Any opinions?

For what purpose would you use them? What's the learning style of the kid? What's the teaching style of the teacher? Group or single student? Is this supplemental or main instruction? Homeschool? Afterschool?

One school offers EM, one school offers Singapore Math. Wondered why. Same gifted type of school, same city, same k-8.

<shrug> Two different choices.

I think that Everyday Math can be good if it's taught well by someone who really gets the philosophy behind it. If that's not the case, it can be pretty awful, from what I hear.

Singapore has much to recommend it, especially for a GT child, since it doesn't have as much repetition as many other curricula do. But it has a lot of focus on mental math, which isn't a strength for all kids. And if it's taught without the hands-on stuff, then, really, it's just another workbook. Bleh.

Actually, I think that if *either one* is taught without the hands-on activities and games that accompany both curricula, things won't go very well. I've heard (all second-hand, mind you) that it's when teachers skip the games for Everyday Math--thinking that it's disposable and not the teaching time that it is!--that this is when things go wrong.

Either way, I think it comes down to the teachers and their ability to translate the curriculum to the students far more than the curriculum itself. IMHO...

Yes, I concur w/ what Kriston has said. Rightstart suffers from the same ie parents complain that DC is just not getting it and then you find out they aren't doing the hands-on stuff and the games. For EM, the review is in the games but most schools don't do them. DS's 1st grade teacher did and it was the only year he liked and how he feels about school centers on how he feels about math.

Now, with a gifted school, all bets are off. Different population of kids. I would bet they'd have to remove the review built into EM. Here's an example as I see it. Multiplication is introduced in 2nd grade in PS in EM. The mathy kids get it right away. But it won't be *really* mastered until 3rd grade and by that time many of the gifted kids will won't something new. And then again in 4th grade, there will be more review and some extension...by that time gifted kids have had it.

Now I've heard of other districts that use pre-tests which come w/ the EM teachers materials but my district never used them. If the gifted schools are pre-testing kids out of stuff they know, I can see EM working. Many gifted kids like it b/c the focus switches daily from on concept to another.

I think Singapore Math (SM) is easier to compact, easier to pre-test.

If all things were equal, I'd go w/ the school teaching SM. I don't like some of the algorithms in EM. IMO, they missed the boat. They adapted mental math algorithms from Asian philosophies (which SM and RS both use) and use them for pencil and paper strategies.

here's an example:

41+27=41+20+7 or 40+20+1+7

Here's EM's algorithm:
41
+27
____
60
8
_____
68

Now for kids who've been doing vertical addition
1
+7
___
8

are now confused when they see
1
+7
__
0

But it could be the school is modifying EM. I know of a district w/ huge success with it but they have modified it and added more standard drill.

Singapore Math, hands down!

Everyday Math is not usually supplemented in the schools, though it really needs to be. In my experience (teaching with this curriculum in a 3rd grade classroom many years ago) it was time intensive, which limited my ability to supplement. This is a program that spirals, so there's lots of repetition and no mastering expected the first/second time a topic is introduced. This curriculum introduces a lot of math vocabulary and requires kids to write about how to solve problems. Teachers are encouraged to allow kids to come up with their own techniques for solving problems. In my experience, kids who use this curriculum in school are weak in their knowledge of various algorithms and math facts. The math games can be fun. Each chapter in the teacher's manual includes tips for differentiation for both advanced and struggling students. FYI the differentiation suggestions are best for students who are only slightly advanced/behind. When I used this curriculum I was very frustrated with that and, realizing how many of my students were being shortchanged, I ended up using three grade levels of the curriculum (ability grouping). It was very difficult to manage that.

I use Singapore Primary Math now that I homeschool my two oldest kids. Primary Math introduces several methods for each new math skill. SM does offer review with additional workbooks like Challenging Word Problems, Extra Practice, and Intensive Practice. The Intensive Practice workbooks bring up the topic in new, interesting, and challenging ways and offer a variety of Math Competition style problems in the "Take the Challenge" section in each chapter. Mental math is a major skill featured. This was a good thing for my child (for whom it did not come easily). The way Singapore's curricula introduce solving word problems is second to none. The Primary Math curriculum was what was being used in Singapore when their kids came out tops in the last two international math competitions (The US was at about the 50th %ile, I believe.) The state of Massachusetts, whom many believe to be leading the US in math competency in the public schools, is home to many public schools currently using the Singapore Math curriculum.

There are several math curricula offered for sale at www.singaporemath.com including the newer California standards version. This version has added topics like negative numbers and probability which were missing from the previous versions of Primary Math avaialable for sale in the US.

We use base-10 blocks and an abacus when introducing new topics here at our house. There are tons of game ideas included in the teacher's manual, too. My kids have enjoyed those we've tried.

Here's a good review of the curriculum:
http://www.sonlight.com/singapore.html (scroll down to the bottom of the page for more specific information)

http://timss.bc.edu/PDF/t03_download/T03_M_Chap1.pdf
Here's a link to info from the most recent (2003) international math test. If you scroll down a bit you'll find the rankings by country. For the third time (in a row), Singapore is number 1. I wish I could be a fly on the wall in a math classroom over there! I really do.

DS7's school is using EM. The teacher requires him to explain his answer and create a few different ways to come up with the answer. However, he doesn't like to explain his answer or create different ways to do the same problem. His teacher has been complaining about him. DS's psychologist doesn't think that the teacher should force it on him.

Also, some parents in school complain that EM lacks drill. I am not sure if it's true.

I grew up in an asian country. The style of teaching is just like SM. SM emphasizes on drills. I personally like SM. I can compute very fast with confidence as an adult. I might not be able to find different ways to solve a problem when I was young, but I can certainly do it now as my skills improve over the years. SM is one of my favorite choice to do afterschooling with DS next year.

Just to give you a little more idea.

When I came here to attend college, I tested out of all the math classes and got into Calculus class right away. I remember I often got over 100% in the tests because the teachers gave bonus questions. I had classmates who told me to stop raising the bar. Looking back, it's funny, because I was never the top of the class before I came here.

I really like Singapore myself (having used it almost exclusively from the start!) but both SM and EM are curricula that depend on having a prepared and involved teacher. Neither one is particularly well-suited to throwing the book at the kid and hoping. So while I would generally lean toward Singapore just because of my own experience with it, I think the teachers are going to trump the curriculum.

Yes teachers trump the curriculum!

I have friends who have given the Primary Math textbook to the child and let them teach themselves a lesson (not every day). The textbook is written to the child, and shows the thinking of the characters in the book (in thought bubbles over their heads), so it is possible. I, myself, have sometimes given the textbook to ds(nearly 10) and it has worked out fine. He was able to do the workbook problems independently afterward. I wouldn't do it every day, but it is a very clearly-written textbook. I think it could work well for those kids interested in "getting on with it." At least SOMEtimes.

I was going to say 'Singapore' until I read people's comments about 'teachers trump curriculum'. GS9's school uses Math Investigations and my complaint is it is too slow for a gifted child. We use Singapore for afterschooling and I'll let him do a chapter test before we do the chapter. If he already knows how to do it, there is no reason to cover the material. If he knows it, and needs practice, I handle that a couple ways. I'll usually give him a couple problems to work for practice, and simultaneously push forward. That gives him practice as well as rewarding him with a new challenge.

OHGrandma....from the little I've seen w/ Math Investigations, that's a whole different animal of a different color.

Oh I agree that it can work, but I wouldn't depend on it working.. if that makes any sense! A good teacher can make either curriculum work very reliably, but a bad teacher (or an uninvolved teacher) could make it much more difficult for either curriculum to teach what it's meant to teach.

Singapore in particular assumes that there's some drill going on outside of the regular work. Some kids won't need much, and that's not a problem, but some kids will need quite a bit, and if it's not added in as needed then they're not getting it. kwim?

I'm mainly reacting to people who drop any curriculum (not just math) because it required the teacher to work with the books, to add in where something more was needed, and to understand the concepts well enough to explain. My point is only that if you have a teacher who is involved, who does know where to supplement, and who understands math, the curriculum is much less important (although I still have preferences). If you're trying to make up for an uninvolved teacher, or one that doesn't understand math, you end up relying on the curriculum to be near-perfect, and near-perfect for every kid in the class.... which is some pretty high standards!

Yeah, what Erica said! That's it exactly!

A good teacher can teach math with nothing more than a couple of sticks and some rocks. A rotten teacher could have the best curriculum in the world and still blow it.

Kriston,

Yeah... but what about those homeschool moms who don't feel comfortable teaching math? Which curriculum would you recommend? I feel very comfortable recommending Singapore's Primary Math series in these cases (with the home educator's manual). The curriculum is written in such a way that the text does a lot of the teaching. (Those thought bubbles showing how to hold the numbers in your head are the bomb!) It *is* written to the child, which, IMO, makes it superb to teach the mom, too.

NOT meaning to say that moms uncomfortable with math are like children.

Kate

I've seen kids later have issues after having done SM. It seems that they just gave the curriculum to the kids and the kids did it w/out really getting the SM way of thinking. So at the higher levels, they hadn't developed the mental math abilities etc to manipulate numbers. Someone had written a great post at WTM curric board about SM saying that if you're not doing it as in the thought bubbles, you're not doing it right. Plus, as you mentioned, Primary Math doesn't have the drill in it. In Singapore, teachers handle the drill and the parents as well. But people get SM b/c it's cheap and don't buy the HIGs which I think really help in learning the SM way of thinking.

Can you tell me more about the issues you've seen with kids who have used Singapore's curriculum?

If the curriculum is used in whole (instead of in part) there is lots of review. Think about using the textbook, workbook, extra practice, intensive practice, AND challenging word problems books for each topic in each level! That much review would drive my kids batty. True, in Singapore they add timed computation drills (and most parents add even more practice at home). The teacher's manuals and home education manuals have extra practice AND drill listed for each topic.

I understand that people who don't use the curriculum as it is intended might have trouble. I wish we could get the message out that it isn't the curriculum's fault. (Many people fault Singapore's Primary Math and say it has little drill or review, etc., when in fact it is there if you choose to use it.)

I *do* like that it's easy to LEAVE OUT the extra practice books and therefore limit the review for kids who pick things up more quickly.

BTW My kids enjoy using the cd-rom games that match the curriculum. There's drill and extra practice in that.

I think if the mom is willing to do the work along the way and learn the Singapore methods, even if they're hard, and be available to teach them to their kids... then it's still the one I'd recommend. I've heard the HIG is excellent for those cases (but I've not seen it myself so I can't say from experience!)

The ones that concern me are the ones that (homeschool or PS) aren't willing to work at it. In PS it might be a teacher who was given the curriculum with insufficient preparation, or who hadn't really wanted to switch from whatever they used before and wasn't willing to make the change, or who, like my own 1st grade teacher, really didn't get math at all (argh!) and figured rote was sufficient and explanations were unnecessary. (double argh!!) I've known plenty of homeschool parents who fall into the "really didn't get math at all" camp too.

But the ones that bug me are the ones that bad-mouth a curriculum at great length, until it comes out that actually what they did was just throw the book at the kid and hope. Gahhhh! Textbooks aren't magic!! I'm certainly not against letting a bright kid take the reins when he's having a great day and just running with it, but when he gets to something confusing then he really needs someone to help him find his way through! And when the grownups (parents or teachers) aren't willing to do that, the curriculum won't save the day.

We're currently using a video program for statistics and even then, with an engaging lecture and clear format, really super-excellent explanations and examples, it makes a huge difference when I'm watching with DS and pausing the video to discuss important points. His needing that little bit of teaching from someone he can ask questions of doesn't mean the curriculum is lacking. And while I think probably a much older kid or an adult could do more with the materials and no teacher, elementary aged kids especially shouldn't be expected to routinely find their own way.

And on the review end, that's another pet peeve of mine... You're right - there is a huge amount of review available, but you have to choose what you're doing and figure out when. It doesn't magically appear at regular intervals. Our method was to run the word problems a semester or a year behind the textbook and workbook, so when the topics came around a second time it was "kicked up a notch". That was perfect for us, but I could easily see another kid needing more or less.

Ha! We do the same thing: use the Intensive Practice books a semester behind the text/wkbk so the topics are staggered. I agree that it's not like your typical American curriculum style review. I liked it "kicked up a notch" too.

I know nothing about Everyday Math but I love Singapore Math. I find it to be a nice strong math curriculum and I am picky as far as math goes. Their Challenging Word Problems are beyond awesome and make DS6 really think.

This has nothing to do with EM or SM but I have a math kid who doesn't really care for manipulatives. You can pretty much throw the workbook at him and he will be happy to figure it out all by himself. Hint here or there is all I do. Just wanted to mention that some kids thrive with a little bit of intentional math neglect

Good point seeing as how this is one of the few places we can admit those kinds of kids really do exist.

zaichiki: the issues are the same as what others mentioned. SM is great for handing to *some* kids and letting them have at it. A friend does this w/ no instruction from her but her DS who is gifted in math, thinks the SM way before he even started SM.

ANd yes, people complain SM doesn't have enough review built it but that's what the IP,EP,CWP books are for. For the ones I've seen, it appears it's that the curriculum wasn't used as intended and that's why it failed. It's not a failure of the curriculum. I LOVE SM and have a lot invested in the books, CWP etc.

Rightstart Math is what I use as my spine and supplement w/ SM and it's identical to SM conceptually although the scope and sequence is a bit different. But over and over people will post how it's just not working, DC is not retaining, DC can't do mental math and someone will ask, "Are you playing the games?" The response, "Well, uh, no, we never seem to get around to them." Or you get "There isn't enough review in RS." That's where the games come in. And yes, my son hit a wall w/ multiplication b/c we weren't playing the games enough lol but until this point (RS D) he's never needed the games.

The comment I read often is that SM is soooo cheap and RS is sooo expensive. Then you read about the problems. Well, by the time you add in the HIGs, CWP, EP etc the price is only about $10 cheaper than RS.

The great thing about SM having the parts, if your kid doesn't need it, don't buy the EP. If kid needs some review but a bit more challenge, get the IP etc. It is easy to taylor but I also think as one poster put it on WTM, SM is deceptively simple.

Could you tell me about the CD-ROM games that you have for SM? We use SM and ALEKS quicktables with my younger kids and SM and ALEKS for my older DD but haven't heard of a computer component.

We love SM, US Standard edition. We use as much of the manipulatives as each child needs. One gets it a lot faster, the other needs the manipulatives more than the other. That is the joy of the program, it is very easy to adjust for each child while covering the same material.

This has been a very interesting discussion for me. And I have to say yes, and yes, but... Yes, in that the teacher makes the difference. I bought SM for DS's teacher to use with him for HSing - but it turns out that she only used them as ready made problem sets. No Singapore method. That definitely did not work.

We switched over to Aleks, but I wanted to use SM for the problem-solving strategies. I bought the books (the Standard Edition, b/c I wanted the extra content and the more colorful textbooks), but there aren't any home instructor guides available for his level. I just checked on the website and I see how helpful they'd be. Bad timing.

And teacher guides are exactly what I need to teach everything. Otherwise, we're just reading through everything together and he's doing the problems. That's partly why I was asking about K12 on another thread.

Zaichiki: yes, for homeschooling, I like SM. (Just to clarify, I was answering Ren's original question, which related to school, not home use.)

Is EM even available for home use? I'm sure you could buy it somewhere on the Internet, but I've never heard of anyone using EM for homeschooling.

Like others, I also highly recommend the SM home instructor's guide and the "Intensive Practice" workbooks. IMHO, I liked "IP" more than "Challenging Word Problems" because it has more than just word problems, and they really are challenging. Even my engineer DH had to think about some of the problems! The arithmetic in them isn't hard, but the thinking is!

As for the instructor's guide...Despite being an English major, I am not math phobic--I took calculus both in high school and college and I always got good grades in math. But there's a big difference between getting a grade and really understanding the math well enough to teach it. The guide helped me with really understanding. Not to mention the fact that it was nice to have the games and stuff in the guide for hands-on work, since I would never have come up with that stuff on my own. Having the instructor's guide was REALLY useful to me.

My biggest complaint about SM was actually that it was not good with an asynchronous math kid. He needed more concepts, less calculation, less repetition. (And SM is WAY better about this than most math programs, but it just showed me that sometimes a program--even a good one!--isn't going to work for some kids.)

I suspect if we went back to SM, it would be better now because his multiplication skills have caught up. But there for a while last year, it was not working well. I didn't love the fact that there was a section on multiplying 2-digit numbers, then one about multiplying 3-digit numbers in the next workbook, *then* one about multiplying 4-digit numbers in the *next* workbook. Those are not conceptually different, so it was a pretty dull stretch of math, especially for a 6yo boy who thoroughly understood the concept of how to multiply multiple digits after the first exposure to it, but for whom the actual work of multiplying was REALLY slow!

That was when we dropped SM and went on to geometry. There he could work on some new concepts without all the arithmetic. It was a much better fit!

He has since caught up on the arithmetic just through regular use on higher concept math. Adding and subtracting fractions has really helped, with all the factoring involved to find denominators. And it's challenging enough that he wants to do the work. More than once I have told him he'd done enough for the day, but he wanted to keep going!

That's a long way of saying that sometimes even the "best" curriculum for GT kids isn't going to work well for some kids.

Kriston, I'd be very interested in hearing what you did/are doing with geometry, if you have time, please.

Thanks!
minnie

http://school.discoveryeducation.com/parents/reviewcorner/software/activeprmathrainbow.html

http://www.singaporemath.com/CD_ROM_Rainbow_Rock_Grades_1_2_p/cd1.htm

http://www.singaporemath.com/CD_ROM_Vroot_Vroom_Grades_3_4_p/cd2.htm

We use Rainbow Rock for dd (currently in Primary Math 2A) and Vroot and Vroom for ds (finishing up level 4B). I have Wiggle Woods on the shelf. The kids sometimes play the games together, too. Check out the review on the discovery education website I linked above.


http://www.singaporemath.com/CD_ROM_Wiggle_Woods_Grades_5_6_p/cd3.htm

Happy to help.

We used Painless Geometry by Lynette Long. I just checked the book out of the library, so we didn't use a workbook, if there even is one attached to the book (???)... There are a few challenge problems, which is what I used to check his understanding, and I made up my own if he seemed to need more practice. (I maybe did that twice in 2 or 3 months.)

It is "real" geometry, not that dumbed down "this is a square" stuff that passes for elementary school geometry. It used all the real terms and required logical and conceptual thinking. It was lighter on proofs than a normal high school geometry class, but was otherwise pretty much what I remember from geometry class.

My highly visual, puzzle-oriented DS(then)6 loved it! It was much more appropriate for him given where he was in math than trying to memorize times tables, which was the next step that any standard math curriculum would require. That just wasn't working. He had a 6yo's speed and memory capacity, but he also had a desperate need for higher level thinking. Geometry provided a lovely detour!

If you decide to go the geometry route, I also strongly recommend working with pattern blocks, a bucket full of plastic or wooden shapes. Something like this: http://www.shopourchildren.com/browseproducts/Geometric-Pattern-Blocks.HTML

(Caveat emptor: I've never shopped this company and am not recommending them in particular--this is just the first good picture that popped up in my search!)

I got our set on sale, and it's one of the best purchases I ever made! They're great for geometry, fractions, squares/square routes, and multiplication/division work, but the kids also used them as toys, making their own Transformers and Bakugon characters out of them. For a solid year, they were out on my floor every single day for most of the day! They still play with them from time to time. A bargain at twice the price!

If I can help further, just let me know.

I'm envious, Dottie! It does sound like your school has it on the ball in that area.

I've not seen the AMC books, so I have no idea how hard those are. But if they stump you, I'm betting they'd leave me cross-eyed!

Bless your heart, Kriston, that looks perfect! (I knew I could count on you!!) The times tables really annoy Harpo--we've gone some other directions (math history, computational linguistics and other kinds of puzzles, Don Cohen's little calculus books)--but every time I try to circle back to multiplication, it gets ugly. Geometry sounds like an excellent solution--thanks so much for the idea, and for the recommendations.

peace
minnie

Aw! Thanks for the blessing! I need all the help I can get!

I had the same sort of trouble last year. DS(then)6 tried to learn the times tables, but it just wouldn't stick. He was growing to hate math because it was neither challenging nor fun...but boring and unpleasant. That seemed dumb to me, so I decided to try going off-road. Scary, but necessary!

Enter geometry, and it filled the gap beautifully. Happily, this year the times tables are coming easily. I really think there's a sort of sweet spot for that kind of memorization, and DS wasn't in it last year, but is this year. Hurrah!

So there's hope for your DS, too!

Do parents of gt kids complain that SM doesn't have enough reviews built in or are those parents of ND kids? I personally find it to have way too many exercises and reviews and we skip lots of them. The only thing we do rigorously are all challenging problems in CWP. We skip most of the other ones. We use only regular workbooks and CWP. I have two instructor guides but I didn't use them. I do own textbooks because the notation is somewhat different from what I was taught as a child.

As Kriston said some of the concepts do repeat and gt kid probably doesn't see any difference between counting up to 10,000 and counting up to 100, 000 but you simply ignore such chapters. At one point DS6 was working on chapters from both 4A and 5A at the same time since it made sense to go one step farther and cover it at the same time. We also do chapters out of order if possible whenever we feel in mood for something else than what's next in the workbook.

LMom,

I have heard a lot of parents of non-mathy kids (I don't ask for IQ scores- ha ha) say that Singapore's Primary Math doesn't have enough review. They are usually not using anything but the textbook/workbook combo.

This is what we do (two gifted kids -- one is "mathy") --
textbook, workbook, intensive practice

I find the Challenging Word Problems aren't more challenging than the word problems in the Intensive Practice books. The CWP books are too much review. I do have them, but I only pick and choose among the problems and only when added review is necessary for that kid on that particular topic.

I don't use the instructor's/home educator's guides because, quite frankly, the method is so obvious to me from the textbook. I do have most of the home ed guides and I have looked through them. I even tried to use them a few times. Mostly, though, I had already gleaned what I needed from the text and saw it simply put into words in the guides.

We sometimes only use the textbook. Sometimes a kid just seems to already know the topic and even the Sinagpore method for that topic (probably because the kids have used SM all the way through and they just picked up on the pattern). Sometimes I even just "throw" the book at the kid and let them do an exercise on their own (usually when they ask for that).

Sometimes we add manipulatives or a little extra review to a topic... drill or whatever... depending on what that kid needs for that topic.

Obviously I'm not going to criticize the way anyone uses Singapore's Primary Math curriculum, as we use it all those ways, too. Of course, if someone complains about SM not working and then admits that they don't try to use all of what is available to them for that particular topic (guides and additional Singapore books include more practice, ideas for games and using base-10 blocks, drill etc.), well then I have no sympathy. Ha.

I have a friend whose PG kid does Singapore curriculum on his own (textbook only) and sure seems to get the method from my point of view. Gifted kids don't always fit the rule, so flexibility is the key.

I prefered the instructor's guide but almost never used the textbook. It seemed to me to be colored pictures but little actual teaching.

I completely agree that it's good to have more options so we can meet the needs of the particular kids in question.

Vive la difference!

(No idea how to put the accent mark in there...Perhaps I shouldn't use foreign phrases that I can't type properly! )

WTM used to recommend Math U See, which I think suits visual spatial types very well. But the criticism I have heard over and over again is that MUS users score lower on standardized math tests. They learn things in a different order and (just my opinion, we used it for geometry years ago) they are not so thorough. I find it curious that WTM users are leveling negative comments at Singapore.

There really isn't one best program for every sort of kid. I think the most useful information is about content, structure, expense, etc. and not so much "this is good" or "this is bad".

I don't see a ton of negative comments about SM, but when I do, it seems it's more due to poor implementation. I think you (the proverbial you) needs to know the student. If they need more practice, add in EP or IP, play more games, add in manipulatives etc. I see the exact same comments about RS...again, it's not all laid out like Saxon math, you need to know your student. Some won't need anything, just through the books at them at let them go...others will need tons of review and seeing it several different ways....and all the others in between those 2 extremes.

Our school has offered my DS6 everyday math on CD for the computer for the summer. Apparently he complained that no math for a whole summer was too long. Maybe you can order the disc's through the co-op?