Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone’s ES use this curriculum? DC is starting a new school that uses it and I’m curious what to expect. Do your DCs respond well to it? Does it keep them engaged and progressing? It’s hard to get a decent grasp from Google whether this is an effective curriculum or if we’ll see it go the way of the dinosaurs in another decade.

From the few samples I've seen, it doesn't look bad, in fact it even seems better for smart students than Eureka, which is very popular with public schools, include my kids' schools. Eureka is mind-numbingly boring for anyone who is a little smarter than average. I don't think you have anything to worry about, but you can always supplement at home with your own materials if you think there are gaps in your kids' understanding. Amazon has workbooks galore.

A point in IM's favor is that it was developed by William McCallum, who has a Ph.D. in mathematics and has worked on college-level math textbooks. IM does not seem faddish at all. Other curricula are authored by people with degrees in education and other non-mathematical fields of study who are steeped in fads.

What is one example difference between IM and another popular curriculum like Eureka?

What makes a college professor more qualified to teach elementary math than an education specialist?

A child who is bright in math benefits from a challenging curriculum with more variety and depth. Somebody who does challenging math for a living is the ideal person to deliver that kind of content. Think of AOPS/Beast Academy, RSM, etc. Those companies hire math people to design their math enrichment materials, and hire math Ph.D.s to teach their online courses.

Eureka is not designed for smart children at all. It's designed for teachers who have to teach kids with low math ability, and one of its features is showing dozens of ways to solve the same problem in the hopes that one of the methods sticks. If a child is bright, it wastes a lot of learning time, time that could be spent learning new things. Most research in education focuses on people with learning problems, not people who are smart, so programs that are designed by educator types tend to cater to the minority of kids who at the bottom of the class.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While it has some really good problem sets and interesting word problems the big issue with Illustrative math is that it does NOT have a student textbook with worked examples. So if your kid is absent, is inattentive, wants to review how to solve the problem, wants to look ahead to see what is coming up and start figuring it out this program is not good. If the teacher is not good at explaining then it is a terrible program because neither the student or the parent can easily figure out how to solve the problems or understand the concept being taught.

Other countries that do well in math like Singapore, Japan, etc. All have student math textbooks with worked examples= sample problems that show how to solve the problem and think about it.

IM Algebra student workbook has a summary in every lesson, explaining that lesson. But it's not an in-depth lecture like in a proper textbook.

I don't know about elementary.

The summary is extremely wordy without enough actual pictures, color coding and worked examples. I don't understand why this country is so anti-math textbook. There is no way a bright kid could work ahead or figure things out with IM. A traditional textbook you could look at the explanation, look at the worked examples, do the odd problems and check your work in the back of the textbook.

Holding everyone back to the same level helps maintain equity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While it has some really good problem sets and interesting word problems the big issue with Illustrative math is that it does NOT have a student textbook with worked examples. So if your kid is absent, is inattentive, wants to review how to solve the problem, wants to look ahead to see what is coming up and start figuring it out this program is not good. If the teacher is not good at explaining then it is a terrible program because neither the student or the parent can easily figure out how to solve the problems or understand the concept being taught.

Other countries that do well in math like Singapore, Japan, etc. All have student math textbooks with worked examples= sample problems that show how to solve the problem and think about it.

IM Algebra student workbook has a summary in every lesson, explaining that lesson. But it's not an in-depth lecture like in a proper textbook.

I don't know about elementary.

The summary is extremely wordy without enough actual pictures, color coding and worked examples. I don't understand why this country is so anti-math textbook. There is no way a bright kid could work ahead or figure things out with IM. A traditional textbook you could look at the explanation, look at the worked examples, do the odd problems and check your work in the back of the textbook.

On 10 years we can only hope they'll finally move to computer adaptive homework that lets kids rise to their ability.

Untill then, use AOPS Alcumus or similar.

Anonymous wrote:Anyone’s ES use this curriculum? DC is starting a new school that uses it and I’m curious what to expect. Do your DCs respond well to it? Does it keep them engaged and progressing? It’s hard to get a decent grasp from Google whether this is an effective curriculum or if we’ll see it go the way of the dinosaurs in another decade.

It's not engaging. It's boring. No color diagrams. No games. No challenge problems.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone’s ES use this curriculum? DC is starting a new school that uses it and I’m curious what to expect. Do your DCs respond well to it? Does it keep them engaged and progressing? It’s hard to get a decent grasp from Google whether this is an effective curriculum or if we’ll see it go the way of the dinosaurs in another decade.

From the few samples I've seen, it doesn't look bad, in fact it even seems better for smart students than Eureka, which is very popular with public schools, include my kids' schools. Eureka is mind-numbingly boring for anyone who is a little smarter than average. I don't think you have anything to worry about, but you can always supplement at home with your own materials if you think there are gaps in your kids' understanding. Amazon has workbooks galore.

A point in IM's favor is that it was developed by William McCallum, who has a Ph.D. in mathematics and has worked on college-level math textbooks. IM does not seem faddish at all. Other curricula are authored by people with degrees in education and other non-mathematical fields of study who are steeped in fads.

This sounds good for older kids, but why would I want a PHD with zero understanding of child development to write a curriculum for my K/1 kid? Not sure I follow your logic that it is better. Or did they have those people to, but decided to highlight the phd in math to sell it?

McCallum founded the company.

Anonymous wrote:While it has some really good problem sets and interesting word problems the big issue with Illustrative math is that it does NOT have a student textbook with worked examples. So if your kid is absent, is inattentive, wants to review how to solve the problem, wants to look ahead to see what is coming up and start figuring it out this program is not good. If the teacher is not good at explaining then it is a terrible program because neither the student or the parent can easily figure out how to solve the problems or understand the concept being taught.

Other countries that do well in math like Singapore, Japan, etc. All have student math textbooks with worked examples= sample problems that show how to solve the problem and think about it.

IM Algebra student workbook has a summary in every lesson, explaining that lesson. But it's not an in-depth lecture like in a proper textbook.

I don't know about elementary.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone’s ES use this curriculum? DC is starting a new school that uses it and I’m curious what to expect. Do your DCs respond well to it? Does it keep them engaged and progressing? It’s hard to get a decent grasp from Google whether this is an effective curriculum or if we’ll see it go the way of the dinosaurs in another decade.

From the few samples I've seen, it doesn't look bad, in fact it even seems better for smart students than Eureka, which is very popular with public schools, include my kids' schools. Eureka is mind-numbingly boring for anyone who is a little smarter than average. I don't think you have anything to worry about, but you can always supplement at home with your own materials if you think there are gaps in your kids' understanding. Amazon has workbooks galore.

A point in IM's favor is that it was developed by William McCallum, who has a Ph.D. in mathematics and has worked on college-level math textbooks. IM does not seem faddish at all. Other curricula are authored by people with degrees in education and other non-mathematical fields of study who are steeped in fads.

What is one example difference between IM and another popular curriculum like Eureka?

What makes a college professor more qualified to teach elementary math than an education specialist?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone’s ES use this curriculum? DC is starting a new school that uses it and I’m curious what to expect. Do your DCs respond well to it? Does it keep them engaged and progressing? It’s hard to get a decent grasp from Google whether this is an effective curriculum or if we’ll see it go the way of the dinosaurs in another decade.

From the few samples I've seen, it doesn't look bad, in fact it even seems better for smart students than Eureka, which is very popular with public schools, include my kids' schools. Eureka is mind-numbingly boring for anyone who is a little smarter than average. I don't think you have anything to worry about, but you can always supplement at home with your own materials if you think there are gaps in your kids' understanding. Amazon has workbooks galore.

A point in IM's favor is that it was developed by William McCallum, who has a Ph.D. in mathematics and has worked on college-level math textbooks. IM does not seem faddish at all. Other curricula are authored by people with degrees in education and other non-mathematical fields of study who are steeped in fads.

This sounds good for older kids, but why would I want a PHD with zero understanding of child development to write a curriculum for my K/1 kid? Not sure I follow your logic that it is better. Or did they have those people to, but decided to highlight the phd in math to sell it?

The teacher needs to be certified in it, no?

Anonymous wrote:While it has some really good problem sets and interesting word problems the big issue with Illustrative math is that it does NOT have a student textbook with worked examples. So if your kid is absent, is inattentive, wants to review how to solve the problem, wants to look ahead to see what is coming up and start figuring it out this program is not good. If the teacher is not good at explaining then it is a terrible program because neither the student or the parent can easily figure out how to solve the problems or understand the concept being taught.

Other countries that do well in math like Singapore, Japan, etc. All have student math textbooks with worked examples= sample problems that show how to solve the problem and think about it.

Very good point. But it does have student workbooks at least. Unfortunately, many elementary schools forgo the math textbook and just give students a workbooks while the teacher uses the teacher guide (which is basically the "textbook" part of the materials), especially in the lower grades, regardless of the particular curriculum being used. (My child's school does not give them textbooks for math in grades k-4, only workbooks.) I agree for higher grades it is better for students to have access to the actual textbook or teacher guide so that they can properly reteach themselves lessons they didn't get the first time around.

What can OP really do? Get a copy of the teacher guide for herself I guess.

While it has some really good problem sets and interesting word problems the big issue with Illustrative math is that it does NOT have a student textbook with worked examples. So if your kid is absent, is inattentive, wants to review how to solve the problem, wants to look ahead to see what is coming up and start figuring it out this program is not good. If the teacher is not good at explaining then it is a terrible program because neither the student or the parent can easily figure out how to solve the problems or understand the concept being taught.

Other countries that do well in math like Singapore, Japan, etc. All have student math textbooks with worked examples= sample problems that show how to solve the problem and think about it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone’s ES use this curriculum? DC is starting a new school that uses it and I’m curious what to expect. Do your DCs respond well to it? Does it keep them engaged and progressing? It’s hard to get a decent grasp from Google whether this is an effective curriculum or if we’ll see it go the way of the dinosaurs in another decade.

From the few samples I've seen, it doesn't look bad, in fact it even seems better for smart students than Eureka, which is very popular with public schools, include my kids' schools. Eureka is mind-numbingly boring for anyone who is a little smarter than average. I don't think you have anything to worry about, but you can always supplement at home with your own materials if you think there are gaps in your kids' understanding. Amazon has workbooks galore.

A point in IM's favor is that it was developed by William McCallum, who has a Ph.D. in mathematics and has worked on college-level math textbooks. IM does not seem faddish at all. Other curricula are authored by people with degrees in education and other non-mathematical fields of study who are steeped in fads.

Anonymous wrote:Anyone’s ES use this curriculum? DC is starting a new school that uses it and I’m curious what to expect. Do your DCs respond well to it? Does it keep them engaged and progressing? It’s hard to get a decent grasp from Google whether this is an effective curriculum or if we’ll see it go the way of the dinosaurs in another decade.

From the few samples I've seen, it doesn't look bad, in fact it even seems better for smart students than Eureka, which is very popular with public schools, include my kids' schools. Eureka is mind-numbingly boring for anyone who is a little smarter than average. I don't think you have anything to worry about, but you can always supplement at home with your own materials if you think there are gaps in your kids' understanding. Amazon has workbooks galore.

Anyone’s ES use this curriculum? DC is starting a new school that uses it and I’m curious what to expect. Do your DCs respond well to it? Does it keep them engaged and progressing? It’s hard to get a decent grasp from Google whether this is an effective curriculum or if we’ll see it go the way of the dinosaurs in another decade.