Is Beast Academy complete? Any complaints? Reviews?

[Janeway]

I have been intrigued by Beast Academy since people talked about it here. So I bought some levels a few years ago. None of my kids liked it at all, so far. But now, my youngest is a quick learner. As in, he almost seems to learn math through osmosis. On his own, he will just say something like...I might say "what is 112 plus 19" and he will say "12 plus 8 is 20, and then add 1, so it is 121." Or I can say "what is 3 times 7" and he will say "3 times 6 is 18 so 3 times 7 is 21." We did Singapore Math 1A and B, but did not complete the workbook in either case because part way through, he just knew it all and breezed through. He also likes to listen on in his older sister's math videos (she is using TGTB) and has watched a bunch of Mathtacular (videos I highly recommend). Someone suggested I try Beast Academy.

My question is..is it just a different way of teaching? Or is it just complicated? We have only done it for a day so far, but my husband saw the books and did the curl up the nose things and told me they looked more like puzzle books to be done on the side and not an actual curriculum.  Is this program good/solid as a stand alone curriculum? Has anyone had trouble with this program in the long run? 

[shawthorne44]

Don't be put off by the comic book format of the guide.  It allows them to teach something unique.   That there is more than one way to solve a problem, and that sometimes the crazy idea is the quickest.   The big purple monster is the one that comes up with crazy ideas that are often wrong but sometimes brilliant.   Also that it is OK to be wrong.   

Also it is complete and very rigorous.   The kids that do math competitions use this company.    

Back when BA2 was still coming out (meaning all the books weren't created yet) I had DD do the BA2 books that had just come out.    So, she might have finished BA3C and then did BA2D.    Sometimes I would see a really interesting problem and I'd ask my work neighbors to solve it.   My work neighbors are computer programmers.  They were always able to solve it, but they'd have to really think about it.  Then I'd tell them, "This is from my daughter's second grade math"

DH and I both have Physics BS which means we took enough math classes to double major in math.    We love BA and are a little jealous. of DD because we wish we could have math like that.  

If your kids are struggling with learning the math, you might try the online version.   There are videos they can watch.   

We love it so much, I recently looked into the Language Arts, but it seems that is In Class only.  

 

[Janeway]

3 minutes ago, shawthorne44 said:

Don't be put off by the comic book format of the guide.  It allows them to teach something unique.   That there is more than one way to solve a problem, and that sometimes the crazy idea is the quickest.   The big purple monster is the one that comes up with crazy ideas that are often wrong but sometimes brilliant.   Also that it is OK to be wrong.   

Also it is complete and very rigorous.   The kids that do math competitions use this company.    

Back when BA2 was still coming out (meaning all the books weren't created yet) I had DD do the BA2 books that had just come out.    So, she might have finished BA3C and then did BA2D.    Sometimes I would see a really interesting problem and I'd ask my work neighbors to solve it.   My work neighbors are computer programmers.  They were always able to solve it, but they'd have to really think about it.  Then I'd tell them, "This is from my daughter's second grade math"

DH and I both have Physics BS which means we took enough math classes to double major in math.    We love BA and are a little jealous. of DD because we wish we could have math like that.  

If your kids are struggling with learning the math, you might try the online version.   There are videos they can watch.   

We love it so much, I recently looked into the Language Arts, but it seems that is In Class only.  

 

So far, my younger child is liking it, but we just started. He is not struggling. It was my older kids that did not like it at all.

[shawthorne44]

BA has a central philosophy that you need to stretch yourself.   If you get all the math problems correct, then the problems are too easy.   This isn't true of most math.   It might be that your older kids aren't used to that.  That is something I love about BA.  Kids that think they need to get everything right all the time become the classic underachievers because they don't try stuff if they think they can't get it right and quickly.    Struggle is good.  

It could also be the level.   Did the older kids take  the level placement tests?  

[Insertcreativenamehere]

I think it works best for mathy kids. I used it for one of mine who has amazing mental math skills but struggled with the standard algorithms for multi-digit multiplication and division. It helped him quite a bit but he did need more repetition than the books provided. We used BA alongside more traditional programs. 

I also gave it a shot for my daughter when she returned to full-time homeschooling from a homeschool hybrid program where I thought she was doing well in math. It turns out, her foundation was very shaky and BA was not a good fit for her. 

[madteaparty]

It’s very puzzley, especially (?) in upper level. A bit over the top so, in my opinion. If you just want to do math and be done with it, this would not be a great fit. 
we don’t find the sections hard, but learning a puzzle type (split rectangles in three? How and why? Reminds me that Schitt’s creek fold the cheese episode 🤪) is not fun for us particularly 

[Janeway]

2 hours ago, shawthorne44 said:

BA has a central philosophy that you need to stretch yourself.   If you get all the math problems correct, then the problems are too easy.   This isn't true of most math.   It might be that your older kids aren't used to that.  That is something I love about BA.  Kids that think they need to get everything right all the time become the classic underachievers because they don't try stuff if they think they can't get it right and quickly.    Struggle is good.  

It could also be the level.   Did the older kids take  the level placement tests?  

I started the older kids below their levels as it was suggested to do that in order to get them used to the puzzle fashion.

[SoCal_Bear]

It's a math curriculum that was developed for math adept students who need little repetition. It introduces depth which these students need. Unfortunately, far too many people don't understand that aspect of this curriculum and use it with students would need far more repetition. I have a gifted math learner but I never used it stand alone. I used it a level behind Singapore Math to introduce depth and interest, but I never used it stand alone. Philosophically, I subscribe more to the school of though that fluidity comes through familiarity. I don't drill and kill, but I believe that there is a certain level of mastery that comes only after you put in signficant time and effort. I recognize this is more in line culturally with my Asian background, but I don't agree with what goes on as the norm overseas in Asia around education.

[El...]

What everyone else said. Just gotta add how much we love it. 😉 If it fits, it's fabulous. 

[Shoes+Ships+SealingWax]

4 hours ago, elroisees said:

What everyone else said. Just gotta add how much we love it. 😉 If it fits, it's fabulous. 

Yes - this is us, as well. My mathy DS9 absolutely adores Beast Academy. It suits him in a way that nothing else has come close to replicating. So incredibly thankful for AOPS/BA! 

[OnceUponAFullMoon]

BA is a complete and strong program. However my son prefers AOPS (the upper level of BA) more because it's more straightforward, fewer distractions, less puzzle-style🤷. 

[Mom_to3]

We've used it as an almost stand alone curriculum for kid 2 (discovered it a bit on the late side for kid1). Starting with kid 3. What we did add was occasional addition and multiplication sheets to make sure those basic skills get enough practice. I am also so, so grateful to Beast Academy and AoPS. It's made me feel so much better about homeschooling.

[blueberrygirl]

We've been using it for 3 years. I do think it's a stand-alone resource; however, I also don't think any resource is enough on its own. You'll probably have to add in extra practice with math facts, and I like to keep a list of review topics that I cycle through so ds doesn't forget. For instance, one chapter in BA3 covers square roots and introduces a lot of ways to work with them. Once a week or so, I include one of those problems to keep the ideas fresh. 

BA requires kids to think deeply about math in a way that's similar to Singapore's Challenging Word Problems. My son has better number sense than I do. I still have to work problems out with the standard algorithm while he's able to shift numbers around in his head. 

In addition to BA, we worked through Danica Keller's addition/subtraction and mutiplication books, do lots and lots and lots of math games, use the Hands-On Equations app and verbal problem books, do some Math for Love, work with Cuisenaire rods a la Gattengo, read math books, and do some fun data projects. All of this probably isn't necessary, but I have major FOMO when it comes to math curricula. 

[Xahm]

I have two students currently using Beast, and I am confident both would qualify for gifted programs at the local schools (one was id'ed before being homeschooled; the other was never in school). My fourth grader is currently finishing up level 4, working independently with occasional clarification when she gets stuck on an idea. We have taken time off to do some Math Mammoth to allow for more practice with multiplication, and she did a couple of the harder (for her) chapters both online and in the BA books. She also plays Prodigy for fun, but not as often as she used to. Her skills are solid and she now easily makes the intuitive jumps the program depends on. My second grader is well into level 3. He started level 2 as a first grader and I let him move as slowly as he needed to, but he hasn't needed to take time off. We're currently in the perfect squares chapter. He kind of hates the focus on clever tricks in this chapter, but he still shows pride and confidence when he has a concept mastered, so I am happy to make him keep doing it. Learning the "clever tricks" is not the only point of the chapter, though. It also is great for having them develop thinking skills and practice their basic multiplication, addition, and subtraction skills. He has some independent practice of multiplication facts, but that's more because he does online and I want to make sure he doesn't forget how to write his numbers and keeps getting handwriting practice in areas that are easy to him. He plays plenty of Prodigy for fun. Between all these things, he's absorbed his basic math facts well and easily.

I don't know if any of that is relevant to your situation, but it is our experience. I wouldn't expect any curriculum to have the perfect amount of practice for every child, so I'd rather do one that lets me add in practice where needed than overwhelms my children and looks like it will take forever.

[Sarah0000]

Most of the puzzles are designed to practice basic operations after learning them in a straight forward way. It is not just a puzzle side thing. Yes, I use it as a standalone because the online version is so independent, but that's after my kids have a very solid, conceptual understanding of all the basic topics. I primarily use Singapore 1-3 and Miquon before going independent with BA. But, we always have additional side math things going on, books, projects, etc. Just not a complete supplemental program.

[Emily ZL]

I personally don't have time to do multiple math curricula so my kids can get all kinds of extra math practice from multiple angles. For us, Beast Academy did not do a good job laying a solid foundation, even though my son was solving the problems correctly. Some people are whole-to-parts learners who love to "discover the principle for themselves" and some are parts-to-whole learners who don't. Just don't fall into the trap that says AoPS/BA is the only way for mathy kids and teaches them problem solving skills, whereas other programs just teach rote memorization. That's just not true. Lots of kids who love math do not fit well with an inductive approach, and that's ok, it doesn't mean they aren't mathy enough. Sometimes you just have to try some things and see how your kid is doing with it.

[daijobu]

Thanks for posting this, @Emily ZL.   I feel like I dodged a bullet because BA hadn't been published when my kids were in elementary and we used Singapore before switching to AoPS PreA.  The transition was seamless, and Singapore was straightforward, just the facts, ma'am, math.  

I wonder now how we would have fared with BA, and I'm really glad we chose our path.  

[Malam]

On 5/29/2023 at 10:34 PM, persom said:

beast academy is a huge disappointment. 

Can you expand on why?

[Aliqout]

I think some give up on BA/AOPS too soon. 

What is sometimes identified as not having a solid foundation is just not memorizing facts at the same pace as old fashion school learning. 

A good example of this is multiplication. BA moves on from basic multiplication long before most kids have memorized many multiplication facts. The important multiplication lesson is what multiplication is, how it works, and how to figure out what 6×3 is  without resorting memorization. Memorization comes with use through the months or years. In fact, one of the first mutilation lessons builds the multiplication table that is ment to be available for use from then on. 

I also don't understand what people mean when they say a kid is good at math but doesn't like the inductive approach. Inductive thinking it what mathematics is. You can memorize algorithms, formula and arithmetic facts without inductive thinking, but thats as much mathematics as engineering is physics, or technical writing is poetry. 

The goal in teaching mathematics is to teach logical inductive critical thinking skills. We often fail at this and fall back on the minimum skills skills in applying facts to get by in life.

To be clear, all this is not to say that BA in the only way, or even the best way,  but to say BA's intentions are in the right place.  We shouldn't give up on teaching the heart of mathematics before we even try. What most of us had in school shouldn't be good enough for our kids if we  have the resources to provide better.

Edited June 12, 2023 by Aliqout

[Not_a_Number]

23 hours ago, Aliqout said:

The goal in teaching mathematics is to teach logical inductive critical thinking skills.

I'm a mathematician, and yeah . . . when I started doing this, I naively assumed that's most people's goal in teaching math. I love math for teaching how to think. 

That hasn't been my experience either with school or with homeschoolers, though. Generally, people teach math like anything else -- there's a set of skills and facts you're supposed to master, and that's the end goal. If you pick up anything else along the way, it's a bonus.

[FreyaO]

On 6/11/2023 at 8:23 PM, Aliqout said:

I also don't understand what people mean when they say a kid is good at math but doesn't like the inductive approach. Inductive thinking it what mathematics is. You can memorize algorithms, formula and arithmetic facts without inductive thinking, but thats as much mathematics as engineering is physics, or technical writing is poetry. 

 

I don't disagree with your post and my thoughts may have more to do with the constructivist approach that seems to be very popular nowadays, rather than with BA per se:

Some people instinctively think bottom-to-top and some top-to-bottom. Details to big picture or the other way around (I don't have any science to support that, just my observations). 

For the second type of thinker, it's very frustrating to built a system, slowly, from nothing. These kids see the holes and question: OK, I found this, but what when X? What if Y? Some kids function better when given an overall structure and can then fill in the details. See the connections. See where everything falls within the structure. 

Probably the two are not exclusive and I'm not really thinking exclusively of Math. But if you have a kid who is engaged by the discovery of connections, especially intricate or distant or unexpected, I think it makes sense to provide externally the structure that will allow the exploration. Front-load many concepts even if the grasp is incomplete to allow for more time to explore instead of wait to built full mastery of X from zero. 

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, FreyaO said:

I don't disagree with your post and my thoughts may have more to do with the constructivist approach that seems to be very popular nowadays, rather than with BA per se:

Some people instinctively think bottom-to-top and some top-to-bottom. Details to big picture or the other way around (I don't have any science to support that, just my observations). 

For the second type of thinker, it's very frustrating to built a system, slowly, from nothing. These kids see the holes and question: OK, I found this, but what when X? What if Y? Some kids function better when given an overall structure and can then fill in the details. See the connections. See where everything falls within the structure. 

Probably the two are not exclusive and I'm not really thinking exclusively of Math. But if you have a kid who is engaged by the discovery of connections, especially intricate or distant or unexpected, I think it makes sense to provide externally the structure that will allow the exploration. Front-load many concepts even if the grasp is incomplete to allow for more time to explore instead of wait to built full mastery of X from zero. 

I think most people think both ways, to be honest. They both need the big idea and a lot of experimentation with that idea at the detail level. At least, that's what I've found. 

[Clarita]

1 hour ago, Not_a_Number said:

I'm a mathematician, and yeah . . . when I started doing this, I naively assumed that's most people's goal in teaching math. I love math for teaching how to think. 

That hasn't been my experience either with school or with homeschoolers, though. Generally, people teach math like anything else -- there's a set of skills and facts you're supposed to master, and that's the end goal. If you pick up anything else along the way, it's a bonus.

With my eldest clearly mathy child, I definitely teach thinking stuff, grit and other things alongside the math. Young me would feel like everyone should learn math this way because it's the best way, meaning that's how people who are good at math would do it and thrive therefore everyone should do it that way.

The older I get though the more I realize that a lot of school subjects are must know (for life) and some people just need to learn some of these subjects as skills and never need to make it anything more. Maybe it's easier for me because as much as math is just a skill set to some people. That's language arts/writing for me. I only have a need to be able to write and be literate to survive daily life and get a job. There is grander things I could aspire to, but honestly I'd rather spend that effort doing something else. Now that I'm a grown adult I'm OK that I'm not a good writer and that I can't hold a conversation about most classic literature (even the few I've read). I just think that some people think that about math.

[Not_a_Number]

2 minutes ago, Clarita said:

With my eldest clearly mathy child, I definitely teach thinking stuff, grit and other things alongside the math. Young me would feel like everyone should learn math this way because it's the best way, meaning that's how people who are good at math would do it and thrive therefore everyone should do it that way.

The older I get though the more I realize that a lot of school subjects are must know (for life) and some people just need to learn some of these subjects as skills and never need to make it anything more. Maybe it's easier for me because as much as math is just a skill set to some people. That's language arts/writing for me. I only have a need to be able to write and be literate to survive daily life and get a job. There is grander things I could aspire to, but honestly I'd rather spend that effort doing something else. Now that I'm a grown adult I'm OK that I'm not a good writer and that I can't hold a conversation about most classic literature (even the few I've read). I just think that some people think that about math.

I guess I tend to think that you need to understand the math well to use the math comfortably, so I don't think it's something limited to mathy kids. Although, yes, the goals are very different for kids for whom it doesn't come naturally. 

But then I've met too many adults who don't remember anything about fractions, and I'm sure they could have done it by rote once. 

[Clarita]

2 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

But then I've met too many adults who don't remember anything about fractions, and I'm sure they could have done it by rote once. 

I also remember helping my fellow students in middle school and high school going we took/are taking the same class how is it that I understand this and you don't?!

I haven't interacted with enough people and know how they were taught math to make a real conclusion either way though. 

[TheAttachedMama]

On 2/27/2022 at 6:05 PM, daijobu said:

Thanks for posting this, @Emily ZL.   I feel like I dodged a bullet because BA hadn't been published when my kids were in elementary and we used Singapore before switching to AoPS PreA.  The transition was seamless, and Singapore was straightforward, just the facts, ma'am, math.  

I wonder now how we would have fared with BA, and I'm really glad we chose our path.  

Our experience is similar.   I have NO regrets using Singapore math.  NONE.  It is a very complete program and prepared my students well for AOPS. And AOPS prepared my students very well for college level math.  

Beast academy was just coming out when my older kids were going through elementary school math.   I used it for awhile with my oldest son in either 3rd or 4th grade.   It is a fun math, and my son loved it.   However, I found that my student (personally) needed more practice with the fundamentals. (Maybe not all students are this way.).  Beast was mostly a creative problem solving book focused on puzzles.   But it lacked a lot of practice in some areas.    So I felt like I needed to supplement Beast. (I could have chosen to supplement Beast with some fundamental workbooks that gave extra practice.  And if I could have found the time to do TWO math programs, it would have been awesome to do both Singapore and Beast.  They both would complement each other.)  However, I opted for shorter school days and just did Singapore.  I have NO regrets.    

BTW--There are many different flavors of Singapore math.   We always used the Singapore primary standards version (the old one).    We supplemented with old Math Counts tests for an extra challenge and to review.   Once my students finish 5B, we move to AOPS Pre-Algebra.   The only thing that we needed to teach at home in addition to Singapore was a bit more practice multiplying and dividing with negative numbers.  

Edited June 30, 2023 by TheAttachedMama

[chiguirre]

Thanks @daijobu and @TheAttachedMama for your thoughts. I'm homeschooling and soon to be afterschooling my 9yo nephew and we've been using Primary Standards 3 this past 3 months. We went through it quickly because he had already done most of third grade math but I wanted to make sure he was solid and had covered all the American curriculum. I've been contemplating Beast Academy for afterschooling but I've been hesitant. I'd prefer a complete open and go program that will cover all the math that his ESL class may or may not cover to keep him on track. Thanks for validating my preference!!!