Is MUS Geometry enough?

[TheCoffeeChick]

My DD will be in 9th grade in the fall and has done Algebra 1 in public school this school year. She has always been an A student and works hard at school. She does well in math, but doesn't really like it. For this reason, I was leaning toward MUS for math moving forward. But, I also want her to be prepared for the PSAT & SAT/ACT later in high school.

I keep reading that MUS geometry is light because it doesn't have much in terms of proofs. Do the PSAT, SAT, & ACT tests have geometric proofs? Does it matter if she isn't quite solid with proofs in the long term? She wants to be a lawyer when she grows up, so she plans on taking the minimum amount of math in college.

I love geometry, so I don't mind teaching a more difficult text, I just thought my DD would enjoy math more if I could find a curriculum that helps her really understand the concepts, rather than just memorizing the processes. 

So what says the hive? Is MUS geometry sufficient to do well on standardized tests later in high school?

[....]

It was fine for us.  I can tell you what my oldest did and how it turned out.  She did:

• Saxon Algebra 1
• Saxon Algebra 2
• Mathusee Geometry (because she felt like the geometry in Saxon was not enough for her)
• Life of Fred Statistics
• Khan Academy SAT prep

She tested into the highest math possible at the college, so she only has to take one math class for her Bachelor's and it was Statistics.  She just finished the course with a 97% average in the class.  At one point, she had like 130% average in the class (something ridiculous).  I think she and another guy had the highest grades in the class.

Anyway....ds17 is doing:

• Mathusee Algebra 1
• Mathusee Geometry
• Mathusee Algebra 2
• Life of Fred Statistics
• ACT Math Prep book

Ok, he hasn't started college yet, but he's actually getting almost all the ACT math questions right so far....I mean, we're only doing one question a day and then if he does get it wrong, we go over and solve the problem.  But, so far, so good.

We like Mathusee.  *shrug*  I do TEACH it, though.  YKWIM?  I did teach Saxon, too.  We have a big dry erase board in our schoolroom and I literally go over every problem they ever miss on the board.  Sometimes, I teach entire lessons on the board from the textbook if they're not understanding it.  So, our experience may have something to do with the way we homeschool, too.  

I'm not sure...

Editing to add: dd15 and dd12 are going to make it through Calculus.  They are math superstars, but dd18 and ds17 were kinda into other stuff.  YKWIM?

Edited May 14, 2020 by Evanthe

[EKS]

8 hours ago, TheCoffeeChick said:

She wants to be a lawyer when she grows up

I would think that learning how to write mathematical proofs would be a valuable skill to develop in a budding lawyer.

In answer to your question about MUS--I don't think it is enough for any student who is capable of more.  The reasons for learning math in high school are not limited to doing well on college entrance exams.  I'd take a look at Derek Owens.

Edited May 15, 2020 by EKS

[Lori D.]

If the goal is to have the minimum for a credit and familiarity with what Geometry is on ACT/SAT, then yes, MUS will check that box. (And no, proofs are not much on those tests.)

However, I'm in agreement with EKS -- if the student can do more, it's in the student's best interest to do more -- and MUS is not enough if the student can do more. DS#2 is a big-time math struggler (mostly with the abstract algebra topics), and he did do MUS Geometry, but I ALSO had him do some of Jacobs Geometry (2nd ed.) for deeper understanding overall, in addition too much better exposure and understanding of proofs. 

Also agreeing with EKS that more exposure building logical proofs in Geometry will be very helpful for a future lawyer. And as a side note: I'd also suggest getting involved with the 2 high school programs of Mock Trial and YMCA Youth & Gov't (bill debate) for practice in building supported argument that will help later on as a lawyer. 😉 

[TheCoffeeChick]

2 hours ago, EKS said:

I would think that learning how to write mathematical proofs would be a valuable skill to develop in a budding lawyer.

In answer to your question about MUS--I don't think it is enough for any student who is capable of more.  The reasons for learning math in high school are not limited to doing well on college entrance exams.  I'd take a look at Derek Owens.

 
DD can definitely do more. And you have a great point about proofs being be beneficial for a lawyer. I will look at Derek Owens. 

1 hour ago, Lori D. said:

Also agreeing with EKS that more exposure building logical proofs in Geometry will be very helpful for a future lawyer. And as a side note: I'd also suggest getting involved with the 2 high school programs of Mock Trial and YMCA Youth & Gov't (bill debate) for practice in building supported argument that will help later on as a lawyer. 😉 

Thank you for the program suggestions. I will search for them now.

4 hours ago, Evanthe said:

We like Mathusee.  *shrug*  I do TEACH it, though.  YKWIM?  I did teach Saxon, too.  We have a big dry erase board in our schoolroom and I literally go over every problem they ever miss on the board.  Sometimes, I teach entire lessons on the board from the textbook if they're not understanding it.  So, our experience may have something to do with the way we homeschool, too.

It sounds like you are a great teacher. 😄 I wish I could get my hands on a MUS book IRL just so I could see it in person. I have found in my searches on this board and online in general that people either love it or hate it.  

[8filltheheart]

nm

Edited May 15, 2020 by 8FillTheHeart

[LinRTX]

You don't need to do proofs for the SAT. And we followed a different path concerning geometry. We only did the geometry in Saxon, nothing more. But we did formal logic -- a lot.

I though my daughter was going to do something in the language arts or maybe law. She did not like math -- at all. Until her senior year. She is now finishing her sophomore year as a math major. And writes very good proofs. Being able to logically think through anything is how she writes them. It also enables her to write very good papers.

So if she wants additional geometry, fine. But it is not a requirement.

[TheCoffeeChick]

2 hours ago, Linda in TX said:

You don't need to do proofs for the SAT. And we followed a different path concerning geometry. We only did the geometry in Saxon, nothing more. But we did formal logic -- a lot.

If we had been homeschooling this year, we would have used Saxon Algebra I this year and just relied on the Algebra I & II courses to cover enough geometry. I personally love Saxon, but think it would be difficult for her to jump into book II without using book I. Perhaps I should make sure we incorporate formal logic to help her in the long run, even though she’ll be in high school and logic is more junior high level?

[LinRTX]

Quote

16 minutes ago, TheCoffeeChick said:

she’ll be in high school and logic is more junior high level

 

We  did logic throughout high school. Formal logic can get pretty involved. I'm trying to remember what we actually did. Also my daughter has logic in her college classes, maybe not an entire semester, but quite a bit. And analyzing arguments and learning to construct them is a skill everyone needs.

 

And I agree that jumping into Saxon Algebra II without doing Saxon Algebra I would be a big mistake. It was one I made with my very mathy oldest. He did recover, but it was a hard frustrating time.

Edited May 15, 2020 by Linda in TX

[TheCoffeeChick]

1 hour ago, Linda in TX said:

And I agree that jumping into Saxon Algebra II without doing Saxon Algebra I would be a big mistake. It was one I made with my very mathy oldest. He did recover, but it was a hard frustrating time.

 

I definitely want to avoid needless frustration. I'll probably end up doing Jacob's Geometry, but not with an online component. I'm very comfortable teaching math and it seems my kids learn better with me teaching rather than just watching a video. 

Thank you, everyone. This has given me a lot to think about. I appreciate everyone's input.

[katilac]

2 hours ago, TheCoffeeChick said:

  even though she’ll be in high school and logic is more junior high level?

Logic is taught at university, so it can be any level. 

[prairiewindmomma]

It was fine for us. Ds got a 36 on the math section, having only had MUS Geometry for the geometry section. 🙂

[TheCoffeeChick]

18 hours ago, prairiewindmomma said:

It was fine for us. Ds got a 36 on the math section, having only had MUS Geometry for the geometry section. 🙂

That is awesome! Did you use only MUS for all of high school? Or did you use a variety of curricula?

[prairiewindmomma]

He used MUS for geometry and the “generic chalkdust” for everything else. 
 

I am using MUS all the way through for my next high schooler. He is in algebra now (will finish over the summer). IMO if you can get through the pre-calc book before testing you are well-prepared. Algebra 1 in MUS is a bit on the light side but combined with Algebra 2 is fine. 🙂 

I do think generic chalkdust is more rigorous than MUS.

[prairiewindmomma]

On 5/14/2020 at 3:51 PM, EKS said:

I would think that learning how to write mathematical proofs would be a valuable skill to develop in a budding lawyer.

In answer to your question about MUS--I don't think it is enough for any student who is capable of more.  The reasons for learning math in high school are not limited to doing well on college entrance exams.  I'd take a look at Derek Owens.

Eh, I hated proofs in high school but still graduated in the top of my law school class. 

[EKS]

1 minute ago, prairiewindmomma said:

Eh, I hated proofs in high school but still graduated in the top of my law school class. 

It's possible to hate something and to still get something out of having learned about it.   Whenever a person learns something, it changes them and has the potential to influence how they approach everything they learn from that point forward.