Seems like DeeDee's idea is good.
Her text is also heavily reliant on a lot of artificial vocabulary and rules that are slow and frustrating for an inherently mathy kid who can look at the problem and see the answer without doing any of that.
Yes on both counts! I was thinking of the CTY SCAT to begin with. Explore is beyond her skill set right now, but might not be by the end of this year.
The textbook definitely has a lot of what you described. As an example, they were "learning" how to multiply and the book had a confusing example that used blocks to show 17*3. DD came up with 51 almost instantly, but struggled to see how they'd arranged the 51 blocks. They didn't make 3 chunks of 17; they drew rows of ten, five, and two and separated them all in way that they made them look like random rows.
I'm
really glad you brought this up. It helps moral-support-wise when someone else points it out. Thanks.
I'll add that I also fear that a good score on an out-of-level test doesn't always count for much. I'm haunted by
a post that Bostonian wrote:
My 8yo son has qualified for the Study of Exceptional Talent by scoring at least 700 on the math section of the SAT.... My advocacy of a grade skip in math has failed so far....
It's painful. Really.
