchased the first year of a Japanese math series. The "workbooks" especially are making a fine compliment to Singapore Earlybird. These are slightly different from Singapore, but quite "sympathetic" in the method.

 

Heres a link to the thread where we've discussed the Japanese Math.

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63631

 

Bill

[Capt_Uhura]

Actually, RS and SM have very similar methodologies except for the initial visualizing quantities from what I can tell. They work well together if child needs a slightly different approach to a topic. I've seen several who use RS as a spine and SM as a supplement and it works well. Many when they finish RS, and want a breather before jumping into Algebra, will go right into SM 5A or 6A with no problems at all.

 

My 5yr old is finishing RS B. I'm having him do some of SM Primary 1A/1B just to slow him down a bit and give him a different representation of concepts. He is a bit slow w/ 2-digit addition over a 100 (89+56) so I wanted him to have time for that gel before moving on. I haven't done SM 3A+ but I don't know of any huge differences between the two in strategies for add/sub/multi/div. If there are some, I'd love to read about them.

 

I chose RS over SM b/c initially the SM way of doing things was foreign to me, as I was taught the rote way and since RS had similar methods but more hand-holding, I went that route. The visuals in SM appeal to me so I have those workbooks as well, for when DC needs a different representation - which, they've never needed lol.

 

I wanted to add, that I think RS and SM Earlybird differ in that EB emphasizes counting. SM Primary series however, emphasizes seeing groups of 5 and 10, similar to RS ie 7 is 5 and 2, 8 is 5 and 3 etc.

Edited November 7, 2008 by Capt_Uhura

[nmoira]

 

To me it looked like an interesting approach, however, it seems to me like the author of RS (more or less) insists that you follow her pedogological method for the program to be a success. And the RS method is directly at odds with many of the methods in Singapore (as far I can tell).

I don't think this is the case. The major difference is that Right Start uses the abacus as a visualization tool from the beginning and doesn't use counting. OTOH, Singapore works up to visualization. By the time the child is finished the Singapore 1A/1B (no more counting), the programs are very similar, though I would characterize Singapore as being simpler/more streamlined in the sense that fewer attack methods are taught on the road to learning math facts. For example, Right Start has four or five methods for figuring out subtraction facts prior to automaticity being gained. If a child "gets it" with the first method, it's frustrating to tell them to learn it a different way. (Just to be clear, I'm just talking about math facts, not higher level conceptual material for which there's often a good reason to learn to solve the problem more than one way.)

[Spy Car]

Actually, RS and SM have very similar methodologies except for the initial visualizing quantities from what I can tell. They work well together if child needs a slightly different approach to a topic. I've seen several who use RS as a spine and SM as a supplement and it works well. Many when they finish RS, and want a breather before jumping into Algebra, will go right into SM 5A or 6A with no problems at all.

 

My 5yr old is finishing RS B. I'm having him do some of SM Primary 1A/1B just to slow him down a bit and give him a different representation of concepts. He is a bit slow w/ 2-digit addition over a 100 (89+56) so I wanted him to have time for that gel before moving on. I haven't done SM 3A+ but I don't know of any huge differences between the two in strategies for add/sub/multi/div. If there are some, I'd love to read about them.

 

I chose RS over SM b/c initially the SM way of doing things was foreign to me, as I was taught the rote way and since RS had similar methods but more hand-holding, I went that route. The visuals in SM appeal to me so I have those workbooks as well, for when DC needs a different representation - which, they've never needed lol.

 

I wanted to add, that I think RS and SM Earlybird differ in that EB emphasizes counting. SM Primary series however, emphasizes seeing groups of 5 and 10, similar to RS ie 7 is 5 and 2, 8 is 5 and 3 etc.

 

I don't think this is the case. The major difference is that Right Start uses the abacus as a visualization tool from the beginning and doesn't use counting. OTOH, Singapore works up to visualization. By the time the child is finished the Singapore 1A/1B (no more counting), the programs are very similar, though I would characterize Singapore as being simpler/more streamlined in the sense that fewer attack methods are taught on the road to learning math facts. For example, Right Start has four or five methods for figuring out subtraction facts prior to automaticity being gained. If a child "gets it" with the first method, it's frustrating to tell them to learn it a different way. (Just to be clear, I'm just talking about math facts, not higher level conceptual material for which there's often a good reason to learn to solve the problem more than one way.)

 

Thank you both for jumping in. It's great to have voices of experience :D

 

I guess we haven't really moved beyond the counting and conceptualizing numbers stage. Perhaps the RS materials online are designed (in part) to "differentiate" themselves from other programs, but they do make RS seem very hostile to things such as Cusinaire rods, and such.

 

So I had doubts about how they'd mix with other programs. Thank you both for the enlightening responses.

 

I do want one of those AL abacuses.

 

Bill

[Capt_Uhura]

YEs Dr. Cotter doesn't like rods but I think I agree with her. Her whole premise is visualizing quantities and developing a math sense. FOr the rods, once you get beyond 5, it's harder to differentiate between 6,7,8,9 etc except for the colors. With the abacus, as in SM, you're seeing quantities based on 5s and 10s. So kids quickly use stratgies initially for 5+7 as 5+5+2. This comes in handy later for things such as 57+35 as some might see it as 55+35+2 and other strategies such as seeing 8s,9s as 2 and 1 away from 10 etc. The big difference between SM and RS is the use the abacus but SM accomplishes the same thing w/ it's visual workbooks and thought bubbles. The problem above in RS (57+35) would be presented in several different ways in several lessons 50+30+7+5, 57+30+5 (this is all for mental math, not written algorithms). You'd visualize this on the abacus putting the 10s on top of the abacus and the 1s on teh bottom, then adding teh 3 tens (30) to the top, then adding the 5 ones at the bottom. In SM, you'd see a kid w/ a thought bubble thinking (57, 67, 77, 87 plus 5 more), another kid w/ another though bubble (50+30+12). In that sense, I think SM moves master than RS and I've doubled up on lessons quite a bit for my mathy kids.

 

Anyone, feel free to correct me if I'm in error! :001_smile:

HTH

[nmoira]

 

Perhaps the RS materials online are designed (in part) to "differentiate" themselves from other programs, but they do make RS seem very hostile to things such as Cusinaire rods, and such.

I think if pressed, Dr. Cotter would say that she's not against the use of Cuisinaire rods for conceptual visualization. Her point (and it's one I agree with) is that Cuisinaire rods don't lend themselves easily to computational visualization. The alabacus is easily the single best manipulative for this purpose that I've seen.

[Rainbows]

Thanks for the responses....

Im having a hard time figuring out if I should buy both SM and RS and see which one DS takes to better (but I hate putting the $$ into it).

 

If I got SM and tried it for a while with DS, would it be hard to switch over to RS? Would he have to un-learn/rethink his approach to problems if we started with SM and switched to RS?

 

Also, which do you think would be the better route if he may go to public/private school next year (1st grade) or the year after?

 

thanks so much!

[nmoira]

 

YEs Dr. Cotter doesn't like rods but I think I agree with her.

You keep managing to beat my by a few seconds. :D

[snickelfritz]

I, at first, gave up on RightStart. Because of the counting taboo. Our culture counts. Math literature counts. Our culture says "thirteen", not "1 ten, 3." She already knew her numbers.

 

It was too hard to go against the flow.

 

I went back to it and decided not to fight it. We count, but we also practice just visualizing the numbers. We play the games where she tries to tell how many "bead" in 1 or 2 seconds. She must "visualize" and not count to do that. If she ends up trying to count, that's fine. I let her. We just work on the visualizing, too.

 

We say "thirteen" and, yet, we use the "Japanese way of saying it". We will now go through a whole lesson and say it the "Japanese way." That's how I differentiate. How many beads? And how would the Japanese say it? She thinks its fun to say it the way another culture does.

 

It's working and I am now enjoying RightStart.

 

It does help to know that Singapore kids go into Singapore math by saying numbers the way RightStart does. It gives them an edge to understanding place value, so I think the two programs can actually work well together. We finised Earlybird, first. Then, went back to RightStart A. I'm trying to decide WHAT I"m going to do next year. I have RightStart B, so I'll probably continue that. I just don't know if I'll go on to Singapore 1, Living Math, keep on with Horizons 1, or........

[Capt_Uhura]

:lol:

 

Please add your thoughts. I always learn something from your posts!

[Spy Car]

This has been a thread worth reading.

 

Thanks Capt Uhura, Moira, and Erica...you've caused be to put my "thinking cap" back on.

 

Bill (whose son is doing things with the Cuisenaire rods that makes my jaws drop...so there! :D)

Edited November 7, 2008 by Spy Car

[stripe]

As someone who also finds both appealing but am leery to mix them, I am quite interested in this thread too. I think because RightStart delays subtraction per se until the end of level B and into C, would be confusing to try to do "at the same time" as Singapore. I like the abacus and the grouping of 5s and 10s. It's clever, and I hear she relates this to telling time (minutes) and money (nickels and dimes) and that strikes me as helpful to kids. I also love the idea of all the games because I agree with my feelings I had as a kid about endless dry drill and worksheets (although I am definitely a "mathy" type of person).

 

On the plus side for Right Start -- I have heard feedback from others that their support is superior (and free), the number of various products from Singapore (texts, workbook, extra practice, challenging word problems) plus needing to find supplements from other sources is not always easy to coordinate; RightStart is all there in one package. These people believe Singapore is cheap because it's incomplete, basically. I personally like the de-emphasis on worksheets; something about little kids filling out worksheets rubs me the wrong way. Perhaps because I think it would be easy for me to substitute them for teaching and interaction that are required by game-play with kids.

 

I think I'm with Bill that I see a different, divergent approach underlying both programs: Singapore shows the relationships between functions (e.g. addition and subtraction are inverses), and sticks to smaller integers in the first year(s) while RightStart focusses so much on addition in the beginning, and jumps rapidly into multi-digit calculations. I am not sure how well these two would work together at least in the first year or so, before the paths converge later on.

 

I did buy the RightStart activities for the abacus book as a less expensive way to gain insight into her program (I'm linking you to the "tutorial" section of the website), and I'm considering using it piecemeal in this fashion, and adding in her games, because I think she's onto something, I am just not sure the program as a whole is quite right for my situation.

[StephanieF]

We did singapore early bird and now do rightstart B. Singapore does do counting which rightstart doesn't so personally I wouldn't mix the two in the early stages. For me rightstart would be enough on its own. Had I known about rightstart I would have done level A instead of the early bird singapore which we flew through anyway as it is pretty basic

Stephanie

[stripe]

Out of curiosity -- does RightStart assume a person *cannot* count, or just never teach them to use counting to determine quantity?

[Spy Car]

I don't want to hijack the thread, but since we are here, are there Right Start manipulatives and/or games that a Singapore/Miquon user should not miss out on?

 

I was thinking of getting the AL abacus at some point soon, but are there other products that are useful (and fun)?

 

Bill

[Capt_Uhura]

RS doesn't assume you can't count, just encourages seeing groups of 5s and 10s. You count up to 5 and then you see 5 and 1, 5 and 2, 5 and 3, 5 and 4 and 5 and 5. You then group things by 10s to count above ten and you see 2-ten 2 items for 22 items rather than 1,2,3,4.....12,13,14,15...20,21,22.

 

As far as manips - the RS abacus is GREAT! I've seen some just the Activities for Alabacus along w/ water program they are using for that visualness of RS. Many use the RS games kit along w/ SM or other programs. I love the game Corners! I think you can just buy the Corners cards.

[snickelfritz]

Just as they name their numbers in terms of 10, they teach their kiddos to see quantities.

 

So, Singapore kids that start Singapore math have been taught the RightStart basics just as a matter of course. They go into Singapore math with a better understanding of (13). Since they have been calling it (1-ten, 3) all of their lives and not this meaningless word (thirteen.) They go into Singapore math already seeing groupings of objects, instead of counting out each one.

 

Now, I'm not from Singapore:D....so, I can't verify that. But, that's the way I understand it from the various things that I have read.

 

To me, that's what makes RightStart a natural pre-cursor/companion to Singapore math.

 

If I could get away from my need to somewhat maintain a typical U.S. progression of math, I might be able to completely buy into the system and do just the Singapore/RightStart combo.

[cillakat]

HHmm if I remember correctly, SM EB teaches a lot of counting. RS discourages counting but rather emphasizes seeing the quantities. If your son is very mathy,

 

second that suggestion. I would absolutely skip A. Even B covers numeration.

 

K

[Capt_Uhura]

Level B has a lot more worksheets than level A, if that is what floats his boat. :001_smile: