Math-U-See vs. Singapore Primary Math?

[TheReader]

specifically, if a child were going between the two, would the different styles be confusing? 

I teach at a homeschool co-op/outschool, and I use Singapore Primary Math for my classes (K, 1st, & 2nd Grades); I have a parent who's interested, but uses Math U See at home, and wants to know if I think the switch back & forth between the different styles/different sets of manipulatives will be confusing for a 2nd grader.  

I've never used Math U See  (my kids did Singapore and then Teaching Textbooks, and one used Miquon & Shiller Math), so am not super familiar.  I'm going to talk to a friend that uses it, and do some research, but thought the Hive might have some helpful input on this. 

Anyone who's used both and can weigh in? 

[Janeway]

It won’t hurt to do both at the same time.

[HomeAgain]

MUS is very linear.  Singapore is not. 

I keep wanting to expand on that and I'm faltering, so mind the word salad that follows.

What may end up happening is the child will be very slow in class if it's a 1x/week presentation.  They'll spend 4 days on one operation with a review of previous operations, and then 1 day with you with other material.  There may be gaps or having to work hard at remembering what strategies may have been taught during your work period that were not as explicitly covered in their previous work.  FWIW, much of what Singapore teaches is adaptable to the MUS sequence, and there are similarities that can be woven in like the more abstract bar model to assist with the visual/tactile block building.

I do see a kid who uses other manipulatives during the week and c-rods when I'm with him.  Every single lesson starts with building the staircase for a memory aid.  That staircase will stay in front of him for the entire time of our work period.  My kids who moved over from MUS adapted without issue, but I saw them 3x a week for a long time and then dropped to 2.  We spent 2 months on color work and addition before moving on.

[prairiewindmomma]

I suspect, having used both programs, that the kid who does MUS at home will quickly fall behind the co-op class in terms of exposure. It would actually be VERY good for the child to be in the co-op to have more exposure than just MUS.  Singapore Primary Math 2A and 2B do more with measurement, shapes, mental math, and different operations that MUS Beta. There's more explicit instruction in place value with SM as well. 

Here's the Beta scope and sequence for comparison: https://mathusee.com/products/math-u-see-curriculum/beta/#scope-and-sequence-2-1 

Switching between the manipulatives shouldn't be confusing. 

[TheReader]

21 hours ago, HomeAgain said:

MUS is very linear.  Singapore is not. 

I keep wanting to expand on that and I'm faltering, so mind the word salad that follows.

What may end up happening is the child will be very slow in class if it's a 1x/week presentation.  They'll spend 4 days on one operation with a review of previous operations, and then 1 day with you with other material.  There may be gaps or having to work hard at remembering what strategies may have been taught during your work period that were not as explicitly covered in their previous work.  FWIW, much of what Singapore teaches is adaptable to the MUS sequence, and there are similarities that can be woven in like the more abstract bar model to assist with the visual/tactile block building.

I do see a kid who uses other manipulatives during the week and c-rods when I'm with him.  Every single lesson starts with building the staircase for a memory aid.  That staircase will stay in front of him for the entire time of our work period.  My kids who moved over from MUS adapted without issue, but I saw them 3x a week for a long time and then dropped to 2.  We spent 2 months on color work and addition before moving on.

That's helpful to know, thank you! 

The way I structure my class (yes, once/week) is that I present the materials for Singapore -- teaching the concepts for whatever lesson we're on, the kids work through the concept (so, I teach it, demo it, then we have group & independent practice of it) and then they either do/don't do the work at home for the week. 

If the student is doing primarily MUS at their main math, and Mom doesn't want to actually use Singapore at home, she doesn't have to. I think in this case, the mom is wanting to stick with MUS as their main curriculum, and wants to be sure that one session/week with  me won't throw her child off track with that, more than wondering would the MUS at home confuse her at school. It sounds like that side of things would be fine, and I'm fairly good at adapting the group practice stuff to each kid - I have several that use different stuff at home than we use in class, so they are on a different scope/sequence. I just give them alternate problems to work on the board/during group time, and that works well. 

(My class covers all subjects, so using a different math is still a feasible thing and the kids still get value out of the class)

[TheReader]

20 hours ago, prairiewindmomma said:

I suspect, having used both programs, that the kid who does MUS at home will quickly fall behind the co-op class in terms of exposure. It would actually be VERY good for the child to be in the co-op to have more exposure than just MUS.  Singapore Primary Math 2A and 2B do more with measurement, shapes, mental math, and different operations that MUS Beta. There's more explicit instruction in place value with SM as well. 

Here's the Beta scope and sequence for comparison: https://mathusee.com/products/math-u-see-curriculum/beta/#scope-and-sequence-2-1 

Switching between the manipulatives shouldn't be confusing. 

That is helpful, thank you! I suspect similar, from having had several kids use different programs. Not many are working ahead of Singapore.  The scope/sequence is perfect, though, thank you!