This seems like a great idea (for math) - in theory.

[pgr]

I posted earlier about my math conundrums with DS13; basically he understands the concepts of AOPS Pre-Algebra, but struggles with the presentation - he feels overwhelmed with how they present different ways to approach a problem. I think there's a chance he might grow into it with time.

On the recommendation of the Hive, we bought Foerster's Algebra 1, which he's done very little of so far but deems mostly OK, as he does Jacob's (which I had bought used for his older sister at some point). He has sometimes watched Khan Academy videos and liked them. The Arbor Center for Teaching books (Jousting Armadillos so far, now Crocodiles and Coconuts) were the best fit by far. It was the only one that sparked interest and did not elicit groans.

There's definitely no sense in doing a bunch of different books all at once, but I've been trying to find one source that's really "just right". If there was one resource that clicked with him the way Jousting Armadillos did, I'd go that route and forget about the rest. But as things stand, I'm wondering if maybe we could manage to use AOPS as a "spine", supplementing the teaching, topic by topic, as necessary from the other sources? Has anyone tried anything like that? 

Edited September 17, 2021 by pgr

[regentrude]

You say he struggles with AOPS presenting multiple approaches.  How is adding yet another textbook going to help with that?

[theelfqueen]

The three arbor books together are perfectly solid prealgebra and algebra 1 and some algebra 2 topics curriculum. If he likes them, why not use them? 

[pgr]

14 hours ago, regentrude said:

You say he struggles with AOPS presenting multiple approaches.  How is adding yet another textbook going to help with that?

You're right - I need to rephrase my question. With AOPS he generally understands the teaching, but sometimes it "clicks" with the exercises, and other times he feels like he should have been able to figure out the "fancy" approaches they offer. I hesitate to ditch AOPS entirely because it's so solid and, when it does click, it's wonderful. He's not fighting AOPS, he just feels like he should be able to do the problems more easily and he gets frustrated when it's a struggle.

So what I was considering was to follow the sequence through the AOPS book. If a topic is one that clicks (for lack of a better word) for him, great. However, if he's struggling with a topic, then we can switch gears and look at it from another book rather than keep at it to the point of pure frustration. DD16 would put the problems aside for a bit and would figure them out afterwards, DS doesn't do that.

 

[pgr]

11 hours ago, theelfqueen said:

The three arbor books together are perfectly solid prealgebra and algebra 1 and some algebra 2 topics curriculum. If he likes them, why not use them? 

Hm. I had understood that they're not a complete curriculum. 

[theelfqueen]

They're the complete math curriculum that the Arbor school uses for all.of their students for three years of schooling. 

They're modeled on Jacob's.

http://arborcenterforteaching.org/arbor-algebra-textbook

Edited September 18, 2021 by theelfqueen

[Farrar]

Agreeing that the Arbor School books are a complete program for pre-algebra and algebra. But with the caveat that at the actual Arbor school, they do additional units for topics in geometry, statistics, etc. And they do additional practice that's more just practice. But you could easily do them and add practice from other books. Basically, I'm suggesting you use the Arbor books as your spine and AoPS and Jacobs and Foersters as the supplements. The Arbor books are essentially made to do that so that doesn't seem as twisty to me as trying to read the AoPS text and do the problems in another text.

[regentrude]

3 hours ago, pgr said:

You're right - I need to rephrase my question. With AOPS he generally understands the teaching, but sometimes it "clicks" with the exercises, and other times he feels like he should have been able to figure out the "fancy" approaches they offer. I hesitate to ditch AOPS entirely because it's so solid and, when it does click, it's wonderful. He's not fighting AOPS, he just feels like he should be able to do the problems more easily and he gets frustrated when it's a struggle.

The struggle is EXACTLY why AOPS works. Both my adult children told me recently that they appreciate that we made them use AOPS,  because they found they have a huge advantage compared to their fellow students: they have learned to wrestle with hard problems that don't easily "click".

The AOPS problems are meant to make the student struggle. That's how they learn problem solving as opposed to rote reproduction of drilled routines. 

Perhaps explaining this to your DS might help. Strong students are so used to being able to understand everything without effort that they get frustrated when they can't immediately figure out a problem, so being made to struggle is a tremendous gift.

[pgr]

3 minutes ago, regentrude said:

The struggle is EXACTLY why AOPS works. Both my adult children told me recently that they appreciate that we made them use AOPS,  because they found they have a huge advantage compared to their fellow students: they have learned to wrestle with hard problems that don't easily "click".

The AOPS problems are meant to make the student struggle. That's how they learn problem solving as opposed to rote reproduction of drilled routines. 

Perhaps explaining this to your DS might help. Strong students are so used to being able to understand everything without effort that they get frustrated when they can't immediately figure out a problem, so being made to struggle is a tremendous gift.

Yes! THIS is exactly why I don't want to ditch AOPS. My DD16 understands that the struggle has a purpose and is continuing to thrive with AOPS. I have explained to my DS that this is how (and why) AOPS works. The difficulty with him is that he's a bright kid, but also verrrrry sensitive. It doesn't take much for his emotional fuses to blow, which he's learning to manage, but in the meantime it makes it harder to get past the frustration to a place where learning is happening. Also, thank you for weighing in. Everyone's advice is appreciated, but I've been here long enough (though I tend to be quiet) to know that you definitely know math... ❤️  

[pgr]

@theelfqueen and @Farrar thank you both for the input and advice! What you're saying makes sense. I had understood that they use the books  more as an ancillary resource, with the bulk of the teaching being from direct interaction with the teachers - hands on and live lectures.

[Arcadia]

7 hours ago, pgr said:

. The difficulty with him is that he's a bright kid, but also verrrrry sensitive. It doesn't take much for his emotional fuses to blow, which he's learning to manage, but in the meantime it makes it harder to get past the frustration to a place where learning is happening. 

13 can be a tough age for a boy undergoing growth spurt/puberty changes. DS16 finished AoPS calculus when he was in 7th grade. Took only non-credit advanced math classes for 8th and 9th grade. He felt he was finally ready to start dual enrollment math in 10th grade when he was 14 years 9mths old. 

[Clemsondana]

I would say to do what works, all around and not just academically.  The struggle is part of how AoPS works, but it's also not essential to have that level of struggle to learn math.  Most engineers and scientists learned math through normal school programs, for instance, since AoPS didn't exist when they were in school.  My older kid has stuck with it, but moved at a slower pace at times and now cuts most challenge problems.  If I had it to do over, we probably would have chosen something different but at this point we are on pre-cal (I did choose something different for my younger).  If Arbor Press is a perfect fit, then use that and supplement with some AoPS problems if you want some extra challenge.  You'll have to do something different than Arbor Press when you get to geometry and Alg 2, so you can always pick back up with AoPS when your student is older and perhaps more comfortable with the struggle and challenge.  Or they may decide that spending that much time on math isn't a good use of their time.  That's actually a major part of why we don't do most challenge problems - kid is OK with the challenge of AoPS at this point and moves at a reasonable pace, but has no interest in spending hours on math every day.  

My kid actually liked AoPS Number Theory and Intro to Probability, but absolutely hated pre-A.  Kid was young and we had maturity and pacing issues, but kid wound up hating math and it took a long time to work through that. Forcing AoPS on a frustrated kid, such that they spent a few years actively disliking math, is one of my few big homeschool regrets.  I wish we had slowed down, or changed programs, or taken more breaks, a lot sooner than we did.  

 

[Not_a_Number]

11 hours ago, Clemsondana said:

My kid actually liked AoPS Number Theory and Intro to Probability, but absolutely hated pre-A.

You know something? I agree with your kid. I like Intro to NT and Intro to C&P, and I find Pre-algebra tedious and pointless. 

[pgr]

@Clemsondanathank you for this. It's so hard to walk the line between teaching them to work through hard stuff and killing their love for something with our insistence that they keep at it.

[Not_a_Number]

For what it's worth, I've had to walk a pretty fine line with my very mathy DD9. On the one hand, she really likes math. On the other hand, she is NOT like I was as a kid -- I was obsessed with puzzles and REALLY wanted to solve problems people gave me. She just... doesn't care that much. She likes learning it, she likes the feeling of mastery, she likes discovering it all herself (I don't teach top-down at all), but she wouldn't like being stuck all the time. 

In my opinion, for lots of kids, the right way to challenge them is using concepts they ALREADY understand. Combining learning new concepts with being frustrated only works for some kids. And I say that as someone who WAS such a kid!