math curriculum

[pneu-engine]

ABeka's philosophy of education dates back to the 1600's where reading, writing, and arithmetic were the foundation of an education. It is true that math builds on itself, but if the foundation is not built, you cannot build on it. Abeka is the only curriculum that stresses this very point. Not all schools and homeschoolers actually do the drill necessary. My son's 1st grade teacher did not do any drill and he was behind where his sister was. Same curriculum, different teacher.

Schooling requires 3 things
1. An excellent curriculum
2. A teacher who knows how to use the curriculum
3. Structure and discipline to make surethe child stays focused

Unfortunately, most schools and parents don't fit #2. Curriculums like ACE, Alpha Omega and Landmark remove the teacher from the equation and force the student to learn on their own. BJU's curriculum might as well be a public school curriculum with it's worldly philosophies.

In order of priorities I'd put #3 way up at the top of the list. :Green

[HappyChristian]

In order of priorities I'd put #3 way up at the top of the list. :Green

As a former schoolteacher and a homeschool mom, I agree with you, PE. Then #2 and #1 at the bottom - simply because if the child is obedient and the teacher knows how to use the curriculum (and add things that are needed...), then #1 doesn't have to be the greatest.

We quit using ABeka when I was homeschooling my son because we noticed that it seemed (to us, maybe no one else) that they were dumbing down the curriculum. I had used it when I taught school, and really liked it. But the more we used it for our son, the less and less I liked it.

Sorry, pastorj, but I have to disagree with

Abeka is the only curriculum that stresses this very point.

I agree that the foundation must be built well in order to continue. We found that there is more than one curriculum that does that. Saxon is one. Mott Media's Classic Curriculum is another. There are others that were not designed by Christians that are good, too. I know you don't like Saxon, but the truth of the matter is that my son learned much more through Saxon than he did with ABeka.

People have different tastes, and that's great. I believe that a family has to find what works for them - and sometimes one child needs something a bit different from the rest - and that most curricula will work if the teacher is willing to work it.

[Trish]

As a former schoolteacher and a homeschool mom, I agree with you, PE. Then #2 and #1 at the bottom - simply because if the child is obedient and the teacher knows how to use the curriculum (and add things that are needed...), then #1 doesn't have to be the greatest.

We quit using ABeka when I was homeschooling my son because we noticed that it seemed (to us, maybe no one else) that they were dumbing down the curriculum. I had used it when I taught school, and really liked it. But the more we used it for our son, the less and less I liked it.

Sorry, pastorj, but I have to disagree with
I agree that the foundation must be built well in order to continue. We found that there is more than one curriculum that does that. Saxon is one. Mott Media's Classic Curriculum is another. There are others that were not designed by Christians that are good, too. I know you don't like Saxon, but the truth of the matter is that my son learned much more through Saxon than he did with ABeka.

People have different tastes, and that's great. I believe that a family has to find what works for them - and sometimes one child needs something a bit different from the rest - and that most curricula will work if the teacher is willing to work it.

I agree 100% with this post and for us BJU works and has no world philosophy. That is a biased, pensacola fed opinion to get you to use abeka. BTW pastor J, you are in the minority here, the girl was using abeka and it failed her, and most of us who have taught it and other cricula have seen its flaws and have changed our opinions.:hijack: This is not a debate on who's ciricula is the best, In this case a young girl needs to be caught up and a mom is looking for what has worked for us.

[HappyChristian]

He, 5d@h - why don't you check out Classic Curriculum? It may not work if you only use it for one child, but it really is good. Ray's Arithmetic was written right around the same time as McGuffey's Readers (the originals, not the copies that most people have today!) and is very thorough. I used Ray's at the beginning of my son's education, and really liked it. I chose Saxon over Classic simply because I liked it better - but Classic is written by Christians, whereas Saxon is not. They have workbooks as well as the text books.

http://www.mottmedia.com/pages/publicat ... p?Pub=rays This is their math page.

I remember showing the highest book to one of my fellow teachers - who taught math - and he said he couldn't believe it...he didn't know if he knew some of what was in there. And that was for eighth graders back when it was written!

You may be able to use the workbooks without the text for the remedial she needs. Just a thought.

[pneu-engine]

Trish and HC,

You got my vote. :thumb I totally agree. :Green

5 Dumplings@Home,

Please know that I am praying for you and your hubby. When parents are united in the task of educating their kids the details are a whole lot easier to handle. My prayer is that your hubby will get in there beside you and develop methods of instruction and communication to present mathematics on the kids' level. They're his kids, too.

[Pastorj]

I did not place them in any particular order.

Good curriculums do not fail children. What fails children is the teacher failing to teach the curriculum. This would be true even with mediocre curriculums. A good teacher can overcome the curriculum. The problem that most parents have with ABeka is that they treat it like ACE and try to let the children learn on their own. The curriculum is not set up that way. Children aren't suppose to learn on their own. They are suppose to be taught. That is the root problem with the ACE/AO/Landmark curriculums. They expect the child to teach themselves.

Trish,
I have no problem being in the minority on this board on this topic, however, ABeka is used by over 1/2 million homeschoolers. It is the #1 curriculum used in Christian Schools, including the one your MIL teaches in.

As to BJU, The curriculum is actually approved to be used in a number of public schools, not a pensacola bias, just the truth. It is approved because they have simply taken the public school philosophy of education and added God to it. Their education majors actually do their student teaching at local public schools. Not quite the philosophy I would want my children using.

[Trish]

including the one your MIL teaches in.

True, its where I taught also. She dosen't agree with ABEKA 100% either, but teaches what she is given to teach. Boy am I glad to hear that some public schools aer using BJU the gospel is getting out then and that is the most important thing anyway. Hc, do you have a sample of that math you used that you could post?

[HappyChristian]

Hc' date=' do you have a sample of that math you used that you could post?[/quote']

I don't have a sample. I do have the textbooks, but they are in storage at this point, so I can't access them. One of the things that I was thinking about was the introduction to math for beginners. I made an abacus, since Ray's is very much manipulative using (like Saxon) in the early stages. Each page (of the text book - although I used the workbooks for the reading, I didn't for the math, because it was so simple to just use the text) has problems that the child is to work. Each set of problems included addition, subtraction, mulitplication and division - all at the same time. How? Well...

You have one bead. Then you add a second. One and one are two. [simple.] Then you have two beads. Two beads less one is one. (all this time, you are working the beads, and the concept is sinking into the concrete thought processes of the child). You have 2 groups of 1 - 1 two times is 2 (you put them together). Then, you have one group of two, divided leave one.

That isn't exactly how it's worded, but you get the idea. The children are taught to do word problems from the get go. I believe that Ray's being the basis for Josh's education is the reason that he caught math so well. Now, as I've said earlier, he didn't like math as he got to the higher grades - not because he didn't know how to do it, but because he didn't want to. And his Algebra 2 teacher told me that same thing... Had we continued homeschooling (we didn't because we believed God wanted us to put him in school - so I'm not saying this with any regret), we would have used a combination of Saxon and Rays for the higher maths most likely.

The introductory pages in Rays gives a good explanation as to how children learn - something that would benefit any parent who is teaching or will be teaching their kids.

[Trish]

from the sound of it, it is very close to the bju philosophy. I know I was surprised they were doing story problems in kindergarten. They were dividing minipulitives into sets right from the begining too. They were combining adding, subtracting and then later on multiplying and dividing at the same time.

[HappyChristian]

from the sound of it' date=' it is very close to the bju philosophy. I know I was surprised they were doing story problems in kindergarten. They were dividing minipulitives into sets right from the begining too. They were combining adding, subtracting and then later on multiplying and dividing at the same time.[/quote']


There are actually several curricula that do this - Saxon, Rays, BJ, etc. And many of the ones that don't are recommending that manipulatives be used. Kids learn in concrete ways at the beginning and can't really understand the abstract of 1+1=2. But they can count one noodle and one noodle, and then count one, two. An abacus is really fun to use 'cause they can slide all those beads. Or a person can take rice and noodles and let them sit in food coloring to dye them different colors and use the colors as groups, too. All kinds of simple things that can cement math principles into kids' heads.

[Annie]

I know I'm jumping into this topic late...but I'll throw my vote for SAXON in with HC! (And this is coming from a loyal BJU grad! )

Of course, I'd never say Saxon is for everyone...but it's sure working for my kids. Just got the achievement test scores back...DD (4th gr.) is performing at the 7th grade level for total math (10th grade level for "math procedures"), and DS (2nd gr.) is performing at a 4.4 grade level for total math (5th grade for math procedures). I do think that the so-called "grade equivalents" are deceptive, but the kids' national percentile rankings were right up there, too.

I appreciate the rigorousness of A Beka, but I think it misses the mark in teaching meaning that can be grasped early on.

I appreciate the emphasis on concepts (set theory, place value, number line, meaningful explanations of basic algorithms) by BJUP, but I think it lacks adequate drill, practice, and memorization.

Saxon, IMHO, is a "happy mix" of these two curricula. I personally would never consider ACE or any pace-based curriculum, but that's just me...

I think the key is to find something that works for your child(ren) and stick with it. Otherwise, there is the potential for gaps in learning.

[pneu-engine]

I think the key is to find something that works for your child(ren) and stick with it. Otherwise, there is the potential for gaps in learning.

You betcha, I totally agree. :thumb

This is why I write my own and use my college algrebra book as my guide. :Green

Not only that but our instruction sessions are more discussion than anything else in the early stages. It isn't long before the student is teaching himself and doesn't even realize it. :wink

[Annie]

You betcha, I totally agree. :thumb

This is why I write my own and use my college algrebra book as my guide. :Green

Not only that but our instruction sessions are more discussion than anything else in the early stages. It isn't long before the student is teaching himself and doesn't even realize it.

Although I would never attempt writing my own math curriculum, I have been known to set aside the day's lesson in favor of launching into animated explanations of base 2 (and base 3, 4, 5, etc.) number systems...with my fourth grader. Kids like knowing things like that...It's like knowing a secret language. I know my fourth grader has probably forgotten all about different number systems, but maybe the next time she comes across them, she'll remember how much fun we had talking about them.

PE, I think you and my dad would get along nicely. I attended a rigid, traditional, A Beka-oriented elementary school, where there was ONE WAY (the "teacher's way," I called it) to do a math problem. As he looked over my shoulder while I completed my math homework, my dad would ask me to explain what I was doing. I'd say things like, "Now put the two there," or, "bring down the seven." My dad delighted in asking, "Why?" and "What does 'carry' really mean?" Then, to my utter horror, he would assert that there were many other ways to do the problem...and would proceed to show me how. By the end, I'd be in tears, insisting that "the teacher didn't want me to do the problem that way--she would count it wrong." I can't tell you how many times Dad went through this process with me. Now I look back on those times fondly...and torture my own children with looooong explanations of different ways to attack a long division problem. Hee-hee!

[pneu-engine]

Although I would never attempt writing my own math curriculum, I have been known to set aside the day's lesson in favor of launching into animated explanations of base 2 (and base 3, 4, 5, etc.) number systems...with my fourth grader. Kids like knowing things like that...It's like knowing a secret language. I know my fourth grader has probably forgotten all about different number systems, but maybe the next time she comes across them, she'll remember how much fun we had talking about them.

PE, I think you and my dad would get along nicely. I attended a rigid, traditional, A Beka-oriented elementary school, where there was ONE WAY (the "teacher's way," I called it) to do a math problem. As he looked over my shoulder while I completed my math homework, my dad would ask me to explain what I was doing. I'd say things like, "Now put the two there," or, "bring down the seven." My dad delighted in asking, "Why?" and "What does 'carry' really mean?" Then, to my utter horror, he would assert that there were many other ways to do the problem...and would proceed to show me how. By the end, I'd be in tears, insisting that "the teacher didn't want me to do the problem that way--she would count it wrong." I can't tell you how many times Dad went through this process with me. Now I look back on those times fondly...and torture my own children with looooong explanations of different ways to attack a long division problem. Hee-hee!

Truly amazing. :Green Thanks, Annie for that post. :thumb

Your dad and I are completely identical in our teaching methods. :cooldude: :cool

I remain convinced that this method is what God intended for us to do. I.E. getting interested in the deep intrigues and beauties of His marvelous Creation. Mathematics is deep, intriguing, challenging, and incredibly beautiful all at the same time.

I deeply pity those poor students whose teachers lock their students into drudgery in math assignments.

When we understand the whys, wherefores and how-some-evers of the intricate workings of mathematics whole new vistas are opened up and suddenly math is no longer as difficult as it might have been. :Green

[HappyChristian]

Amen to both Annie and PE!!! When our son was first learning about things like n+7=14 and how to solve it by moving the n - it kind of made him go . But when I told him that he had to look at it as a clue so he could solve the mystery, he began to actually enjoy it. Too bad it didn't last! Kids have such a natural curiosity that the intricacies of learning can really hold them spellbound...if we think outside of what we deem "teaching."

Annie - I'm with you on the pace-centered learning. Although I have to admit - my mom is using School of Tomorrow (ACE) with my nephew, and he actually learns quite a bit. I think if there isn't a crowd of people, and the teacher knows how to supplement, it can be done...but I still like Saxon best (Ray's would come a real close second!). Just for clarification, though, for those who've never used them, the Mott Media workbooks aren't paces. There are four (in the language...again, I didn't use the math workbooks) per year. They would be equivalent to ABeka, BJ or Saxon workbooks - the texts are still necessary to be able to do the work.