We Can Do by Moshe Kai with guest Robert Levy discussing Saxon Math.

[Robert Levy]

I'll chime in a bit too, Nee1.

"I’ll up my goal to keeping him a minimum of 3-4 years ahead in math and reading. That will change very rapidly to keeping him 5 years ahead, and even up to 8 years ahead, just like Robert accomplished with his son. So 3-4 years ahead will now be my current minimum, and then we will quickly scale it up depending on how he performs. Thank you so much for that insight."

Just a heads up here.  Saxon does get more time consuming at the higher levels, so polishing off 4 books in the first year, starting at 54 may be doable (and was done by David), that may not be as possible later on...although 2 books per year through junior high should be doable.  Also the kids, if in school, will be getting more homework as they get older, so there's that competition for time.  I can't really quantify it much better, I just observed that David's available time for Saxon dropped off as he got older...so don't count on more than 2 books for year starting at junior high.


"And thank you so much for updating us with how your daughter is doing with Saxon. 2 lessons every day is great, and as Robert mentioned,  in 11 weeks, you can get the entire book finished, then move on to Saxon 65, and so on. Please keep us updated with how it’s all going, I’m learning a lot from your updates. And thank you to Robert for explaining how David completed the 4 Saxon books in just over a year. I'll be using that game plan too, so thanks a lot for sharing."

Sure thing, and I second you, keep us informed on your kid.  If he (I think) does well, that increases my credibility on the subject and may well mean that it's doable by many, many, kids - which is what I think anyway.


"I am learning so much from this thread, and I’ve made serious modifications to my plans. And my expectations for school have changed immensely. If my child will be schooled, I will consider it simply as a day care center (as Robert advised); my child's real education will be at home under my tutelage."

Yep, dead-on.  And your child will appreciate that for the rest of his life, especially as your child sees other kids struggling.  And your child will still pick up a lot of good stuff at school in other areas, but you won't have to worry about the core stuff.


"Thanks so much, Mandabplus3. And thank you, Robert. I'm very grateful for the insights you both have shared."

Any time, like I say, this is a load of fun for me.  I had given up on finding parents that believe this is possible.

[FomerlyMrsObedih_Now_BatmansMama]

I have been following this thread since it started and especially closely after you entered the conversation Robert, and I have to admit that I had mixed feelings at the start. I understand that a lot of accelerated kids focus on Math, there was a popular programme in the UK on child prodigies were an Asian family were very clear that it was hard work that earned their sons' achievements, watch them respond to the very negative feedback they received for their sharing their methods - http://www.channel4.com/programmes/child-genius/articles/video-interview-with-wajih-and-zohaibs-parents

I guess I'd always thought literature was better able to provide a well rounded education so I had always planned to use a literature-based homeschool curriculum like Sonlight and use something else for math like Saxon. But I'd never thought I would have a specific maths focus for my son, well one because I really did not like maths myself much in school and thought of myself as a word person not a number person. It's not that I did not do well in it, I was still above average in my class, but I never really felt like I got is or enjoyed it and that has continued until now.

I know maths is important, although I still find myself googliing that phrase for evidence to really sell me on it, but I have never given serious consideration to emphasizing math with my son until after reading this thread. So here is my question for you Robert or Mandabplus3 or anyone who wishes to chime in really - to achieve the things we're talking about here what goals should I set for my two year old son (he's two this Thursday) for us to achieve by 3. Robert I know you started with David at 3.5 yrs and Mandab you started earlier, what would you suggest should be my goals from this year moving forard, even in terms of concentration time, his understanding of work vs play time etc.


Many thanks for all the insight and passion shared on this thread!

Davinia

[Robert Levy]

To MrsObedih,

"I have been following this thread since it started and especially closely after you entered the conversation Robert, and I have to admit that I had mixed feelings at the start."

Welcome to this thread and glad you joined.  As to mixed feelings - thank you, one man can only take so much hero worship - but I understand what you're saying.


"I understand that a lot of accelerated kids focus on Math, there was a popular programme in the UK on child prodigies were an Asian family were very clear that it was hard work that earned their sons' achievements, watch them respond to the very negative feedback they received for their sharing their methods - http://www.channel4.com/programmes/child-genius/articles/video-interview-with-wajih-and-zohaibs-parents"

I'll watch that, sounds interesting.  The thing to keep in mind about maths is that it's serious stuff.  In fact, I don't think it's a coincidence at all that the Industrial Revolution began almost to the day when Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz published their discovery of Calculus, as it formed the mathematical backbone of the Industrial Revolution and more.  I'd still be riding horses had it not been for them, but I like my cars better, and they pollute much, much, less (per mile driven/ridden).


"I guess I'd always thought literature was better able to provide a well rounded education so I had always planned to use a literature-based homeschool curriculum like Sonlight and use something else for math like Saxon."

Haven't heard of Sonlight, but you know what I think of Saxon.  Yes, many people do just fine without maths, but, as I've mentioned earlier, we're talking a probability game when it comes to our little guys.  If they're good at maths, and literature, then they simply have a much better chance of doing well, than just one or the other (and I would strongly argue that maths trumps literature...but many people have done fine without being good at maths).


"But I'd never thought I would have a specific maths focus for my son, well one because I really did not like maths myself much in school and thought of myself as a word person not a number person."

You're a parent, that's your call.  If you sense that maths isn't going to work, then literature only may be best.  In my case I knew David had the genes to do maths, regardless of the fact that he hated it (back then).


"I know maths is important, although I still find myself googliing that phrase for evidence to really sell me on it, but I have never given serious consideration to emphasizing math with my son until after reading this thread. So here is my question for you Robert or Mandabplus3 or anyone who wishes to chime in really - to achieve the things we're talking about here what goals should I set for my two year old son (he's two this Thursday) for us to achieve by 3."

Unfortunately I have trouble remembering David's timeline back at that age.  I think I was hitting him up with numbers, but I'm not certain.  I would suggest that you just use addition flash-cards.  As I mentioned earlier, don't worry if he understands the concept of 2 plus 3, just get him to say "5".  He will learn the concept later - that was what I found out, the hard way.  The concept is much harder than the fact...as the concept is abstract, whereas the fact is simply memorization.  Also use a number line, it really worked with David.  He would just tick down the line.  But it was on a marker board, so I stared erasing numbers, and he had to remember what was in between...and finally he got there, without the number line.  The numbner facts are very tough at that age, so be patient and expect progress to be a tiny bit at a time.


"Robert I know you started with David at 3.5 yrs and Mandab you started earlier, what would you suggest should be my goals from this year moving forard, even in terms of concentration time, his understanding of work vs play time etc."

Just as I wrote above.  And if you can get through addition, then subtraction, and times, and division (the last two actually went very easily for him).  Their brains are like computer chips at this point, if you can burn it into them, they will never forget it.  But if you wait too long (and I mean really long), it will never get there.  Just like learning a language fluently.

Best of luck!!

[PokerDad]

This thread is just a joy to read. Thank you again Robert for all your continued input, it's valued highly around here (if you couldn't tell).

I think the number line is an awesome idea.

As to prior to age 3 sort of things you can do...

When I first found BrillKids, I figured out who seemed to have some great results and then attempted to read every post they ever made on BK. That took me a while to say the least. Two of those parents were aangeles and nadia0801. If you look at what their daughters are doing mathematically from age 3 to 4, it's absolutely awe inspiring. I'd recommend going back and reading the sorts of things they were doing at age 2+. One of the biggies, IMO, is when they transitioned into using the soroban. Both girls also do traditional algorithms to solve problems, but they can also do it mentally with Anzan via their soroban training. For the early stuff, I plan on going more this route and then once we have basic addition, subtraction, multiplication and division down, we'll be off and running with Saxson 5/4. I see no reason why this couldn't happen by around age 4 just based on what I've read from these other parents. Perhaps I'm dreaming and certainly time and effort will tell....

http://forum.brillkids.com/teaching-your-child-math/cammie's-anzan-(mental-math)/
http://forum.brillkids.com/teaching-your-child-math/math-supplement-for-advanced-3-year-old-(almost-4)/
(be sure to check the last page of this thread)

[nee1]

MrsObedih,

I did share my reasons for my Math focus on this thread - http://forum.brillkids.com/teaching-your-child-math/proportion-of-el-time-devoted-to-math-(split-from-2-year-old-thread)/msg88896/?topicseen. Check out the thread. And all of those reasons mean very much to me.  And on that thread, I pasted 3 news articles on Zohaib and Wajib Ahmed (the boys you mentioned), alongside the interview and written testimonials from their parents. Further, I've done quite a large amount of reading on really clever kids, and realised that most of them were very good in math too. You may get to skip a class for being very good in math and reading, but you may not get to skip a class if you are only good in reading.  LDSMom made that point on this thread.

Further, from Harold Stevenson's research which I cited on that thread, most of the teachers questioned tended to neglect math, because:
1) They do not like math themselves.
2) They do not feel very competent in math.
3) They do not think math is a very important subject.
You'll notice that most of the teachers tended to focus on/ love teaching the language arts. So what is a parent to do? If I know that there is likelihood that my kid's teacher may not be a math-lover, and hence will likely let him down in that subject, I hammer it a lot at home. And that is what I'm doing currently. Take for example the story Robert shared about the bird-lover teacher David had in 3rd grade. A very funny story, but as Robert mentioned, the other kids lost a year in math and reading because of the teacher’s love for birds.

Robert also said something very important, that while reading can be picked up everywhere, math is different. Reading could be easy, but math may not be. But I know that is a very important subject, and you can't get by without a solid knowledge of some math. Most University courses need math a lot, and I've seen a lot of students fumble because of poor math skills.

I recently got this great article from Caroline Mukisa ( of mathinsider.com) in my email box.  The article is titled 'Degrees that need Math'  - http://www.mathsinsider.com/degrees-that-need-math/. And also this one titled `Is College Still Worth It? (Yup, Especially If You Study Math)'. Link - http://www.mathsinsider.com/is-college-worth-it/. Check out both links. You'll be surprised at the level of math that even literature-based courses require.

TeachingMyToddlers did paste an article on this forum titled 'Kindergarten Performance/Math Linked to Later Academic Success'. Here is the link http://forum.brillkids.com/general-discussion-b5/article-kindergarten-performancemath-linked-to-later-academic-success/.  Read the article, and then read the thread to see the insightful remarks of Brillkids members. PokerDad made salient points on that thread, and that has stayed with me since them. 

My focus is not just on keeping him ahead in math, but keeping him in ahead in reading too. The two go hand in hand. He's still very young, but I'm working hard to get him fluent in math as he will be in reading.

[Korrale4kq]

Mrs Obedih,

My son will be 3 in December, so very close in age to your little one. Between the age of 2-3 our goals are for James to know his addition, subtraction, multiplication and division math facts. Unlike Robert, we are going for a little more math understanding. I am sure if I drilled him with flash cards I could have him memorize all those math facts by the time he is 3. But instead we play math. We play math daily, and a lot. My son loves math, but so do I.

Right now we are working on using different manipulatives, unifix cubes, abacus, beads, touch math numerals, tally sticks, m&m's, cuisenere rods etc  to do addition and subtraction. We do number bonds, and traditional 1+1=? Equations and number lines. Once we are able to do double digit addition and subtraction we will move onto multiplication and division. Starting with manipulatives, skip counting and outright memorizing flash cards.

Before we got to this point James learnt to subtitize, then match math numerals and amounts. Then counting, forwards and backwards and now we are counting from 10-100 by tens. I will introduce 11-99 systematically so he doesn't need to memorize all the numbers but uses the pattern to fill in the blanks. He can go on forever from that point.

James also does Kindergarten Math right now to fill in the blanks. Pretty much covering concepts.  We will continue to do that.

We plan to start Saxon 5/4 with James is 4-6. Whenever I feel he is ready. I don't want to pressure him on it at too young and age but if he remains the mathy kid that he is, I think it won't be too long until we start.

Oh and we will always use IXL.com to make sure he is doing everything.

[nee1]

PokerDad,

I've had mixed feeling about Anzan mental math after reading Arvi's question on page 8 of the thread http://forum.brillkids.com/teaching-your-child-math/math-supplement-for-advanced-3-year-old-(almost-4)/ and Aangeles and Nadia0801's responses to that question on pages 8 and 9 of the thread. 

I’ve read this thread too - http://forum.brillkids.com/teaching-your-child-math/question-(or-hypothesis-if-you-will)-about-anzan/. I thought 'If Anzan does not build number sense, what's the point?''  I may be wrong, correct me if I'm wrong.

[Korrale4kq]

Née,

I am going to go check out those threads right now. So my thoughts might change. But I don't see how doing Anzan will hurt understanding.
We do RS math with the abacus, (I know it is not soroban, but from my understanding you can transition easily because it is both based in 5s) and the way that they do math on the RS abacus had been able to give me a more visual understanding of math.

I was a mathy kid, always getting High Distinctions each years, in national math competition, I was also in special accelerated math classes. I loved math, I still do. I am the odd one who likes to pull out an algebra textbook and do exercises for fun. Math came easily. My math instruction was hands on in the early  grades. in high school we moved  to text books, they look very much like Saxon text books. And I loved them! I loved seeing how the math was done, then doing all the problems. I was able to do mental equations in my head, not by Anzan soroban, methods but because I could write out entire equations in my head.

Now all that being said.... It wasn't until I started learning about Rightstart math with the abacus did I really understand how multiplication and division worked. I could not fathom how either were to be done on the abacus. And now that I see how easily it is done I am floored. I feel like a fool. And I can see how if you learn the abacus or soroban in your head for Anzan how it really makes everything make sense.

[PokerDad]

I'll go check those pages of the thread, I missed several posts in there.

As for the hypothesis about Anzan thread that I started, I remember Chris bringing up Richard Feynman's comment about the abacus salesman. I went ahead and read that entire book and enjoyed it thoroughly. I think there's a fallacy in reading too much into his (Feynman) comment about "they don't know numbers". In that particular chapter, Feynman went on and on about the time in his life when he started doing mental math. His ultimate challenge was taking on the salesman - and he admits that he got lucky in the number that they chose to cube root.

His conclusion or comment about not knowing numbers came from when the salesman asked him how he beat him. Feynman, who was around numbers his whole life and mental math for quite some time, tried to explain how he just "knew" what 12 cubed was and how he took it from there. This didn't make a whole lot of sense to the salesman because he didn't have a working memory of math facts like Feynman had - and was trying to calculate with the abacus to see what Feynman was talking about. The problem was, the abacus was precise and Feynman used a method of estimation followed by smaller and smaller calculations that were easier to arrive at the answer much quicker than the mechanical process the salesman was using. But, you ought not conclude that this was duplicable for any joe shmoe off the street.... because it's not.

The reason is because you have a guy that not only won a Nobel Prize in physics, but also contributed tremendously to human knowledge in a handful of ways. His contributions to quantum mechanics, particularly probability waves, are still used as part of the current theory - and bears his name. This guy really was the upper echelon of people that have ever walked the planet in terms depth and scope of mathematics and physics. It's not really fair to compare a guy like that to some uneducated poor abacus salesman in Brazil. The fact that he was able to make things interesting with a guy like Feynman ought to say something to the efficacy of the calculation method he was using. But, I think you raise a concern which anyone reading ought to weigh for themselves.

PS... in that book, Feynman also criticized Einstein's assistants for the very same reason "they don't even know his theory!"

[nee1]

PokerDad, point taken. But how about this story pasted by Chris1, still on that thread? Link - http://www.osaka-abacus.or.jp/english/soroban_experience.htm

[FomerlyMrsObedih_Now_BatmansMama]

Thank you so much for your response Robert, I do feel honoured to have you guidance on this (not to add to the hero worship or anything   )

I will do as you recommend. He knows his numbers to 20 and we were working on number value but I won't hesitate now to add maths facts in song and flash card format. I may not have been taught math in a way that left me with a burning passion but he certainly seems to enjoy it, probably from his dad's genes. I hope to remedy my maths issues through homeschooling so I can help Douglas, certainly bearing in mind that it is not always going to be enjoyable for him OR ME should steel my will to ensure he is not in the position I am in now with regards to my feelings about numbers.

Glad you do not necessarily think literature is pointless, just that maths has a higher probability of guaranteeing success in later life which even  I cannot argue with - my lack of enjoying maths led to me qualifying as a secondary school teacher    Although not too long after I knew it was not the right career for me and left to EL and ultimately homeschool my son - that is how traumatised I was by what I saw in schools even Ofsted rated Outstanding ones. I very quickly felt disillusioned with the school system in the UK and even the tools I was given to do the job - and I was trained via the Oxbridge of teacher training institutions in the country. Perhaps it was just me, but like Mandab said I felt I learnt more about educational philosophy from this website than the essays I had to write for my teacher training. The different styles of learning and curricula I was exposed to through my research into early learning and homeschooling made me want to cry at some of the programmes I was required to teach - not to talk of the abilities majority of pupils had after years in education at their final years of secondary school and even sixth form (15years to 18/19 years). It was truly shocking. I am talking about students about to go into university who cannot write grammatically correct structured work.

I feel reading was the  that enabled me to be a good writer, I do not remember being formally taught grammer although given the schools I was in in my indigenous hometown Nigeria, I probably was! But I know my love of reading opened many doors and opportunities for me, so while I am passionate about sharing that with my son, I DEFINITELY want to do better than me with math. So Robert we shall be following your recommendation for math and thank you very much for bravely facing down critics of your methods, so parents like us can benefit from you willingness to tread the less beaten path.

God bless,
Davinia

[Robert Levy]

To PokerDad,

"This thread is just a joy to read. Thank you again Robert for all your continued input, it's valued highly around here (if you couldn't tell)."

Thanks, I was just wondering about you.  You started the thread and I hadn't heard too much from you recently.  And yes, it's been a blast for me.


"I think the number line is an awesome idea."

Thanks, it worked.  I was flailing - David couldn't remember or derive anything.  By derive, I mean putting 2 marbles with 3 marbles and understanding it's 5 marbles.  It was hopeless.  The number line gave him something to latch on to (a tool), rather than trying to pull the answers out of his head.


"One of the biggies, IMO, is when they transitioned into using the soroban. Both girls also do traditional algorithms to solve problems, but they can also do it mentally with Anzan via their soroban training."

Wow, never heard of it, so no comment either way.


"For the early stuff, I plan on going more this route and then once we have basic addition, subtraction, multiplication and division down, we'll be off and running with Saxson 5/4. I see no reason why this couldn't happen by around age 4 just based on what I've read from these other parents. Perhaps I'm dreaming and certainly time and effort will tell...."

I don't know, we were hurting at the end with his number sheets.  It wasn't until he was 6 that I even heard of Saxon, and was by sheer luck (my life story).  I don't know how he would have done if he started earlier.  On thing I do remember is that we had apply to "The School" in Houston (i.e., the best private school), at the insistence of our pediatrician.  He was applying for Kindergarten, at age 5 (just turned 5).  I wanted him to demonstrate he was smart, so we were doing number sheets with reduction of compound fractions.  I got him there, but he was ready to take off my head (and I didn't blame him).  So he was pretty far along then, even though I didn't have any kind of text to use.  So, even at that age (just turning 5), he would have likely been ready for 5/4, I just hadn't heard about it - and it would have gone slower (he started Saxon about 1.5 years later).

[FomerlyMrsObedih_Now_BatmansMama]

@Pokerdad - thank you very much for your helpful addition! I will read those threads again (I am sure I came across them during my time of reading through BK forum posts, but forgot about it). Yes, I remember conversations about Soroban and Anzan, but somehow thought this would be added at a later stage. Will read through and see if it Douglas can handle it during this next EL year (2-3 that is). Number line is good especially as it can be a drawn one not a manipulative. The thing is I'm going to have to learn how to use these things before teaching my DS, good thing I'm starting early . Thanks again.

@Nee1 - I think I actually first read about Wajih and Zohaib from your post! The watched the full documentary on Channel 4. Thanks for your post to reasons for math, because it really does not come naturally for me to assume math superiority (although intellectually I get it and am starting to get it even more). The links to aangeles and TmT I will read through also. Really glad though that it is not a case of one being better than the other, working hard to make him strong at both I can definitely get behind.

@Korrale4kq - I really love the idea of doing math games, we sort of do that now using Marshmellow Math, but like I said math is not my strength so I am learning via the resources we gather as much as Douglas is. Would Mathtacular kit and DVD1 be a good enough start for math games? I know Touch math is prohibitively expensive, do your recommend Rightstart kit over Mathtacular's? It's a lot more expensive and we could buy an abacus or soroban separately? I appreciate your thoughts on this.

Thanks so much for all the advise and links, I feel more confident about setting our agenda for this year!

[Robert Levy]

Nee1,

"Further, from Harold Stevenson's research which I cited on that thread, most of the teachers questioned tended to neglect math, because:
1) They do not like math themselves.
2) They do not feel very competent in math.
3) They did not think math was a very important subject."

Now this one I can agree with.  There are a lot of options in college for people that are decent at math - there are far fewer for those that are not.  One of those is 'Education'.  So the system tends to push non-math people into education.  My mom has mentioned to me that she thinks women's liberation had a lot to do with declining teacher quality.  Basically, women that were smart now had choices beyond being a teacher...so schools were left the others.

I also just checked on the University of Michigan (where I went) School of Education website.  They require 3 courses in math to be a primary or junior high teacher (sometimes more for high school, depending on the field).  The pre-requisite for the first course is Algebra 1 and Geometry - that's it, 2 years of math in high school, although they 'recommend' more.  The first required course is simply arithmetic.  The second course is makes it to geometry (with some probability and statistics, but I suspect simple stuff).  The third one is an elective.  More advanced math is required for an English Degree (at least at Michigan State, couldn't figure it out for Michigan).  My point here isn't that high-level math is needed to teach 7 year olds, it's that when a School of Education takes students that only did 2 years of high school math, they are really taking students that are either lousy at math or hate it (or, probably, both).  Not every teacher is like this, but some certainly are.


"Robert also said something very important, that while reading can be picked up everywhere, math is not the same."

Yea, that was one thing that really struck me.  Once he had reading wired, by Age 4, David would pick up anything with words and start reading - including adult novels (he never told me what was in those...LOL).  He just loved it.  But math, just forget it.  To this day, literally, to this day, I have never seen him do a math problem for fun.  I even do math problems for fun...to test my sharpness and memory - but I've never, ever, seen him do a single problem without some external force telling him to do so.  He never wanted to do Saxon, and I'm sure he just wished I would forget about it when I came home from work.  He's likely different in that way, but it does make him a worst-case example.


"The article is titled 'Degrees that need Math'"

Agree...a Biology, for example, degree requires a full year of college-level Calculus - and you won't get through that year unless you seriously have your act together.  The colleges mean business with that course.

[MummyRoo]

I very specifically remember what one of the top UK state schools considered to be 'teaching grammar' - we spent several lessons in year 8 or 9 learning that "a verb is a doing word and a noun is a person, place or thing". That was the total sum of my grammar education (if we don't count my choosing to learn Latin, and later Russian    )

I was lucky enough to live near and attend a really "good" secondary school. Despite what the government insists about the GCSE/A-Level exams being equally hard, we all knew it was a joke.Once we had drilled our way through the past GCSE exam papers in any subject, the teachers dug out the O-level papers. They are the exams my parent's generation took which were later replaced with GCSEs. We COULDN'T DO THEM!!!  It was laughable - the older the exam paper, the more we struggled! There were chunks of the paper we had to skip because the topic was no longer covered, and what was covered needed so much more depth of knowledge to answer accurately. That, if nothing else, is a sign that the current system isn't working as well as the old one.

My disillusions with the state school system started at the age of 15 and have only gotten worse with time. I knew before I even finished school that I didn't want to entrust the education of my children to one. They refused to challenge me for years, then called me a failure when I stumbled at the challenge of sixth form (because they let me get lazy and I forgot how to cope with being challenged). I might not have the qualifications to teach anything, but I am positive I can't do worse than the school. If sending my son into the education system becomes a necessity, his primary teacher will still be me

I really favour a literature-based education for my son. I plan to use Ambleside for the most part. However, I put an EQUAL importance on literacy and numeracy - he will get his literature exposure through all the humanities, but I expect my son to excel at maths, too. Unfortunately, there is a much smaller number of maths-based subjects than language-based, so the proportion of time spent on maths compared to specific English grammar will be much greater.

document.getElementById('recent_loading').style.display = 'none';document.getElementById('recent_page_box').style.display = '';

Page: 1/4  

Loading...

Members

• Total Members: 214772
• Latest: addisonjones

Stats

• Total Posts: 110526
• Total Topics: 19136
• Online Today: 509
• Online Ever: 826
• (January 22, 2020, 12:09:49 AM)

Users Online

• Users: 0
• Guests: 364
• Total: 364