Ugh, our school just switched to Everyday Math

[Anonymous]

From what I have read about it on here and other places, this is not a good thing. Does anybody like this math program? Are other schools using a different program still? I think our school was using Pathways to Success (Burdett) before. That seemed pretty normal, but I'm scared about Everyday Math because of what I've read. Are the GT Centers using this, too? My child is doing local level IV so we can always switch schools next year if the math program is bettter. Any input?

[Anonymous]

My DD just switched from our Local Level IV last year (3rd) to our AAP Center (4th grade). Last year the school used a very hybrid approach, a little Silver Burdett Ginn, M3 (Mentoring Mathematical Minds) and Hands on Equations and other stuff. Our center will mainly be using Silver Burdett Ginn 5th grade book (4th grade class), a little M3 and a little Hands on Equations.

[Anonymous]

I work with educators who provide professional development for math teachers. Their take on Everyday Math is that is it a fine program; the issue is that the teachers teaching it need to be trained on it well (which often does not happen) and need to really understand math (again, often not the case with math teachers.) Everyday Math is about using different approaches to solve math problems and applying math to "every day" situations, etc...if the teachers uses the materials just as a worksheet then it is not a very good math program. If the teacher uses the materials to talk about math conceptually and demonstrates the underlying concepts in the math (and supplements it with other materials), then it is just fine. I would be much more worried about the quality of the math teachers at your school than the specific program they are using.

[Anonymous]

For my first grader: Any suggestions as to what I can use to build vocabulary, analogies, antonyms, etc

thanks in advance.

[Anonymous]

reading to him and using the different words will build their vocabulary easily.

[Anonymous]

The AAP Center at Louise Archer uses Everyday Math. I have not been very happy with the math program. I don't like the "spiraling" approach. Master something and then move on sequentially to the next thing; don't dabble in everything but master nothing and plan to get back to it in 6th grade. I also get frustrated that they teach 3, 4, 5 different ways to solve everything instead of teaching basic algorithms. I completed AP calculus in high school so I should be able to do 5th grade math, but I struggle to figure out what the hell they are talking about half the time, with all the cutesy new names and labels this program uses.

[Anonymous]

I'm the oddball that likes Everyday Math. I spoke with a math teacher that I met randomly and she said a lot of math teachers like it. As the PP above said, it depends on whether they are well trained.

[Anonymous]

I abhor Everyday Math.

In first grade, my very math-inclined student would get so confused because they wouldn't let you just add and subtract (which she knew how to do quite well). They would give you a grid of boxes and have you hop back and forth and then ask how many boxes you hopped. It drove her crazy. I just told her to write the problem out in the margin and solve it and she was much happier after that.

They try to use all these cute activites to teach math, when it really just adds confusion and stress. Nowhere else in life will a child see a "frames and arrows" problem or a "in and out machine" problem. The program tries to teach math without really teaching math.

When my daughter switched schools in 3rd grade for AAP, we were pleased to find out that Haycock does not use Everyday Math. (but disappointed to find out that she was behind the game in math a bit because of Everyday Math. The second grade Everyday Math curriculum doesn't teach typical carrying an borrowing (they use something called "whole number" addition and subtraction) and I had to backpedal a bit at home to catch her up.

However, after a year using Silver Burdett Ginn and M3 Math, she has fallen back in love with math. We have honestly considered moving to avoid Everyday Math for our younger child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I abhor Everyday Math.

In first grade, my very math-inclined student would get so confused because they wouldn't let you just add and subtract (which she knew how to do quite well). They would give you a grid of boxes and have you hop back and forth and then ask how many boxes you hopped. It drove her crazy. I just told her to write the problem out in the margin and solve it and she was much happier after that.

They try to use all these cute activites to teach math, when it really just adds confusion and stress. Nowhere else in life will a child see a "frames and arrows" problem or a "in and out machine" problem. The program tries to teach math without really teaching math.

When my daughter switched schools in 3rd grade for AAP, we were pleased to find out that Haycock does not use Everyday Math. (but disappointed to find out that she was behind the game in math a bit because of Everyday Math. The second grade Everyday Math curriculum doesn't teach typical carrying an borrowing (they use something called "whole number" addition and subtraction) and I had to backpedal a bit at home to catch her up.

However, after a year using Silver Burdett Ginn and M3 Math, she has fallen back in love with math. We have honestly considered moving to avoid Everyday Math for our younger child.

I think th epoint of EDM, though, is to understand the concept, not just memorize the math facts. So maybe your daughter understood the facts, but the point was to be able to conceptualize the process. Not a dig on your child at all. i was just trying to point out the theory (or value) behind EDM. I understand not every system works for every child and it sounds like EDM was not what your child could relate to. I think M3 is pretty cool, too, though.

[Anonymous]

I'm the OP. Our teacher is very strong and has an excellent reputation, but this is a brand new program for the 3rd graders so it's new to her. I just found out our AAP Center used Everyday Math, too so I guess we don't have much choice. I haven't looked at the book so I have no opinion about the program except what I have heard about it. Funny thing is, we may be moving next year and when I went on a forum in that new town, the people there were also discussing how they dislike Everyday Math. For a program that has so many critics, it seems to be very popular in the schools.

[Anonymous]

I used to hate EDM as I had all the concerns voiced here and on related threads. My child has been taught with EDM for 3 years ... starting his 4th year now, and I have come to really like it. Here's why:

-- The point of EDM (I think!) is for kids to really understand what they are doing with the numbers ... not just plug into an efficient algorythm that works each and every time but is not understood. This obviously requires teachers that also have that level of understanding ... not always the case.

-- The spiral part of it seems to work well ... for children who "get" a concept easily, they are not required to do sheet and sheet after sheet of a concept that they know how to do ... tedious. For children who are not yet ready for a concept ... they get an exposure to the idea, mull it over and try it a bit, but are not forced to "get" it completely until they are ready, which may be next year.

-- Memorization of basic math facts DOES happen, either painlessly through the playing of math "games" and/or with the supplementation worksheets provided now and then but not every day by teachers. Again, this requires good teachers.

I think the reason most people don't like EDM is because they know that probably 90 percent of kids will not grow up and pursue a college major and/or career where they will need to be good theoretical mathematicians ... the bulk of kids just need to know how to do the basics well and quickly. But I think there is value to having more kids actually understand math ... how do you know whether your child will be one of the few who actually will benefit from knowing math at a more theoretical level??? The efficiency we want are kids to achieve in math will come with appropriate time and practice ... I have decided to trust the program for now. Like I have a choice!! Starting in 6th grade ... my child will be in a more traditional, linear style of math. The kids at his school do not seem to be behind in their math skills ... they get very good standardized test scores, etc.

It is the TEACHERS that matter most ... not just the textbook or approach.

[Anonymous]

PP again ... sorry for all the spelling errors ... good thing I was discussing math and not language arts!!

[Anonymous]

9:04 here

Actually, my daughter has had no problem with math concepts. The problem was not in understanding, but that the EM methods leave a lot of room for error...and specifically errors that have nothing to do with understanding or applying math.

Everyone learns differently, and I am sure that EM works well for some kids...but that was not the case for mine.

And as for math facts, there is absolutely no memorization of math facts in EM (at least up to 2nd grade). A teacher may choose to supplement with math facts, but it is not a required part of the curriculum. We found that children at other schools were memorizing addition and subtraction facts, and even moving on toward multiplication facts in second grade, but with our EM curriculum there was no memorization.

I agree that understanding concepts can be more important than memorizing facts, but when you get out of EM and on to higher level math, if you don't have that fact base, you are going to be behind the curve.

[Anonymous]

I am a Computational physicist with a 3rd grader in the LA aap program. From what I have seen so far, everyday math looks great. I like the spiral approach -- in most areas of life, it is the most efficient approach to problem solving. Plus, if a child does not grasp something the first time, they are not lost for ever. I hated memorizing the math facts as a kid...it is much more important to u derstand what the math means.

[Anonymous]

My 4th grader is also in the aap program and has had EM since kindergarten. I like the conceptual approach of EM. The only problem that we had with it was that the pace of it was way too slow before he started the aap program. It would have worked better for him if he could have just skipped first grade EM and moved right to second grade. The spiral approach would have allowed him to backtrack to fill in his few gaps during second grade.

We did supplement fast recall of multiplication and division math facts using computer games, but only for a few minutes a day for a month or so.