Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't heard of this, but I just want to put it out there that there is a reason "new math" was controversial. All that "boring" stuff (boring in quotes because it's not boring if it's taught well) is important and trying to skip out on it is one of the reasons the US has done so poorly on it compared to other countries, particularly when it comes to numeracy. The "new math" generation is the lost generation of mathematics. This sort of reminds me of Lucy Calkins.

Of course, if a kid is super-mathy then I'm sure it's fine and it definitely sounds fun.

Singapore's school system emphasizes rote memorization in their math classes. They teach one reliable method for a given calculation and then make students practice it over and over until it is really memorized. They deliberately de-emphasize math theory in pre-college instruction. Singapore consistently has had the best math educational outcomes for many years. The "boring" repetition centered (and avoidance of theory) approach that they use has served them well. A pity we do not follow their lead.

Rote memorization is good in elementary years. Not enough in high school.

Back in the Cold War the US was over the top with communist fear. The Soviet Union was much more advanced with science and math. This created a whole new math program copied from the Soviet Union. Russia is still tops in math.

Anonymous wrote:I'm curious as to what kind of school you attended, OP, that had you using this unusual curriculum in middle school?

You have to be older to have experienced this. My public school used new math starting in 4th grade through 8th grade in the 70s. All I know is that was when I started to hate math. I don’t do well with abstract concepts or something and started tanking. I don’t know why they ended it but I’m sure the program produced some brilliant mathematicians.

Why is math so hard to teach in America? Lol. This is just bizarre. I took precalculus in my freshman year of high school in my country and so did everyone else. It was nothing special.

Anonymous wrote:For parents or students who did this - how long does it realistically take to complete until prealgebra plus?

6-10 months

For parents or students who did this - how long does it realistically take to complete until prealgebra plus?

Anonymous wrote:I haven't heard of this, but I just want to put it out there that there is a reason "new math" was controversial. All that "boring" stuff (boring in quotes because it's not boring if it's taught well) is important and trying to skip out on it is one of the reasons the US has done so poorly on it compared to other countries, particularly when it comes to numeracy. The "new math" generation is the lost generation of mathematics. This sort of reminds me of Lucy Calkins.

Of course, if a kid is super-mathy then I'm sure it's fine and it definitely sounds fun.

Singapore's school system emphasizes rote memorization in their math classes. They teach one reliable method for a given calculation and then make students practice it over and over until it is really memorized. They deliberately de-emphasize math theory in pre-college instruction. Singapore consistently has had the best math educational outcomes for many years. The "boring" repetition centered (and avoidance of theory) approach that they use has served them well. A pity we do not follow their lead.

Wow, just like the rest of the world does math instruction. There may be hope for US kids after all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't heard of this, but I just want to put it out there that there is a reason "new math" was controversial. All that "boring" stuff (boring in quotes because it's not boring if it's taught well) is important and trying to skip out on it is one of the reasons the US has done so poorly on it compared to other countries, particularly when it comes to numeracy. The "new math" generation is the lost generation of mathematics. This sort of reminds me of Lucy Calkins.

Of course, if a kid is super-mathy then I'm sure it's fine and it definitely sounds fun.

Thisthisthisthisthis.

AOPS works as a fun tack-on to math. I had a friend try it as a primary homeschooling math curriculum and when her child returned to public school, that child was behind in various areas of math that were important.

Which areas? How long did it take them to catch up?

Anonymous wrote:I haven't heard of this, but I just want to put it out there that there is a reason "new math" was controversial. All that "boring" stuff (boring in quotes because it's not boring if it's taught well) is important and trying to skip out on it is one of the reasons the US has done so poorly on it compared to other countries, particularly when it comes to numeracy. The "new math" generation is the lost generation of mathematics. This sort of reminds me of Lucy Calkins.

Of course, if a kid is super-mathy then I'm sure it's fine and it definitely sounds fun.

Thisthisthisthisthis.

AOPS works as a fun tack-on to math. I had a friend try it as a primary homeschooling math curriculum and when her child returned to public school, that child was behind in various areas of math that were important.

I’m not familiar with this particular curriculum. But my kids did a program that had the same sequence (Alg, Alg II, geo, precalc) taught over 2 year period in 7th and 8th grade. Several students go through this program successfully in our district but most opt to retake precalc in 9th.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm curious as to what kind of school you attended, OP, that had you using this unusual curriculum in middle school?

It was an experimental magnet program at a county lab school. One of the founders of IMACS lived there and made a deal with the county.

I went to a similar program in the 80s! It was at Plantation Middle School in Broward County Florida. It was a program called MEGSSS. I actually found this program looking to find something similar to MEGSSS.

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate this review.

I have a homeschooled 5th grader about to finish up AoPS Alg A. He moves quickly, but I'm not eager for him to get into further HS math when he's not even 11 and it isn't his only academic strength or interest. Trying a bit of IMACS might be a good fit this year. Thanks.

You might be doomed.

It's really hard to slow down homeschooled kids enough to keep them as far back as schooled kids, without severely cutting back on educational hours.

I appreciate this review.

I have a homeschooled 5th grader about to finish up AoPS Alg A. He moves quickly, but I'm not eager for him to get into further HS math when he's not even 11 and it isn't his only academic strength or interest. Trying a bit of IMACS might be a good fit this year. Thanks.

Anonymous wrote:I haven't heard of this, but I just want to put it out there that there is a reason "new math" was controversial. All that "boring" stuff (boring in quotes because it's not boring if it's taught well) is important and trying to skip out on it is one of the reasons the US has done so poorly on it compared to other countries, particularly when it comes to numeracy. The "new math" generation is the lost generation of mathematics. This sort of reminds me of Lucy Calkins.

Of course, if a kid is super-mathy then I'm sure it's fine and it definitely sounds fun.

I think societal dysfunction is a larger problem for math education than New Math curriculum, which got nowhere near universal adoption in USA.
Also USA has deflated "average" performance metrics because we have universal college-prep education.

But I agree that the New Math works mainly for gifted kids (the ones who we needed in the Space Race) who can handle abstraction and don't need to be force-drilled basic school math in order to achieve competence.

New Math isn't a fit for early elementary grades. But on the flip side, drilling works OK for times tables and basic algebra, but most people who learn regular school math don't remember anything past basic algebra, even if they cram and pass clases through calculus.

Anonymous wrote:We did the free EMF course during covid for my child who was younger at time. We went through the problems together. It was fabulous. Finally a way to work the brain and engage mathematically minded children in a more abstract less route memorization type way. One of the problems dealt with ciphers and coding which sparked further interest in how ciphers were used during wars. Just made math more challenging, but in a more enjoyable “less work” more escape room type of mindset.

But you weren't interested in continuing?

It is a bit pricy if you compare to AoPS, which would get you the full Prealgebra through Calculus plus Counting&Probability and Number Theory, about double the content for about the same money.
(But not the same content or presentation.)