Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-09-2017, 07:54 AM
 
75 posts, read 81,273 times
Reputation: 100

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbab5 View Post
... Everyday Math is slower than Singapore math. It starts a good year behind. What Everyday Math does in second grade, Singapore does in first. The gap gets larger as time goes on - kids who finish Singapore math level 6 (6th grade) are ready for Algebra the next year (7th grade). Whereas Everyday Math prepares kids for Algebra in the 9th grade. ....
They both claimed Common Core aligned. They are not at the same level. Does that mean Everyday Math is at standard while Singapore Math goes beyond?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-11-2017, 05:41 AM
 
7,583 posts, read 4,134,265 times
Reputation: 6935
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbab5 View Post
My daughter uses Everyday Math at school and Singapore math at home with me. So I am very familiar with both. They are both "Common Core", which just dictates what topics and techniques they cover. Everyday Math teaches almost the exact same topics and techniques as Singapore math. So they don't differ on the "what", they differ on the "how". Everyday Math is slower than Singapore math. It starts a good year behind. What Everyday Math does in second grade, Singapore does in first. The gap gets larger as time goes on - kids who finish Singapore math level 6 (6th grade) are ready for Algebra the next year (7th grade). Whereas Everyday Math prepares kids for Algebra in the 9th grade.

Everyday Math is VERY heavy with the spiral. EM will introduce a topic for one day at the beginning of the chapter, and then spend every day for the rest of the chapter going back and reviewing 4 previous topics. And when I say 4 previous topics, I mean you get ONE PROBLEM each. So the kids are literally doing 4 problems a day, each on a different topic. And the topic that they were introduced to this chapter, they will do one problem about it next month, another problem about it the month after that, and so on and so on. They try to reduce the amount of work necessary by spacing out the review. The idea being the more often you review it, the less you have to practice it in the first place. Which does work for... oh... I'd guess maybe half of the students? The ones with the best memories. And the rest of the students are just screwed because they don't get enough practice, and they never solidify the topics. (The better teachers add some extra practice though).

Singapore math treats the same topics Everyday Math does. But they introduce a topic, and then spend 3 weeks practicing that topic, and only that topic. Many many problems, but not all the same type of problems. Each page looks at the same topic in a slightly different way. So at the end of 3 weeks you have really mastered that topic. Then it spends the last week reviewing all the previous topics. So you still get the review. This works extremely well. The only issue is that it is a LOT of work, for both the child (doing lots of problems) and the teacher (grading lots of problems). This method works well with the OTHER half of the students, the ones who have to do things 100 times before it sinks in. So, of course you run into the issue where the first half of the kids are bored. The way Singapore math deals with this problem is that they have 2 other workbooks that the accelerated kids use instead of the regular workbook. These 2 other workbooks (Challenging Word Problems and Intensive Practice) provide really challenging treatments of the same topics, that stretches the accelerated kids.

The problem with this is that public schools have a very hard time giving the "slow kids" one workbook, while giving the "fast kids" another. People get a bit touchy about that here in the states, especially in elementary school. Which is why it's more heavily used with homeschooling parents, where the parents can decide for themselves which workbooks their child needs, or even get both and do some from each. It's very very easy to tailor to a specific kid if you are a parent only dealing with your own kids.

I have found that the best way to do this as a parent is to do Singapore math at home with my child in the evenings. Then, about a year later, my child gets to start reviewing the topic, one problem every month, at school. This is actually ideal. They master the topic first, and then they get the added benefit of the spiral review a year later. My kids LOVE math. Not because they are exceptionally good at it, but because at school they are always very confident because they know the math already, and they are not bored because they are constantly learning new math at home. It does take a good 30-45 minutes of my day (I have 2 kids, with 1 it's less) to sit down with them and do the math with them. But it's worth it. So worth it.

If I did not have time to do this, I would send my kids to Kumon. I know a lot of moms who do this. They also do lots of problems, like Singapore math. It works too.
Thank you for explaining some alternative programs. I see many of the responses involve heavy parental involvement.

Now I am wondering what people consider great schools. Parents who buy into expensive neighborhoods often justify it for the excellent schools. But at the same time, I hear about families in these communities hiring tutors or using supplements, such as Kumon or in your example Singapore Math.

I have two friends who teach at a local public school, one in 5th grade and one in 4th. The 5th grade teacher just wishes kids would come to her knowing how to subtract, multiply and divide. She believes that if they came in with those mastered, she could catch them up. The 4th grade teacher also wishes children would come to her knowing how to multiply and know the basics of division, not to mention subtraction.

What is going on that students are arriving at these grade levels not knowing basic math? I understand that teachers in lower grade levels have standards they must teach, but what is the point if the next grade level really just needed students to know how to subtract?

They often remind/warn me to make sure my daughter knows basic math.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2017, 11:46 AM
 
1,955 posts, read 1,750,694 times
Reputation: 5179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gold miner View Post
They both claimed Common Core aligned. They are not at the same level. Does that mean Everyday Math is at standard while Singapore Math goes beyond?
Yes
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2017, 11:55 AM
 
1,955 posts, read 1,750,694 times
Reputation: 5179
Quote:
Originally Posted by elyn02 View Post
Thank you for explaining some alternative programs. I see many of the responses involve heavy parental involvement.

Now I am wondering what people consider great schools. Parents who buy into expensive neighborhoods often justify it for the excellent schools. But at the same time, I hear about families in these communities hiring tutors or using supplements, such as Kumon or in your example Singapore Math.

I have two friends who teach at a local public school, one in 5th grade and one in 4th. The 5th grade teacher just wishes kids would come to her knowing how to subtract, multiply and divide. She believes that if they came in with those mastered, she could catch them up. The 4th grade teacher also wishes children would come to her knowing how to multiply and know the basics of division, not to mention subtraction.

What is going on that students are arriving at these grade levels not knowing basic math? I understand that teachers in lower grade levels have standards they must teach, but what is the point if the next grade level really just needed students to know how to subtract?

They often remind/warn me to make sure my daughter knows basic math.
From what I can tell, a small potion of students can become proficient at math in the amount of time they spend on math at school in class. These kids are "mathy", or really good at teaching themselves. The majority of kids, however, need more time, more practice, and one-on-one time with a patient teacher. It's just the nature of math - it's hard. Parents who send their kids to "good schools", the trick is that they know that all the other kids at the school also have invested parents. So if they send their kids to kumon, their kids won't rebel, because their classmates are at kumon too. Or if they do extra math at home, their kids are happy about it, because when they demonstrate they are good at math at school, other kids like them. At bad schools, kids get teased for going to kumon, or being good at math because their parents helped them. At bad schools, these kids have no friends, and so they try to fit in, and will not put any effort in math.

Math takes effort. A lot of it. Good parents put forth the effort, and good schools acknowledge and celebrate the kids who put in the effort, and have parents who do the same. And that's the secret.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2017, 05:13 PM
 
Location: The end of the world
804 posts, read 541,141 times
Reputation: 569
You have to practice math every day for the rest of your life in order for it to stick. Mathematics along with the other four major subjects is something that must be practice in repetition. You want them to learn it? Just cut the fat on anything that is not beneficial to them at all including the fat and study with them as you did. Logically the school system is based on parenting and making the excuse for slave labor and not teaching your children is not something that I wouldn't want at all.

Anybody who tells you differ is lying or does not study, practice, or preaches math. You can not master math. You have to use it or lose it.

Think about it like this. I can close my eyes and remember all the tv shows and deleted $@!!# of my computer but I can't make heads or tails out of the formulas I pain painstakingly learned and relearned in college.

Just have them learn it as fast possible and drill them on it when you can. No different then driving a car.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2017, 04:04 PM
 
Location: So Ca
26,653 posts, read 26,614,297 times
Reputation: 24707
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbab5 View Post
Parents who send their kids to "good schools", the trick is that they know that all the other kids at the school also have invested parents. So if they send their kids to kumon, their kids won't rebel, because their classmates are at kumon too. Or if they do extra math at home, their kids are happy about it...
Our kids went to highly ranked public schools here, but we still had to send them to Kumon, because at the time, the state had pulled away from drilling on math facts in lower elementary grades and the focus was on conceptual math. And they did not like Kumon. (What kid would? Not only do they have to check in at the Kumon office for at least an hour twice a week, they have to practice every day for 30 minutes, six days a week).

However, they're adults, and they still thank us for sending them there. CA public schools used to teach drill and kill as part of the curriculum here, so it's unfortunate that parents have to shell out $ for this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2017, 06:59 PM
 
Location: Paranoid State
13,044 posts, read 13,822,556 times
Reputation: 15839
Quote:
Originally Posted by elyn02 View Post
What about you all? Do you end up teaching your kids how to do math mentally (memorizing as well) or does your school do a good job of it?
Unfortunately, I'm a product of an experiment in the California Public School System back in the '60s. I never learned arithmetic very well -- in fact, the process you described is one I never learned.

The experiment was called "New Math" -- If Johnny has 3 bananas, and Suzie has 2 apples, how does Billy feel about the War in Viet Nam? OK, that's an exaggeration. But this isn't: Sun A has a color temperature of 4,017 K; Sun B has a color temperature of 3285 K. If you subtract Sun B's color temperature from Sun A's, what do you get???

My answer: under what set of circumstances would you ever perform arithmetic functions on the color temperature of suns?

To this day, I have difficulty with simple arithmetic. Higher level math was never a problem, but arithmetic is something I can't do.

My suggestion: stay on top of things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2017, 08:55 PM
 
12,690 posts, read 8,919,375 times
Reputation: 34692
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportyandMisty View Post
Unfortunately, I'm a product of an experiment in the California Public School System back in the '60s. I never learned arithmetic very well -- in fact, the process you described is one I never learned.

The experiment was called "New Math" -- If Johnny has 3 bananas, and Suzie has 2 apples, how does Billy feel about the War in Viet Nam? OK, that's an exaggeration. But this isn't: Sun A has a color temperature of 4,017 K; Sun B has a color temperature of 3285 K. If you subtract Sun B's color temperature from Sun A's, what do you get???

My answer: under what set of circumstances would you ever perform arithmetic functions on the color temperature of suns?

....
Yes, I remember "New Math" from when I was in school. Another failed experiment.


But, please, please, please tell me you the color temperature question is not a real question from some text book or class somewhere.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2017, 09:50 AM
 
17,183 posts, read 22,829,738 times
Reputation: 17473
The new math was not really new. Many of the concepts that were added during the 1960s are still around today. The shift was not really in the math, but in the way it was taught.

The Straight Dope: What exactly was the "new math"?

Quote:
After Sputnik was launched, Americans felt the schools were in crisis. The National Science Foundation (NSF), created in 1950 to promote basic scientific research, was expanded in 1957 and began to examine and promote change in secondary school education in math, biology, chemistry, and social sciences. The changes in the curricula and texts had a filter-down effect on the primary schools as well. The main thrust of these changes was a switch from teacher "telling" and student recitation to "inquiry" and "discovery," with the hope that students would be more likely to retain information they found out themselves than what was just told to them in lecture form and memorized. In the hard sciences, and to a lesser extent the social sciences, this was described as "hands-on learning." It's a teaching technique still held in high regard by educators and parents today.

In the more abstract mathematics, however, the 'hands-on' connotation was disturbing to teachers and parents who had learned the addition facts and multiplication tables by rote. One focus of the new math was set theory, where students were encouraged to think of numbers in a new, hopefully more concrete way. Students would take a set of four items, and add it to another set of five. Yes, the result was still nine, but the emphasis was on the concept of addition, rather than the answer per se. Using this technique, students were hoped to discover that the sets would yield the same number regardless of their order (the commutative property), and that taking one original set from the combined set would yield the other original set, thereby discovering subtraction, the inverse of addition. Other aspects of the new math including using number bases other than base-10 and introducing more abstract number theory concepts such as prime numbers earlier in the students' careers. As you say, none of these concepts were newly discovered in the 20th century; the shift was purely in teaching technique, not in basic concepts.
Interesting chart of the differences in curriculum from 1940 to 2010
School Math Development: #6 New Math of the 1960s and the "New" New Math of the 1990s
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2017, 08:16 AM
 
Location: Paranoid State
13,044 posts, read 13,822,556 times
Reputation: 15839
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnff View Post
Yes, I remember "New Math" from when I was in school. Another failed experiment.


But, please, please, please tell me you the color temperature question is not a real question from some text book or class somewhere.
Sadly, it was real.

Actually, Nobel Prize winning physicist Richard P. Feynman documented it in his biography "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!" https://www.amazon.com/Surely-Feynma.../dp/0393316041 . IIRC, while he was a professor at CalTech, Feynman was also volunteering to review the math curriculum in the Pasadena public school systems.

It gets better: he was part of the review committee to select a new set of textbooks for the public schools. Various textbook publishers would wine & dine the selection committee members, bring out textbook authors, circulate short educational briefs about the textbooks, etc. Feynman asked to see the, you know, actual textbooks. So the publishers sent the entire committee members the textbooks.

Some time later came the open meeting/public hearing regarding textbook choice. The committee members gave short presentations on their opinions of the textbooks, saying the liked this feature or that feature.

Then it was Feynman's turn.

He said (I'm doing this from memory), "I received boxes of textbooks and looked them over -- but the interior of the textbooks were all blank pages. They had production covers, but absolutely no content."

It turns out all the opinions being discussed by the committee members were based on the short educational briefs about the textbooks. It turns out not a single member of the textbook selection committee other than Feynman had even opened the boxes shipped to them to inspect the textbooks.

It turns out the textbook publisher, who was present, sheepishly said "well, we haven't actually had the textbooks written yet. That's why we shipped out blank books. We won't commission the textbooks to be written until we actually have enough orders for the new textbooks. That's why we circulated the educational briefs talking about the textbooks rather than the actual textbooks. They don't exist yet."



Last edited by SportyandMisty; 02-18-2017 at 08:33 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top