Singapore math

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think a Beast Academy is a full math program. It’s more for going into concepts in a deeper or different way. It won’t teach a full year of math concepts and provide the amount of practice needed for “school math.” They also recommend starting a year behind wherever you are in school (eg if starting in 3rd grade start with level 2), so it won’t necessarily help accelerate into an higher math track either.

AoPS states that, yes, Beast Academy is a full program that covers all topics/standards. That said, it is a different approach that is intended for advanced students. If your child needs a ton of extra practice to grasp basic concepts, it’s not for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Saxon is mastery via a spiral method. The repetition means students know the material very well. It works for a broad range of students.

There is an old 1990s "60 Minutes" episode on Saxon Math available on YouTube. Worth watching even though the video is a bit grainy.

The only I reason I know this was because I was looking at Saxon, but there is old versus new Saxon Math. Apparently people seem to prefer the old Saxon math, but I'm not sure why. I'm assuming the 60 minutes special would apply to the older version of Saxon Math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Saxon is mastery via a spiral method. The repetition means students know the material very well. It works for a broad range of students.

There is an old 1990s "60 Minutes" episode on Saxon Math available on YouTube. Worth watching even though the video is a bit grainy.

The only I reason I know this was because I was looking at Saxon, but there is old versus new Saxon Math. Apparently people seem to prefer the old Saxon math, but I'm not sure why. I'm assuming the 60 minutes special would apply to the older version of Saxon Math.

The homeschool version or edition is the "old" version. This was actually done by John Saxon before his death. His approach integrates geometry across several years (rather than having geometry has an entirely separate course that interrupts). This is still available in print today -- RainbowResource.com is an example of a retailer.

The difference is that "new" Saxon Math was rewritten by other people (after Saxon died) and was significantly changed to appease the multi-state Common Core requirements. Geometry was separated out into a distinct course. This is what shows up first on the new publisher's website.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have been looking for a school which uses Primary Math. That is a very solid curriculum.

Do you mind naming the local DMV schools that use it?

I just double checked and it's actually Math in Focus (which is based on Primary Math). That said, we like it.

Thanks! "Math in Focus" seems popular with many local DMV private schools. We are looking for something much closer to Primary Math, but thanks for checking.

Ad Fontes uses Primary Math Standards Ed. My guess is that other schools with similar vibes (classical and/or homeschool friendly) are your best bet.

We used Primary Math US ed. at home, but settled with a school that uses Math in Focus. I do think it is important not to let the perfect be the enemy of the adequate. PM is better, and occasionally we break it out for summer review, but MiF is sufficiently ok, at least for our purposes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have been looking for a school which uses Primary Math. That is a very solid curriculum.

Do you mind naming the local DMV schools that use it?

I just double checked and it's actually Math in Focus (which is based on Primary Math). That said, we like it.

Thanks! "Math in Focus" seems popular with many local DMV private schools. We are looking for something much closer to Primary Math, but thanks for checking.

Ad Fontes uses Primary Math Standards Ed. My guess is that other schools with similar vibes (classical and/or homeschool friendly) are your best bet.

We used Primary Math US ed. at home, but settled with a school that uses Math in Focus. I do think it is important not to let the perfect be the enemy of the adequate. PM is better, and occasionally we break it out for summer review, but MiF is sufficiently ok, at least for our purposes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought Singapore Math was only recommended if the teacher is trained and if you are using the physical manipulatives. I'm not sure I would do SM at home, given what I have heard, but maybe I am misinformed...

I’m not a teacher, but I have an engineering degree and an MD, and I used to tutor sat math in college. I taught Singapore math to my kids, and I would not recommend doing it unless you fully buy into the bar model, number flexibility, and conceptual mindset that Singapore requires. You have to do it the Singapore way, not the way that we were taught, assuming you went to a normal elementary school in the U.S, like I did.

Let me put it this way, if you cannot explain why, when you divide fractions, you flip the second fraction and then multiply, or if you cannot give a real world example of 3/8 divided by 2/3 without thinking about pies and chocolate bars, then it will require study on your own before teaching it. People without math or teaching backgrounds absolutely do teach Singapore math at home, but either they need to learn the methods, or their kids are not getting the full benefit of conceptual learning because it is not being taught correctly. It’s hard to do. My kids did math in focus at a pricy private school in ny, and I could see that some of the teachers were not teaching it well, which is why I started doing Singapore at home with them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought Singapore Math was only recommended if the teacher is trained and if you are using the physical manipulatives. I'm not sure I would do SM at home, given what I have heard, but maybe I am misinformed...

I’m not a teacher, but I have an engineering degree and an MD, and I used to tutor sat math in college. I taught Singapore math to my kids, and I would not recommend doing it unless you fully buy into the bar model, number flexibility, and conceptual mindset that Singapore requires. You have to do it the Singapore way, not the way that we were taught, assuming you went to a normal elementary school in the U.S, like I did.

Let me put it this way, if you cannot explain why, when you divide fractions, you flip the second fraction and then multiply, or if you cannot give a real world example of 3/8 divided by 2/3 without thinking about pies and chocolate bars, then it will require study on your own before teaching it. People without math or teaching backgrounds absolutely do teach Singapore math at home, but either they need to learn the methods, or their kids are not getting the full benefit of conceptual learning because it is not being taught correctly. It’s hard to do. My kids did math in focus at a pricy private school in ny, and I could see that some of the teachers were not teaching it well, which is why I started doing Singapore at home with them.

I think you are maybe asking for a little too much of the potential instructors. In Liping Ma's "Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics", *none* of the twenty-five-odd US elementary school teachers that were surveyed could come up with a good example involving fractional division (and only one person could even produce a bad example that correctly illustrated the concept).

The textbook and home instructors guide that go with Singapore Math US Ed. do a really good job of helping out with just-in-time instruction -- if you are working through the curriculum with your kids, you will learn it as they do. Husband's much less of a math person than I am, and he was able to use it pretty effectively with our kids when Covid happened and I was busy and he was not.

I will say that if you really want to dig into bar models, "Step by Step Model Drawing: Solving Word Problems the Singapore Way", by Char Forsten, is fantastic.