Jump to content

Menu

Teaching Textbooks - ready for college math


Recommended Posts

My son has used TT for Algebra I and II, Geometry and is now 3/4 way through the Pre-Calc. Math is not his strong area and their explanations for all problems helps him (and Mom). He tested to enter our local CC for classes last spring (before he had pre-calc) and he just missed placing into Calc. This was much better than I expected because Math is really not his strong area. Based on our experience. I highly recommend them. But I know my son won't be majoring in math or science areas so we were satisfied with his knowledge and the results. Hope this helps some.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, my dd hasn't taken the placement test for cc yet, but she is half-way through the TT Trig/PreCalc book having already taken TT algebra 1, TT algebra 2, and TT geometry.

 

While she was doing the geometry book I had her do one lesson per day from Life of Fred Advanced Algebra (which took less than 30 mins each) just to keep her algebra skills current while doing geometry. She liked the LOF book since it was so fun.

 

Right now I have her prepping once a week for the ACT coming up in April. She is taking ACT practice tests and took her first one last Saturday. Now, she is recovering from major surgery (just under 5 weeks post) and didn't feel very well the day we did these.....and she still scored 37 on the math section. I was very, very pleased.

 

I think she'll do just fine having gone the TT route. But I do think the key is to finish all their books as they do have a different scope and sequence than most texts ; and they are very up-front about this so it shouldn't surprise anyone.

 

I was really happy to read that kids placed into cc Calculus after finishing these texts! Hope my dd has the same results....that would be SO cool. :001_smile:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's encouraging. Did you do anything else for Math ?

 

The only other thing we did for math was the Chalkdust SAT review. Oh, he also used Chalkdust geometry (from the library). He would have preferred TT geometry, but I couldn't afford it at the time.

 

He did TT alg. 1 and 2 thoroughly. Skimmed through TT Pre-calc. Took the placement test at the local cc and scored very well.

 

He just took his first calculus test yesterday (on his 18th bday), so we'll see how we're doing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is very good news to hear. Thank you for posting the question.

 

My son has taken TT Algebra I and now is in Geometry. After hearing what others had to say previously, I felt that I was failing him. It's good to hear the positive reactions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes - all the "opinions" about TT can be quite misleading.

 

In the end, the most important question is whether or not the student was prepared for college math courses, and specifically which course.

 

Some people on this board are anti-TT because they are of the opinion that it is not challenging enough,

but if the student is well-prepared for college, then that is what counts.

 

I am hoping to hear from more whose children have done TT all the way through, and particularly into which college math course they were accepted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a bump...We are using TT Algebra 1 (Dd loves it).

The negative comments sure made me question our choice. But we tried VT, LOF, Saxon without success. She is also young (11)

I know someone here wrote that her son was accepted into pharmacy school (having completed TT through pre-calc), so although not a personal achievement of our family, we can count on "another TT graduate getting into college" from our "big WTM family!":001_smile:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but if the student is well-prepared for college, then that is what counts.

 

Well, not necessarily :)

 

It seems to me on this board that a rigorous and comprehensive math program is more desireable than one that will "prepare the student for college" as any math program will do that if you master the material.

 

I've gleaned that Teaching Textbooks is for those who "just" want to be prepared for that college math placement exam and not for those you want the most rigorous and comprehensive math program in high school.

 

TT seems to at least "teach to the (placement) test" which can be a good thing.

The placement tests I imagine would cover key core concepts listing basic problems.... not the most thought-provoking, thought-requiring, rigorous, comprehensive application-type problems that would also test that skill/concept.

 

So it does kind of depend on what your goals as far as whether TT will be a good choice or not.

 

I asked the same question about TT last semester but the response was TT PreCalc was "too new" and so there wasn't much experience, proven track record with it yet. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I'll have to say about TT is that it does foster an interest in the subject. When my dc used Saxon, most of them found it to be extremely tiresome and it really did kill any love for math. DD who is doing TT Precalculus this year just loves the course and is actually excited about her math lessons. Whereas is the past it was sheer drugery and torture. When she used TT Geometry last year, she felt that it helped contribute to her good SAT score. Using TT solidified in her mind concepts she that were a jumbled mess from when she had used Saxon. She can finally see the sequence and order of concepts and how they are related to one another. That means alot to me and I think it will be a good prep for college, because she finally understands it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've gleaned that Teaching Textbooks is for those who "just" want to be prepared for that college math placement exam and not for those you want the most rigorous and comprehensive math program in high school.

 

TT seems to at least "teach to the (placement) test" which can be a good thing.

The placement tests I imagine would cover key core concepts listing basic problems.... not the most thought-provoking, thought-requiring, rigorous, comprehensive application-type problems that would also test that skill/concept.

 

Can I guess from this post that you have formed this opinion from other people's posts and not from actually having used it.

From responses on this thread it seems that those who are or have actually used TT are having very positive results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I guess from this post that you have formed this opinion from other people's posts

 

Yes, that that is what I meant by glean...I meant from reading posts here.

 

From responses on this thread it seems that those who are or have actually used TT are having very positive results

 

Just to clarify, "positive results" is a term that can be defined differently and in the eye of the beholder, and even the experience designated "positive results" may well not be in the goal of (or only goal of) a lot of the folks who post on this board.

 

I will agree that folks here who use TT and remain using TT are happy with the progress, the caliber of the daily assignments, and the results.

 

:seeya:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you happen to notice that the 95 lessons take almost 900 pages?????

 

No. I just noticed the 95 lessons

 

NO, it's not a one-semester course

 

It's not intended to be one lesson per day?

The A2 course is 130 lessons which is about the same number of lessons for other year-long books.

 

Is Pre-Calc not intended to be one lesson per day?

I realize you said it's 900 pages, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's still not intended to be one lesson per day (at nine pages per day). I haven't owned/help the Pre-Calc program. I don't know how it's set up.

 

My understanding it is not (or has not been) uncommon for Pre-Calc to be only one semester.

 

:seeya:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, that that is what I meant by glean...I meant from reading posts here.

 

Just to clarify, "positive results" is a term that can be defined differently and in the eye of the beholder, and even the experience designated "positive results" may well not be in the goal of (or only goal of) a lot of the folks who post on this board. :

 

We need to be careful about forming our own opinions from other's opinions - especially those who haven't actually used a program.

Hence my original question. It was an attempt to get an objective measure of whether or not TT has "positive results".

 

One way to measure TT objectively would be to find out into which college math classes students are accepted after having used TT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe, though, it might also be a good idea to ask how the students did when they actually took the courses, not just where they tested into? My son took the CC placement test and placed into pre-calc WAY before he was ready. I knew that and taught him math at home for another year before I let him take the precalc course, and he still has to work hard at it and needs a bit of help here and there. Now, this might just be my particular student, but if I were you, I would want to know both where they placed AND how they did. Just a thought : ) Ignore if not helpful. I know nothing at all about TT. -Nan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need to be careful about forming our own opinions from other's opinions - especially those who haven't actually used a program.

Hence my original question. It was an attempt to get an objective measure of whether or not TT has "positive results".

 

One way to measure TT objectively would be to find out into which college math classes students are accepted after having used TT.

 

:001_huh:

 

This is in part a reason for this board, to be form opinions, and hear opinions (with care), but I would agree and state I am not advocating opinion-forming of the careless manner.

 

I am also agreeing with you that there is ....more than one way... to define positive results.

 

A sufficient score on the college placement exam may well not be one's definition of positive results. A sufficient score on a college placement exam is not the only thing that "counts," as someone indicated.

Other homeschooling parents have other goals, additional goals, and other things "counts" (or can "count") and that is the point I was addressing, and for those parents, TT would not be their first choice.

 

I've owned TT at two different levels. For me it wasn't my first choice, not because my student would/wouldn't be prepared to score well on the college placement exam (any typical math program can do). So that isn't "what counts" . . . And so the point I was making was that there are other things that "count"

 

Perhaps we are agreeing ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I guess from this post that you have formed this opinion from other people's posts .

 

Yes, and I think you formed the same opinion (below)

 

Some people on this board are anti-TT because they are of the opinion that it is not challenging enough,

 

Yes, the opinion group you mention is what I meant.

 

My point was passing a college math placement exam after using TT does not go back and make the TT program more challenging.

 

If there is a parent wanting on a day-to-day basis for 800 school days of high school a program with daily problems that require higher level application, problems that are more challenging, daily, then their first choice wouldn't be TT. And thus scoring on a college math placement exam wouldn't be the only thing that counts in their scenario. And there are many such parents on the board here. You and I have both recotnized this.

 

I see you have a young student, and I am posting in part for the benefit for those K-8 members who come here to read ahead.

So in being "careful" about reading opinions, it helps to know what that homeschooler's goals because it places their opinion in the proper setting.

 

I'ved owned two TT levels two years apart, and while I tried to like them, TT did not fit well into my math goals, because being prepared for a college place exam (at the end of all this) was not the only thing that counted. ;)

 

:seeya:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My dd has used TT Alg. 2 and Geometry. Her SAT math score allowed her to take College Algebra at our cc. Math is not her strongest subject and the class was online, which added to the difficulty for her. Evenso, she made an A in her College Alg. class. Her cc teacher must have been impressed with her work. He wrote her a very nice email at the end of the semester congratulating her on how well she had done in his class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used Saxon through Advanced Math with my older 3 children, but knew it would not be a good fit for my youngest son, a late reader with dysgraphic weaknesses. I posted on the old board for insight, and got some great suggestions from LoriM.

 

Here's what we did:

1. TT Algebra 1+2 in 8th and 9th

 

2. MEP Math for Geometry supplemented with Aleks over two summers

 

3. MUS Precalc in 10th supplemented with Aleks (TT Precalc wasn't available in complete form when ds was in 10th

.

4. This year (11th) precalc divided over two semesters at community college, both semester courses using the Hornsby Lial text, Precalc a Unit Circle Approach.

 

Results and Plans

1. Tested into calculus after completing MUS precalc. I talked to one staff member and 2 profs about the Compass scores and they all said to go straight to calc as they considered the scores very high.

 

2. I chose to do the year long cc precalc to make sure all was solid, especially wanting ds to experience the heavy use of the graphing calculator and to ramp up to doing an increased number of problems daily before calculus. My decision was sealed when LoriM had posted sometime last year that her daughter did cc precalc even though she had an excellent high school prep through calculus. Ds received an A last semester in College Algebra with Limits. His prof told him he was an excellent student and was either 1st or 2nd in rank in the class.

 

3. This semester ds is continuing through the Hornsby/Lial text via the five credit course, Trig and Analytical Geometry. Ds just completed the first exam and got an A.

 

4. Next year, as homeschool senior, ds plans to take Calc 1 and 2 at cc.

His current plan is to major in finance, possibly with a math minor. He is also considering computer science. We will be looking at texts when he moves to a four year college for his freshman year. I've considered having him start the calc sequence with Calc II, as a freshman to make sure he is solid before going into Calc III.

 

 

 

5. For our situation, the "math lite" sequence with about 60 hours of Aleks supplementation has worked out well. We had for more math discussion since we werenĂ¢â‚¬â„¢t doing as many extensive math calculations. And now ds can get used to doing those pages of calculations while feeling confident of his mathematical ability.

 

Although most on this board will benefit from one of the more rigorous college prep math programs, I wanted to share my experience in case there are others who need to choose a less rigorous route to better fit thier children's unique needs.

 

Jolene

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used Saxon through Advanced Math with my older 3 children, but knew it would not be a good fit for my youngest son, a late reader with dysgraphic weaknesses. I posted on the old board for insight, and got some great suggestions from LoriM.

 

<snip>...My decision was sealed when LoriM had posted sometime last year that her daughter did cc precalc even though she had an excellent high school prep through calculus. Ds received an A last semester in College Algebra with Limits. His prof told him he was an excellent student and was either 1st or 2nd in rank in the class.

 

 

 

I wanted to comment that I never used TT myself for either of my daughters (although I did tutor several students who used it), but did find that teaching my daughter through Calculus AB at home (by age 15), then backing up to College Algebra/PreCalculus/Statistics/Calc I at the community college has given my daughter an outstanding foundation in mathematics. She's a math major now at the university, and continues to hold onto her 4.0 GPA (even with her art courses). She's taking Differential Equations and Advanced Calculus this semester. I told her she's rapidly reaching the point in undergraduate math that I will have to spend (unwanted) hours in review in order to help her--GRIN. She loves the idea that she is "outdistancing" me in math! She will graduate in December 2009 with a BA in mathematics (minor in art). She intends to pursue graduate study in ART, not mathematics, much to my chagrin.

 

I do want to encourage any of you "non-math" moms out there to push your child to a point of failure (LOL) at home, then allow them to back up and rebuild confidence and competence at the CC if possible. My daughter really felt incompetent in mathematics, and we did "Calculus Lite" at home, where she primarily copied my solutions to problems and tried to follow along, more than generating her own problem solutions. And yet, here she is, four years later, studying mathematics successfully. She is quick to say that she is a math major NOT because of me or anything we did at home (sigh), but because once she got to the CC, she realized she was better prepared than she thought...since she was not competing with ME, but with her peers.

 

Personally, I think she learned to work diligently with self-reliance at home, and then took that to the CC where she was seen as a superior student, and proceeded to transfer that over to the university. :)

 

Congrats to your son, Joleen!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do want to encourage any of you "non-math" moms out there to push your child to a point of failure (LOL) at home, then allow them to back up and rebuild confidence and competence at the CC if possible.

 

Maybe you aren't talking to me since being a math major myself I would be considered a 'mathy' mom, but I can not imagine the point in pushing a child with the point of breaking their confidence and spirit. Having had that happen to me in school, it is not a character building experience for most kids - it's just an unnecessary destruction of their self-esteem. I went through one of the most rigorous programs available for math in high school. Sure it made math in college pretty easy for me but it didn't wipe away the 4 years I spent in high school thinking I was an idiot when I wasn't.

 

Heather

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe you aren't talking to me since being a math major myself I would be considered a 'mathy' mom, but I can not imagine the point in pushing a child with the point of breaking their confidence and spirit. Having had that happen to me in school, it is not a character building experience for most kids - it's just an unnecessary destruction of their self-esteem. I went through one of the most rigorous programs available for math in high school. Sure it made math in college pretty easy for me but it didn't wipe away the 4 years I spent in high school thinking I was an idiot when I wasn't.

 

Heather

 

I'm sure this is one of those times that the written word isn't translating well what I intended in my message. As one of the most moderate educators I know--relaxed classical was my mantra at home, and "if I can, anyone can" is my classroom motto!--I am OF COURSE not recommending that anyone truly break their child's spirit. But I do fully believe that part of success in mathematics (and really, anything) is struggle and work, which is never easy. So, there is some necessary feeling of "I'm never going to be able to do this" right before the ta-da moment. I think it's okay to have plenty of the "never gonna get it" feeling while working on high school math. :)

 

What I'm suggesting is that it is good and right for students to attempt work that is "too hard" for them. Work that they don't quite understand. Work that is tough conceptually, and that is tough time-wise. THEN, back up to a reasonable, confident, attainable level, and move back into that formerly-hard stuff...and surprisingly, most of the time, it's now attainable. It's kind of a "running start" at a concept.

 

I just hear a lot about people who stop in math because they got lost. And instead of going back and finding the path again, they just quit and went to the car. (GRIN)

 

Instead of that abandonment route, I like to see students retrace their steps a course or two, and move along the path again with more certainty. I don't think it "breaks their spirit" to do that. I do think it rebuilds confidence to see that they CAN do this thing well, and by the time they get back to that thing, it's still working out for 'em.

 

And honestly, it's even harder for kids with mathy moms. We make the math look easy. When they come to us with a problem, we say things like, "Oh, that's this kind of problem. You'll see plenty of these. Here's all you do..." and solve. They don't see us struggle. So, the message they receive is that they aren't quite as good at math as we are (and perhaps, as anyone is).

 

Anyway, YMMV. But for me and my house, we go all the way to Calculus at home...then start "over" at College Algebra in the CC. It's a fast-paced review, solidifies concepts, builds good college habits, and in my dd's case, gives her a couple of "easy A's" at 16 years old while she's dealing with other developmental stuff. Now at 20, she's still working in math diligently, and most of the time enjoys it. (Despite still having that "I'm never going to get this" feeling regularly in her university math courses...) GRIN.

 

Lori

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But for me and my house, we go all the way to Calculus at home...then start "over" at College Algebra in the CC. It's a fast-paced review, solidifies concepts, builds good college habits

 

 

That makes a lot of sense to me. I never thought of it that way before. Math made a lot more sense to me when I went through it a second time teaching my own dc. Thanks for the insight. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I posted earlier in the thread that DS had tested into Calculus at the local cc after using TT Alg. 1, 2 and Pre-calc.

 

He just got back his first test. The high score for the class was 87; the average was 62. DS got 87.

 

I'm sooooo tired of hearing the TT is "math light" or that "x" program is the most rigorous around. TT has provided my ds with a love of math and a foundation that's solid. He's obviously doing well at the college level (as a high school senior).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Sandy! Have you ever taken a look at Saxon Calc? My ds is LOVING TT also---but of course I worry because I guess I am so easily swayed :glare: So if ds finished through the TT Pre-calc----would he be able to seamlessly enter into Saxon Calc or something like Thinkwell?? I can't afford Chalkdust and we have no CC anywhere remotely close...............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I posted earlier in the thread that DS had tested into Calculus at the local cc after using TT Alg. 1, 2 and Pre-calc.

 

He just got back his first test. The high score for the class was 87; the average was 62. DS got 87.

 

I'm sooooo tired of hearing the TT is "math light" or that "x" program is the most rigorous around. TT has provided my ds with a love of math and a foundation that's solid. He's obviously doing well at the college level (as a high school senior).

 

 

Thank you for taking the time to post this update. I really appreciate hearing your son's experience.

 

Jennie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Sandy! Have you ever taken a look at Saxon Calc? My ds is LOVING TT also---but of course I worry because I guess I am so easily swayed :glare: So if ds finished through the TT Pre-calc----would he be able to seamlessly enter into Saxon Calc or something like Thinkwell?? I can't afford Chalkdust and we have no CC anywhere remotely close...............

 

I didn't really look at much. I knew *I* couldn't possibly teach calculus (couldn't teach algebra for that matter!) and I really wanted ds to have a classroom experience. I'm sorry....I really don't know what to tell you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I posted earlier in the thread that DS had tested into Calculus at the local cc after using TT Alg. 1, 2 and Pre-calc.

 

He just got back his first test. The high score for the class was 87; the average was 62. DS got 87.

 

I'm sooooo tired of hearing the TT is "math light" or that "x" program is the most rigorous around. TT has provided my ds with a love of math and a foundation that's solid. He's obviously doing well at the college level (as a high school senior).

 

Thank you for this encouraging post. :001_smile:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm sooooo tired of hearing the TT is "math light" or that "x" program is the most rigorous around. TT has provided my ds with a love of math and a foundation that's solid. He's obviously doing well at the college level (as a high school senior).

 

:iagree: Preach it sister!

 

I spent the last 15 years hearing the same thing about Learning Language Arts Through Literature.....and my dc excelled/are excelling in college. It gets old, doesn't it?

 

Thanks for the encouraging words. Congratulations to your ds and I am happily keeping my dd working in TT, the best math program for her!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sooooo tired of hearing the TT is "math light" or that "x" program is the most rigorous around.

 

I don't think saying "x is more rigorous than TT" is the same as saying TT is "math light." "Math light" implies that it doesn't measure up to some minimal' date=' required standard ("Now with 30% less math!"), and is thus "not good enough" to be used alone. I can understand why, if you have found it to be a good, sufficient program on its own, you'd be annoyed at people saying that.

 

But saying that TT isn't as rigorous as "x" doesn't have to mean that TT isn't worth doing. I know this is a classical education board, and there is a certain cachet to doing the hardest, most rigorous program in everything, but just because something isn't the most difficult program out there doesn't mean it isn't worth doing.

 

Reading [i']The Iliad[/i] in Greek is "more rigorous" than reading it in translation - but does that make the translation worthless?

 

A calculus-based physics course is "more rigorous" than a conceptual physics course - but does that mean there is no value in just learning the concepts?

 

So super-hard program "x" may very well be "more rigorous" than TT, but that in no way implies that TT is therefore somehow completely unworthy of being used. To turn it around, proponents of TT emphasize TT's superior user friendliness, but that doesn't mean that they are implying that program "x" is so user unfriendly that it is unfit to be used. Besides, no one can do the most rigorous program in everything, anyway, so if using a program that isn't the most rigorous available is somehow a mark of shame, we're all guilty.

 

(I, for one, want the most handhold-y, user friendly art curriculum in existence, and as long as what it teaches is correct, it can be the least rigorous thing in existence, and I will be happy to have it.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I posted earlier in the thread that DS had tested into Calculus at the local cc after using TT Alg. 1, 2 and Pre-calc.

 

He just got back his first test. The high score for the class was 87; the average was 62. DS got 87.

 

I'm sooooo tired of hearing the TT is "math light" or that "x" program is the most rigorous around. TT has provided my ds with a love of math and a foundation that's solid. He's obviously doing well at the college level (as a high school senior).

 

Fantastic !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think saying "x is more rigorous than TT" is the same as saying TT is "math light." "Math light" implies that it doesn't measure up to some minimal, required standard ("Now with 30% less math!"), and is thus "not good enough" to be used alone. I can understand why, if you have found it to be a good, sufficient program on its own, you'd be annoyed at people saying that.

 

But saying that TT isn't as rigorous as "x" doesn't have to mean that TT isn't worth doing. I know this is a classical education board, and there is a certain cachet to doing the hardest, most rigorous program in everything, but just because something isn't the most difficult program out there doesn't mean it isn't worth doing.

 

Reading The Iliad in Greek is "more rigorous" than reading it in translation - but does that make the translation worthless?

 

A calculus-based physics course is "more rigorous" than a conceptual physics course - but does that mean there is no value in just learning the concepts?

 

So super-hard program "x" may very well be "more rigorous" than TT, but that in no way implies that TT is therefore somehow completely unworthy of being used. To turn it around, proponents of TT emphasize TT's superior user friendliness, but that doesn't mean that they are implying that program "x" is so user unfriendly that it is unfit to be used. Besides, no one can do the most rigorous program in everything, anyway, so if using a program that isn't the most rigorous available is somehow a mark of shame, we're all guilty.

 

(I, for one, want the most handhold-y, user friendly art curriculum in existence, and as long as what it teaches is correct, it can be the least rigorous thing in existence, and I will be happy to have it.)

 

I completely agree but unfortunately if you read enough TT posts you'll find that there are many who do mean exactly that - that TT is only good enough if you really don't care much about your child's math education or if you are sure they won't have to take math (or much math) in college. I'm sure that gets very old for users of TT whose students are learning and are going on to successful advanced college math. I don't even use TT and I get sick of hearing it.

 

Congratulations to Sandy in Indy's son. Keep setting that curve!!

 

Heather

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely agree but unfortunately if you read enough TT posts you'll find that there are many who do mean exactly that - that TT is only good enough if you really don't care much about your child's math education or if you are sure they won't have to take math (or much math) in college. I'm sure that gets very old for users of TT whose students are learning and are going on to successful advanced college math. I don't even use TT and I get sick of hearing it.

 

Congratulations to Sandy in Indy's son. Keep setting that curve!!

 

Heather

 

:iagree:

 

(Thanks for the congrats. Not bad for a kid who's taught himself math since the 7th grade!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely agree but unfortunately if you read enough TT posts you'll find that there are many who do mean exactly that - that TT is only good enough if you really don't care much about your child's math education or if you are sure they won't have to take math (or much math) in college.

Oh, I've read them, but I'd consider those opinions to fall under the "TT is math light" umbrella (which are pretty much fightin' words).

 

My point was that many TT supporters (who do deal with lots of the direct, "TT is unworthy" stuff) have become so sensitive to that sort of thing that they equate any mention of "program 'x' is more rigorous than TT" with "TT should never be used". I was trying to show that comparing relative rigor, with TT coming out as the less rigorous option, is *not* the same as making the absolute judgment that TT's level of rigor is insufficient. They are two separate issues. Anyone who says that, "Program 'x' is more rigorous than TT, and therefore TT is insufficient," without any supporting statements like, "Program 'x' has the minimal level of rigor necessary for success," is committing a logical fallacy.

 

(And even if they've constructed a logical argument, it is only as good as the facts it is based on. I've rarely seen anyone say that, "I believe that XYZ is needed to have a sufficient math program. TT does not have that, as shown by A, B, and C." Mostly it seems like, "TT is insufficient - use and bad things will occur! Use 'x' instead - it's a *worthy* program." They don't explain what specific things TT lacks and program 'x' has in a way that would allow for independent verification, nor do they explain what their standard is and why it is a good one.)

 

(Also, is anyone else thoroughly amused by the whole concept of a controversial *math program*? The sheer absurdity makes me giggle every time a TT thread comes up. :tongue_smilie:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, to be fair there ARE people who used the program all the way through and trusted it----only to find out their kids were NOT prepared properly for college math. FWIW---we ARE using TT. It works wonderfully for my dd. BUT---that said, it definitely doesn't cover ALL the topics normally covered per grade level program. The pre-alg definitely does not cover ALL topics that I have seen covered in other Pre-Alg books. I have NO idea if this is good or bad----but I assume the writers of the program would never be so cold as to create a program that would disenfranchise untold numbers of homeschool kids mathematically :001_huh: I have come to find out that phrases like "Created JUST for homeschoolers from the ground up" does NOT mean that ALL homeschoolers need the program!!! This is a sales pitch. TT fills a niche----but not for everyone. But---it is a wonderful, God-send of a program for those of us who have children who need a program like this.

 

And yes---it irritates me when people who have never used the program bash it. My kids LOVE it...........but I still have reservations. After we test in the spring, I will make my final decision for ds. DD is definitely using it still!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is rigorous, but in a gentle manner. I think if you stick with it through pre-calc, consider Algebra 1 and 2 covered.

I have compared many, many math programs and I like it because Dd understands the material. She has looked at others, and "they" make simple formulas/calculations more difficult than they need to be.

 

I had the best Algebra 1 and 2 college instructor. He made Algebra EASY for me! I was the top student (really not bragging but making a point), so I appreciate material presented in a clear, precise format.

From the posts above, TT is working!

thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Just a bump...We are using TT Algebra 1 (Dd loves it).

 

 

We're using TT right now (5 & 7) and it is nice to hear some positive comments since there seem to be so many negative ones.

 

Unrelated question. . .why do I keep seeing "bump" in these posts? What does that mean?:confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unrelated question. . .why do I keep seeing "bump" in these posts? What does that mean?:confused:

 

People use the term bump when they respond to keep a question near the top of the board in the hope that it will get more attention.

 

Regards,

Kareni

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm curious...why not talk objective numbers? For those of you who have used TT, how were your students' SAT math scores? Seems to me we could learn something from that, if people were willing to share. Granted, some kids will do better than others on the SAT, but if there are lots of high scores out there that might reassure those considering the program, don't you think?

 

ETA: There could even be a poll...I have no idea how to set one up, but maybe that would give people anonymity and thus encourage them to share.

 

Ria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DS's SAT math score....680.

 

In fairness, ds did TT Alg. 1 and 2 and part of CD geometry before the SAT. We also used Chalkdust SAT Math Review (briefly) to prepare. He did TT pre-calc after he took the SAT.

 

And again, he had no tutors or teachers....he did it all on his own with absolutely no help from me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Katia

Well, dd won't take her first ACT until April, but in her practice tests so far she has scored 29 and 30.

 

She's used TT Algebra 1 and 2, TT Geometry, LOF Adv. Algebra (although she hasn't finished this one yet, we've used it as a supplement), and she is only on Chapter 7 of TT Trig/PreCalc.

 

HTH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there are some kids who are naturally good at math and who test well that will score high on the SAT/ACT regardless of which program they use. Often you'll see in the testimonials of these products (whether it's TT, CD, Ask Dr. Callahan, etc) that some kids did superb on standardized tests after using their product. I think these kids would likely have done just as well using another product.

 

For those kids who are not so mathy we need to take into consideration their learning style. I have one DD that seems to learn well using TT. My other older kids use CD. My personal choice would be Foerster's because it's my learning style.

 

Just some thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Katia
I think there are some kids who are naturally good at math and who test well that will score high on the SAT/ACT regardless of which program they use. Often you'll see in the testimonials of these products (whether it's TT, CD, Ask Dr. Callahan, etc) that some kids did superb on standardized tests after using their product. I think these kids would likely have done just as well using another product.

 

For those kids who are not so mathy we need to take into consideration their learning style. I have one DD that seems to learn well using TT. My other older kids use CD. My personal choice would be Foerster's because it's my learning style.

 

Just some thoughts.

 

Well, I can tell you my dd is not a mathy kid. She is really struggling through TT Trig/PreCalc but she is bravely marching onward. Her scores, whatever they are, have been hard-earned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...