What do you know about "Everyday Math"

[BabbyO]

Stachio will be starting 4K in Sept, but a friend's son is starting 1st grade and he was talking (complaining) about Everyday Math - which is apparently what is being taught in WI schools now. I really don't know anything about it.

What do the wise parents here think about Everyday Math if your kiddos are taught this in school? Is it the same as the "Math" system that was discussed in the "regrouping" thread?

Would love some BTDT feedback!

[infomama]

Our school district teaches Everyday Math and it's absolutely horrible. Even the teachers hate it. I find that it skips all over the place and I think the lessons and homework assignments are just bad. I hope they get rid of it sooner than later

[SnuggleBuggles]

Dislike.

They used it grades 1-3 at ds1's school then switched. I felt like the kids couldn't master anything bc they'd do it for a short time then move on then come back a few weeks later.
Eta- ds1 is great at math so be did fine w it though.

[crl]

It is a spiral curriculum where they spend a short time on a topic and then move on only to return to it later. Some people here love it and espouse that it promotes a deeper understanding of math than many other curriculums. I had a teacher acknowledge what I thought which was that it's not the greatest fit for ds. He tends to need a lot of repetitions to get math and they were always moving on before he really had the concept. So when they came back to it he wasn't ready to build on the concept.

We have had teachers supplement it with other curriculums and that seems to make it go much better for ds.

Catherine

[gatorsmom]

There have been some indepth discussions here of the Math curriculums so definitely do a search here.

We did everyday math for half a year in 1st grade at our other school. In a nut shell, it is great for kids who don't do well with repetition. But for those kids who need repetition and memorization in order to learn a concept it is terrible.

[JElaineB]

DS is in fourth grade and has used Everyday Math since the beginning. It's worked very well for him. I am impressed that they work on critical thinking skills at such an early age. He has touched on many topics I didn't expect him to see until much later - such as algebra. His school does use some additional skill drills (such as multiplication facts) that the curriculum is a bit weak on. But he has done well with Everyday Math and enjoys it. They definitey use different methods for computation that I am used to (don't have any clue how he does long division!) but it seems to be much more intutitive for him than I remember it being for me (and I got up to Calc I in high school and Calc II in college so I'm not a math slouch).

[BabbyO]

There have been some indepth discussions here of the Math curriculums so definitely do a search here.

We did everyday math for half a year in 1st grade at our other school. In a nut shell, it is great for kids who don't do well with repetition. But for those kids who need repetition and memorization in order to learn a concept it is terrible.

Thanks for the quick break down. I have a feeling this would have been a great curriculum for DH and terrible for me! We'll see how it goes for the kiddos!

I'll also do a search. I just haven't had a chance to!

[AnnieW625]

I believe it is widely used in the State of California these days in public schools. I believe I used it for my Algebra 2 class during my senior year in high school (1994-1995). It was the first time that the text had been used in our district, and I know for sure it wasn't used again when my brother and sister were in school (my brother grad. in 1998, and my sister in 2005) and both of them went through Algebra 2 as well (I think my brother did pre calc. actually). There were certain aspects of it like real world math (we had to do a project about financing a car) that were helpful and I understood, but for traditional algebra 2 stuff it wasn't all that great of a product for me. Now if you had no issue with learning math I think it would probably be okay, but the only class I have ever failed ever was Algebra 2 so I tend to think it isn't that successfull (thankfully I was still able to go to a 4 yr. college right out of high school).

[georgiegirl]

There are certain aspects I like, but I don't like spiraling back for DD. she picks up math concepts very easily but then has to deal with them again later in the year and the next year too and she's already mastered that principle. But I do like how it teaches the concepts/theory behind the computation. In K, DD learned how to tell time to the minute, and in first she was bored when they learned time this year because she already had achieved the goal/standard for second grade in first grade. I can see how kids who need more repetition get lost.

[larig]

I believe it is widely used in the State of California these days in public schools. I believe I used it for my Algebra 2 class during my senior year in high school (1994-1995). It was the first time that the text had been used in our district, and I know for sure it wasn't used again when my brother and sister were in school (my brother grad. in 1998, and my sister in 2005) and both of them went through Algebra 2 as well (I think my brother did pre calc. actually). There were certain aspects of it like real world math (we had to do a project about financing a car) that were helpful and I understood, but for traditional algebra 2 stuff it wasn't all that great of a product for me. Now if you had no issue with learning math I think it would probably be okay, but the only class I have ever failed ever was Algebra 2 so I tend to think it isn't that successfull (thankfully I was still able to go to a 4 yr. college right out of high school).
I am pretty sure everyday math is just preK -6th. I was teaching high school math in the 90s, and reviewed a lot of texts for adoption, and I don't think an everyday Math text passed my desk. (And it would have, as we were in close proximity to the U of Chicago, which is the home of EM.) there are other texts that spiral, but they are not UCSMP. Maybe that is what you're thinking of? Mcdougal littell's series comes to mind. It had kind of a pinkish beige cover.

My perspective as a math (mostly calculus and precalc) teacher and parent is that I'd love to have my child in an EM school. It's a wonderful curriculum, and if done right fosters a deeper understanding of mathematical concepts that are important in higher level mathematics. I saw a thread recently about partial sums, that is a concept that comes up in calculus when students cover series. Having exposure to this stuff early and then seeing it as it spirals through later grades' work is important.

The biggest hurdle for EM is that most elementary teachers are not required to take rigorous mathematics classes pre-service. It's a lot easier to teach EM if one has an understanding of the mathematics concepts that EM is working to build. It goes beyond the arithmetic that is in the lessons, at least that is the intent.

[AnnieW625]

I am pretty sure everyday math is just preK -6th. I was teaching high school math in the 90s, and reviewed a lot of texts for adoption, and I don't think an everyday Math text passed my desk. (And it would have, as we were in close proximity to the U of Chicago, which is the home of EM.) there are other texts that spiral, but they are not UCSMP. Maybe that is what you're thinking of? Mcdougal littell's series comes to mind. It had kind of a pinkish beige cover.
......


I am not 100% sure either, but the concepts weren't at all like the concepts I learned two years later when I finally was able to pass Algebra 2 (or what was called college math there). The text was a notebook type text that was white, and had maroon lettering on it. The notebook could be put in a 3 ring binder.

I did look up EM and yes I think it could just be for the primary grades. The concepts just seemed really similar.

[nfowife]

As a teacher I really liked everyday math and the philosophy behind the spiraling curriculum. However like any program there are going to be holes and as a teacher we would fill them in. It is designed to be a long-term program and the success can't really be measured in a short snapshot. Students who are taught with EM over years do have a greater deep understanding of math concepts and more critical thinking skills. It isn't just teaching the algorithm but encouraging students to come up with a method that will work for them. We would still (in early grades) work on fact memorization and also explicit skills with struggling students.
IMO the parents who seemed theist negative about the program (when I was a teacher) didn't like that it was so "different". It did require parents to learn new ways of doing things they already knew and that was not easy to get them to buy into. Change is never easy.
My children's current school used Singapore math until last year and I liked that program as well. They switched this year to a more traditional program- Houghton Mifflin Harcourt- and I'm not as impressed.

[niccig]

The biggest hurdle for EM is that most elementary teachers are not required to take rigorous mathematics classes pre-service. It's a lot easier to teach EM if one has an understanding of the mathematics concepts that EM is working to build. It goes beyond the arithmetic that is in the lessons, at least that is the intent.

This has been our experience too. I observed a grade 3/4 class for a college class. There were 2 teachers in the class. The lead teacher was great at explaining the concepts, walking the students through the steps. The assistant teacher wasn't as good and even the kids who were quick with math, got confused.

DS also needs more practice of concepts than he was given. We're currently doing math tutoring to catch him up (current teacher won't complete the grade 2 workbook and his new school will), and I've been impressed with how quickly DS has picked up concepts when explained to him + practice to learn it. I'm going to give him extra practice next year, and may go back to tutoring if he needs it. At the tutoring center they told me they get a lot of kids over the summer brushing up on math concepts they didn't quite get during academic year.

[erosenst]

Our school system uses EM. Three years ago they started supplementing with Rocket Math, as they realized kids needed a component of math facts and repetition.

DD is in 4th grade math, and I'm stunned at what she knows/they've learned, including basic algebra.

Sent from my phone. Please excuse typing errors I've made, and auto correct 'fixes' I missed.

[speo]

Our schools use EM also. In K, I found it a little frustrating. The concepts were just so simple for my DS1. I also find the structure of the program hard for the teachers to really differentiate the students. However, I started to like it more in 1st and now even more in 2nd. It is great how they weave in algebra. And in 2nd they started doing fractions. I also agree with others that the program misses the boat a bit on learning math facts.

[nmosur]

DD's school follows Everyday Math curriculum. Initially I was put off and felt that it was much below what I thought math curriculum should be like. For example, DD is in first grade and they are still working on single digit addition. We supplement at home - mainly math facts. But what I realised was that, DD is familiar with concepts like graphs and probability and is able to verbalize these concepts thanks to EM. I am very impressed when she is able to write in words how she arrived at an answer rather than just putting down a number. Same with fractions, I tried to trip her on hands on fraction exercises that we were working on and I was surprised by her answers. IMO, EM is great if it is supplemented by more rigorous homework. Right now we get two to three sheets for homework per week that most kids finish in 20 minutes.

[kijip]

I had a very low opinion of EM from how it was used in K and 1st grade with my son. We've homeschooled since the 2nd grade and have used several different math programs since it is a fave subject and we spend a lot of time on it. The mathematician that has taught a couple of math enrichment courses my older son has taken had some positive things to say about the program but a lot of negative to say about how it is used day to day. Based off his positive comments, I was curious to check out the materials for grades 5 and 6.

When we finished out most all of what I had planned to do all year by the end of February, I grabbed the 5th grade EM books from our district (which makes them available to homeschoolers). While there were some units I skipped or felt would be redundant to what we've already covered, I found more to like than dislike. It definitely made me reconsider my previous, and mostly negative, opinion of them. I didn't expect to use them as much as we have/are. I have had my son do most of the 5th grade workbook material. We are starting the Art of Problem Solving's Pre-Algebra with him this summer and I think the EM was a good strengthening of geometrical and algebraic thinking.

EM is a great concept which is too often slaughtered on implementation. In the hands of a teacher who loves math, it can work very well for many students. I was surprised to learn that it was initially designed for students who excel in math. Even some of the authors and developers criticize it as a program for general use. There are many elementary school teachers who are great with most subjects but are not enthused about or competent in math nor in the way that EM presents math. There are many districts who dump the curriculum on teachers without adequate training. Making it more complicated is that most students will have 7 teachers K-6th and each year they have a teacher who may be great in math or who may be awful at math. Students can lose a lot of ground when the quality of their math instruction varies. I think we do our teachers and kids a disservice by not having a higher math requirement for primary grade teachers in training.

I wouldn't say that it lacks rigor. I would say it is light on the drill type stuff and repetition. Some students need drill and repetition to nail down the facts but not all do. Rigor is not more arithmetic practice IMO, it's deeper mathematical thinking and more challenging, multistep problems that take a long time to complete.

[KrisM]

We've had good experiences. It does spiral, which is interesting, since it's a 2-year spiral, I'm told. But, I do notice my 3rd and 1st grader are often doing the same thing in math, just on different levels. DD, in 1st, was learning basic fractions while DS1, in 3rd, was learning equivalent fractions and their homework was really similar looking. It's clear that DS1 is learning the more advanced aspect of each topic.

DS1's 3rd grade teacher did do extra to emphasize multiplication tables and the kids had to know it in an instant. I'm not sure EM was good for that. But, I do like how it teaches 3 ways of multiplying multi-digit numbers. The kids can choose which to use from 4th grade on. I like how there are different ways of doing the same thing so that if one works better for your child, that's okay.

[egoldber]

I wouldn't say that it lacks rigor. I would say it is light on the drill type stuff and repetition. Some students need drill and repetition to nail down the facts but not all do. Rigor is not more arithmetic practice IMO, it's deeper mathematical thinking and more challenging, multistep problems that take a long time to complete.

I would agree with this. The lack of drill is actually really great for my older DD and they use it in the advanced math program in our district.

I used to think very negatively about it, but as older DD got into the upper levels I have come to really like it. Last night I was helping her do probability problems that I did not learn how to do until college! I have been impressed with the amount of algebra and statistics concepts that get introduced at an early age.


There are many elementary school teachers who are great with most subjects but are not enthused about or competent in math nor in the way that EM presents math. There are many districts who dump the curriculum on teachers without adequate training. Making it more complicated is that most students will have 7 teachers K-6th and each year they have a teacher who may be great in math or who may be awful at math.

:yeahthat:

The downside to EM, IMO, is that unless the teacher is pretty strong mathematically, I can see where they could confuse the kids. There is a teacher education component to the curriculum, but I think this is often neglected or not implemented or is not effective.

The one thing I have found about the curriculum is that sometimes I think the problems are written in a confusing manner. They are trying to be open ended and encourage flexible/deeper thinking, but sometimes that just doesn't work.

[KHF]

Everyday Math has been great for my DD (1st grade). She has diagnosed dyslexia and rote memorization is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for her. The concepts taught in EM have helped her with understanding the "whys" of how math is done, not just "Here, memorize this." Math facts are nearly impossible for her to remember, and she still uses a number line for all but the most basic math facts. However, she understands the concept of fractions and can count money correctly. She utilizes some of the different ways of representing numbers in EM to help her with the math facts. It takes her longer, but she arrives at the correct answer.

[brittone2]

EM is a great concept which is too often slaughtered on implementation. In the hands of a teacher who loves math, it can work very well for many students. I was surprised to learn that it was initially designed for students who excel in math. Even some of the authors and developers criticize it as a program for general use. There are many elementary school teachers who are great with most subjects but are not enthused about or competent in math nor in the way that EM presents math. There are many districts who dump the curriculum on teachers without adequate training. Making it more complicated is that most students will have 7 teachers K-6th and each year they have a teacher who may be great in math or who may be awful at math. Students can lose a lot of ground when the quality of their math instruction varies. I think we do our teachers and kids a disservice by not having a higher math requirement for primary grade teachers in training.


Agree with this. I've read criticisms from the developers who originally used the program and they've said the program is not implemented the way they were originally using it with great success. In addition to the teachers not necessarily having the skills, support, or training to implement it well, I've read that the parents are supposed to receive support and materials in order to help their children. It seems like a lot of parents dislike the program as there isn't adequate communication regarding the EM approach, which understandably leaves many parents feeling poorly equipped to support their children through homework, etc.

My impression is that it isn't necessarily a bad curriculum at all. In fact, I've heard it has some similarities to things like Singapore. I want my children to explore flexible approaches to problem solving, I want them to understand why it works, etc. vs. an algorithm-heavy approach to math. I had algorithm-heavy math, and it worked well for me as I was a kid that could essentially memorize the steps. That got me through calc, but I have found my own depth of understanding increasing more and more through the years as i've taught my mathy DC using a non-algorithmic approach.

But if my child was using EM in school, I'd be concerned about *how* it was being implemented.

[niccig]

How can parents help their kids with EM if the school isn't implementing it the way that it should? What can we do to help at home?

[KrisM]

How can parents help their kids with EM if the school isn't implementing it the way that it should? What can we do to help at home?

Does he have a log in on the everydaymathonline.com site? There are parent letters there, games for the kids to play, etc.

Our teachers loan the student reference books out each year to parents who want them: http://www.amazon.com/Everyday-Mathematics-Student-Reference-Grade/dp/0076045692/ref=pd_cp_b_0. I haven't gotten one, but I know others who have and they've found it useful.

[egoldber]

What can we do to help at home?

Older DD enjoyed doing math workbooks on her own when she was younger. And I've kept an eye on her work to make sure she is "getting" the concepts. But other than that, I don't really do anything.

Now, if my kid were struggling in math, I'd do more. But honestly, I really didn't even pay much attention before about third grade.

And KrisM, I've never even heard of that site!

[kmkaull]

How can parents help their kids with EM if the school isn't implementing it the way that it should? What can we do to help at home?

I taught special ed (grades 4-6) for many years. While I didn't use EM with my students, I did support kids who were in the regular classroom. If implemented well, EM can be great until about the end of fifth grade for most students. It was a nightmare for my kids who needed a more concrete approach. It can be very confusing for kids who need to learn and master just one strategy. Long division was a particular nightmare--most of my kids did not "get" the EM method of partial quotients. Too many steps and too abstract. A good teacher will encourage students to find an answer using the best strategy for that student--through a traditional method or a new one.

Anyway, I always felt EM was weak in mastering math facts. Memorizing facts is critical, so any extra practice at home is very important. Just five minutes a day on basic facts really makes a difference.

[niccig]

Older DD enjoyed doing math workbooks on her own when she was younger. And I've kept an eye on her work to make sure she is "getting" the concepts. But other than that, I don't really do anything.

Now, if my kid were struggling in math, I'd do more. But honestly, I really didn't even pay much attention before about third grade.

And KrisM, I've never even heard of that site!

I'll keep an eye on things.

DS is good example of poor implementation in grade 1 and 2. As we're swapping schools next year, I wanted to get him up to speed in Math. He's had tutoring at a Math center a few hours a week for nearly 2 months and he's learned so much. They assessed him and took him back to cover basics he didn't understand and now he's working on grade 2 work.

I asked him if the Math center has helped with Math in class and his response was class work is easy and he's 3rd or 4th kid finished and not one of the last. He's actually enjoying Math at the center. I'm glad we didn't wait until next year to catch him up. Understand the basics of math is so important for everything else that comes next.

[KrisM]

And KrisM, I've never even heard of that site!

interesting! Both my kids have log ins for it and use it often. We had the option at the beginning of the year to get paper workbooks or to print sheets ourselves. I opted to print because I didn't want to store the workbook :). But, there is a lot of good info on the site for both parents and kids.

The school also bought a license for ixl.com, which they both enjoy doing. They are supposed to do 20 min/week and usually that happens. The school gets some feedback on what is being used, so we try to use it because I like that it's paid for :).

[kijip]

How can parents help their kids with EM if the school isn't implementing it the way that it should? What can we do to help at home?

I think the main thing people can do is to learn a bit of the math and the algorithms that they are unfamiliar with. Lattice multiplication, partial quotients, probability work and then practice with your children with games. For a child who needs more drill, Kumon or other workbooks can be helpful. Khan Academy online has free videos that you can use to familiarize yourself with more algoritms past the standard.

I was the kid who was bored to tears with drill and kill math and who made conceptual leaps out of curiosity and boredom- for example when I was about 6, I thought I discovered division. I called it "pull aparts" but from seeing multiplication, I wanted to "go backwards" immediately. I also hated long division with the standard algoritm and did it my own way. My own way was essentially partial quotients (though no one ever taught me that) and it drove my teachers to the edge of insanity that I didn't use the same form. The advantage of partial quotients is that you can keep going if you get your divisor wrong and use too small of a number and still get the right answer. It also ties into work that students need to do later on in advanced high school and college math. It's worth learning and knowing. When I showed it to my husband, he'd wished he'd learned it that way as a child.

[crl]

My kid is happy to practice math facts on apps on his iPad so we have done a lot of multiplication practice that way. It's nice because I don't have to supervise or nag and he gets the extra practice he needs.

Honestly I have also found that sometimes showing ds the way I learned to do problems helps him. He seems to sometimes follow my way more easily and then seems able to work out the Everyday Math way from that.

Catherine

[bisous]

We use it and it is okay. I preferred scott foresman's eVision curriculum. It also underscored multiple ways to do problems and even had "algebra" type equations but it seemed really straight forward and easy to teach as a parent.

At DS1's school, they do give us access to the Everyday Math website. I haven't visited it yet but will be today. DS is having trouble with "Partial Products" multiplication and although he can get the right answer in a couple of other ways, I want him to understand this process. And frankly, I can't figure out what he's doing!!

[s7714]

We're in CA and our district implemented EM two years ago. My younger DD had the district's lead program trainer as her teacher, so we really got a great start (in 1st grade) on the program from her. She implemented the game playing and theories really well with the kids. My DD loves math homework days and she blows me away sometimes in how she figures out a problem. I will say that's one thing I do like about EM, is that they essentially teach the kids there is more than one way to get the right answer. How that will play out when we get to more exact mathematics I'm not sure though.

OTOH I could really see my older DD's 3rd grade teacher struggle to implement it into her curriculum that first year. Regardless, that year my DD did really well in math I think in part because it was a combo. of EM and standard memorization techniques. Now in 4th I see her strength in math slipping because she hasn't retained a lot of the memorization skills on times tables, etc. now that she's being taught EM exclusively. Her teacher has strongly recommended that we push the memorization drills at home and over the summer since that's clearly how she needs to learn math.

[bisous]

BTW, apart from some homeschool curriculums, I find that most elementary math curriculums are short on drilling. I've used four different math curriculums over three years and all of them needed to be supplemented by additional "math facts" type of programs. Our school does a combo of timed tests and EM. Our last school used HM and timed tests and prior to that it was (again) timed tests and SF.

[maestramommy]

Our district does Everyday math, but each elementary school (we have 3) does their own spin and add-ons. So my first grader still does math facts, has been since the beginning of the year. We started with flash card drilling, then this last quarter moved to Xtra-Math, which is an online drilling program. In addition the kids have to practice counting by 2s, 5s, 10s.

The worksheets DD brings home shows me they do a lot of math in the context of everyday situations, so they learn time, money, measurement. This semester they also did an 8 week stint of Math Superstars, which is all word problems that get the kids into problem solving. THAT was pretty hard. I mean, once my DD understood what the question was asking, she was able to set up and solve the problems pretty easily. It was figuring out what the question was asking that was the challenge. Other kids may have different challenges.

When I talked to DD's K teacher (who just retired after decades) her take was that Everyday Math couldn't be taught in isolation. In the early years they still have to do math facts, otherwise they just didn't have the facility to learn Everyday Math. Somehow they manage to cover both sides. The district adopted EM shortly after NCLB, and after a year they saw the limitations, so added drilling back in.

[inmypjs]

Our school district uses it and I don't like it. Most I know don't either. The way our school administers it is that teachers must follow the spiral guidelines and move on to the next topic, regardless of whether they think that is best for the class.

I've also heard of issues arising in middle school, but Everyday Math isn't used there. When kids get there, the teachers are expecting them to do operations in a certain way, not have 3-4 methods to choose from (and not having one mastered).

[BarbieSmith]

Didn't read the comments, but we moved school districts... one of the reasons was that my ADHD daughter could not keep up with 1st grade Everyday Math! We (both!) cried over math homework in 1st grade! Now, in our new school she is in the top math group and no tears... she loves math now. Whew.

I don't think your experience will be the same. Unless your child is "different" in her learning in any way...

[maybeebaby08]

HATE IT! It has been the downward spiral of homework hour almost everyday for the past 2 years. Our district switched for a month to trial a new program and it was night and day the difference between what was understood and applied. I haven't been impressed with the curriculum or the parent support materials. Here's a perfect example, on Thursday I was doing homework with 3 5th graders, 3 different math abilities (one anove average in Math) they did the problem according to their Math notes and struggled the whole time trying to do it. It didn't seem right to me do I looked it up online and found a different answer from what they were taught in school, and the correct answer with two different ways to get the answer and a different number outcome. I don't mind learning to new methods but am against confusing and frustrating students. Most people in our district are very unhappy with the program. K-3 it was manageable but 4th & 5th grade curriculum is not good IMHO.

[dogmom]

We love in it our house because it starts a parallel track of many math concepts early. The idea is to use basic arithmetic as the start of computation and what we used to consider "higher math". So instead of the very step wise fashion I did so I couldn't even touch fractions until 5th grade they start weaving in the most basic of fraction concepts (half and whole) in K, along with fact triangles. So when people say they don't know "math facts" (I term I LOATHE BTW, see my BP about it in past) I don't get it, they have math facts. I still find fact triangles around my house at times. They also just have things like estimation and graphical math concepts early on. It does a lot more of real world applications.

The feedback in I get from the teachers is that you need to trust the curriculum's spiral concept and not feel like you have to a check a box that something is "done" and move and an never touch it again. If the school district does it right you get a parent letter at the beginning of every unit that outlines the concepts for this unit and the terms, and also gives you the answers for the homework that will sometimes come home.

[crl]

. So when people say they don't know "math facts" (I term I LOATHE BTW, see my BP about it in past) I don't get it, they have math facts.

.

Well, you can loathe the term all you want, but when my kid is still counting on his fingers to add 5+7 in second grade and visibly frustrated because that makes his math homework take so long, not knowing math facts, or whatever term you prefer, is a problem for him. Now maybe my kid would have had that problem regardless of curriculum, but it seems like a common complaint with Everyday Math.

Catherine

[georgiegirl]

Well, you can loathe the term all you want, but when my kid is still counting on his fingers to add 5+7 in second grade and visibly frustrated because that makes his math homework take so long, not knowing math facts, or whatever term you prefer, is a problem for him. Now maybe my kid would have had that problem regardless of curriculum, but it seems like a common complaint with Everyday Math.

Catherine

If taught correctly, aren't some of the basic math facts based in EDM "strategy," like doubles plus one (6 + 7) or doubles plus 2 (5+7)?
At least in DD's first grade class, they have also worked on the numbers that equal 10 (6+4, 7+3, etc.) and the 9s tricks. I'm sure a lot has to do with the teacher and how they apply EDM strategies to math facts.

[crl]

If taught correctly, aren't some of the basic math facts based in EDM "strategy," like doubles plus one (6 + 7) or doubles plus 2 (5+7)?
At least in DD's first grade class, they have also worked on the numbers that equal 10 (6+4, 7+3, etc.) and the 9s tricks. I'm sure a lot has to do with the teacher and how they apply EDM strategies to math facts.

Yes but very little repetition, at least as executed in ds' school at the time. So he worked on the families, etc. and on understanding the concepts, but never memorized the facts. Then he was so slow doing more advanced work because he had to figure out the basic arithmetic every time and he was frustrated.

Catherine

[dogmom]

deleted....Sorry, realized I was going to off course in the post.

[o_mom]

We love in it our house because it starts a parallel track of many math concepts early. The idea is to use basic arithmetic as the start of computation and what we used to consider "higher math". So instead of the very step wise fashion I did so I couldn't even touch fractions until 5th grade they start weaving in the most basic of fraction concepts (half and whole) in K, along with fact triangles. So when people say they don't know "math facts" (I term I LOATHE BTW, see my BP about it in past) I don't get it, they have math facts. I still find fact triangles around my house at times. They also just have things like estimation and graphical math concepts early on. It does a lot more of real world applications.


We are on our fourth year of EDM. I do like a lot of stuff about it. The concepts introduced very early (my Kindergartner is doing fractions, and just fine with it). The spiral approach can be hard sometimes when they don't get it and yet they move on. However, we have seen that when they do come back to it, it comes easier and they usually pick it up. Most everything I have seen shows that repeated, shorter exposure is better for long-term understanding than a longer focused/intense approach that is never returned to.

However, on the 'math facts' side, it does not promote mastery. I know they have the fact triangles and they cover many strategies (doubles, turn-arounds, etc), but they do not have a component that really checks that kids are able to quickly recall the basic facts. In general, I'm a fan of kids having the math facts memorized (see previous threads on this). I find that MS/HS students who cannot add without a calculator are at a disadvantage because of the time it takes them to do problems that hinders their ability to understand the concepts (can't see the forest for the trees).

I guess I equate "math facts" to spelling. A good LA program may not cover spelling, but spelling is very much needed, IMO, to be able to write well. A student who has to stop and look up every other word to spell it correctly is going to struggle more than one who is able to focus on writing and not spelling. Many people argue that they can just use spell-check, but relying on spell-check can lead to issues where they misspell a word but it is an actual word, so spell-check doesn't catch it, etc. The similar argument in math is they can just use a calculator, but if they don't have a sense of what is the correct answer, it can lead to errors. With spelling it is possible to just wait until the end and then check every word - time-consuming but it would work. OTOH, if you do that with math, you will be way off by the end of a problem. And, with both spelling and math facts, there will be students who, for whatever reason, struggle with those and may need to rely on spell-check and calculators long-term, but that does not mean that the majority of students should.

[squimp]

Honestly, I think following one of these cookbook approaches to the letter is not the best way to teach math. I really think kids have different learning styles, and different levels of parent involvement. We never did anything visual in my math as a kid and I am very much a visual learner so I love a lot about the EM. DD's worksheets have a lot of word problems, which is what their standardized tests are full of, so it really helps.

Our school uses EM and it really does depend so much on the teacher. Some use the worksheets but supplement with games and drills. That seems to work well. I also like the spiraling because my DD was introduced to algebraic thinking in kindergarten and keeps learning more about it in later years. They are always reviewing and building.

[lucybabymamma]

Late on this post and didn't read all comments but taught EM at grades 2-6, including GT students. What specific questions or concerns are you having? Overall, it is a great program if followed correctly and if students can continue with it for many years.

[kboyle]

our schools just switched this year from everyday math to go math! while i know many parents and teachers don't like the 'worksheet' format of go math! i LOVE it. they master a skill before moving on vs all the skipping around of everyday math. there are a few teachers who did like it because it was more of a 'learning the skill in an everyday manner' but that doesn't help those in k-3 who are still trying to learn the skill. once you hit 4th i understand trying to put math into everyday situations, but not in the younger grades. my 4th grader is excelling more in math now than he did with the everyday math series.

[citymama]

As a parent, I hate it. As an Asian parent who could recite her 1-12 multiplication tables by age 6, I detest it. :p (To any critics of rote, dude, I can still say those things in my sleep, 34 years later!)

The instructions truly were written by wild chimpanzees in the midst of a food fight.

I'm bookmarking to read more about this, because I didn't realize it was so widely disliked!

[larig]

As a parent, I hate it. As an Asian parent who could recite her 1-12 multiplication tables by age 6, I detest it. :p (To any critics of rote, dude, I can still say those things in my sleep, 34 years later!)

The instructions truly were written by wild chimpanzees in the midst of a food fight.

I'm bookmarking to read more about this, because I didn't realize it was so widely disliked!

As a calculus teacher I'm a critic of rote learning of arithmetic facts being such a huge focus of the early grades, because it doesn't always teach one the meaning behind the algorithm. That is an important goal of EDM. Knowing what an algorithm means is sometimes more important than being able to do fast computation. It's a balancing act--kids need to have some computational skills, sure, but without knowing what it all means, it's pretty darned hard to put that to use. It's like my calc kids--if they can find a derivative fast, great, but if they don't know that a derivative can help them calculate a rate of change it's meaningless.

I'll grant the critics of EDM that it is different than what most of us learned growing up, but the mathematics behind it is solid, and the goals go beyond teaching the simple computation that is what so much of us spent our time learning in grade school in the past. It's heavier stuff, and that can be hard for parents to deal with at home, especially given that a lot of parents haven't had any math since high school, or have negative feelings about math, or love math, but have strong opinions about math being the way they remember it from school.

[citymama]

As a calculus teacher I'm a critic of rote learning of arithmetic facts being such a huge focus of the early grades, because it doesn't always teach one the meaning behind the algorithm. That is an important goal of EDM. Knowing what an algorithm means is sometimes more important than being able to do fast computation. It's a balancing act--kids need to have some computational skills, sure, but without knowing what it all means, it's pretty darned hard to put that to use. It's like my calc kids--if they can find a derivative fast, great, but if they don't know that a derivative can help them calculate a rate of change it's meaningless.

I'll grant the critics of EDM that it is different than what most of us learned growing up, but the mathematics behind it is solid, and the goals go beyond teaching the simple computation that is what so much of us spent our time learning in grade school in the past. It's heavier stuff, and that can be hard for parents to deal with at home, especially given that a lot of parents haven't had any math since high school, or have negative feelings about math, or love math, but have strong opinions about math
being the way they remember it from school.

These are great points and very reassuring coming from a calc teacher. I'll worry a bit less now. ;) I did take math through college (and my fair share of calc, although I can't say I've used it much since), and stats/econ in grad school. Despite my tongue-in-cheek comments about it, I developed a deep love for math at age 6 as well as learning those
multiplication tables. I enjoyed math and looked forward to math homework! But you're right that the way one was taught as a kid is more comfortable and intuitive to us. Still, I think the EDM text books are poorly written - several
pages of DDs first grade textbook have been hard to interpret even for me as a parent. I'm going to relax about it now that I hear from an expert that you think it works!

I'm curious why math instruction changes so much year to year and generation to generation. Are we really getting better at the way we teach math? Is EDM one of many ways math is taught to elementary school kids these days? Who is evaluating the various pedagogical methods for effectiveness, and how are they being assessed?

[larig]

These are great points and very reassuring coming from a calc teacher. I'll worry a bit less now. ;) I did take math through college (and my fair share of calc, although I can't say I've used it much since), and stats/econ in grad school. Despite my tongue-in-cheek comments about it, I developed a deep love for math at age 6 as well as learning those
multiplication tables. I enjoyed math and looked forward to math homework! But you're right that the way one was taught as a kid is more comfortable and intuitive to us. Still, I think the EDM text books are poorly written - several
pages of DDs first grade textbook have been hard to interpret even for me as a parent. I'm going to relax about it now that I hear from an expert that you think it works!

I'm curious why math instruction changes so much year to year and generation to generation. Are we really getting better at the way we teach math? Is EDM one of many ways math is taught to elementary school kids these days? Who is evaluating the various pedagogical methods for effectiveness, and how are they being assessed?

I'm a second generation h.s. math teacher, and my dad always says that education swings like a pendulum--about every 15 years a change from one educational philosophy to another. The various proponents of each field take turns doing battle to make others come around to their way of thinking about how people best learn things. There is a lot of money in education, and that sways thinking too--like the Gates Foundation, which had a big role in the small schools movement 15-20 years ago. Sometimes someone has an idea and a lot of money to put behind it, and it gets implemented, because the group or foundation gives a lot of capital to schools that will follow their ideas. Some of these ideas get researched and tested for effectiveness before, and some don't.

Take charter schools for example...We're in a swing of a pendulum toward them, in large part because there is a lot of money pushing in that direction. Many charters are run by for-profit companies, so they spend money to influence decision makers to implement charter schools that they can then come in and manage.

To answer the question, are we getting better at the way we teach math?--I'd say it depends on your philosophical view of what learning looks like. For me, that answer would be yes. I'm a believer that, mathematics acts as a filter for many people--keeping them out of potential careers and vocations. The mathematical association of america, argued that we should turn that notion on its head and have it act as a pump. In other words create a curriculum so interesting and meaningful to kids that they are drawn into math-heavy fields. This is important, because so many of our jobs in the future will depend on people being mathematical thinkers. I believe given the proper tools all students can understand mathematics. To that end I've been a strong proponent of reform-based calculus and other mathematics--in which we approach teaching from graphical, analytical (the symbol manipulation traditionally thought of), and numerical points of view. The graphing calculator has been a boon to this end--as it has put a strong visualization tool in the hands of the teacher and student. (It revolutionized both my own understanding and teaching of mathematics).

EDM comes out of the University of Chicago and has been around at least 20 years. I taught out of it when I was substitute teaching for middle school classes as I was trying to earn my own teaching certificate in Illinois. There are other texts, like Saxon, that subscribe to other philosophical views. I'd say Saxon is about as traditional as they come. So, yes, we are teaching kids other ways too, but it depends on the educational leadership in a district and their points of view.

As to who is evaluating, well, that is done by the districts themselves, and educational researchers at universities (I am ABD in the learning sciences, and from that world of educational research myself--something I took a break from teaching to pursue before DS was born). It is almost impossible to get federal funding to implement a program without a grounding in quantitative research. If you look in google scholar you can find lots of academic articles about EDM and other programs, and their effectiveness as judged by educational researchers.

[arivecchi]

Larig, what is your favorite math curriculum?

[JElaineB]

As a calculus teacher I'm a critic of rote learning of arithmetic facts being such a huge focus of the early grades, because it doesn't always teach one the meaning behind the algorithm. That is an important goal of EDM. Knowing what an algorithm means is sometimes more important than being able to do fast computation. It's a balancing act--kids need to have some computational skills, sure, but without knowing what it all means, it's pretty darned hard to put that to use. It's like my calc kids--if they can find a derivative fast, great, but if they don't know that a derivative can help them calculate a rate of change it's meaningless.

I'll grant the critics of EDM that it is different than what most of us learned growing up, but the mathematics behind it is solid, and the goals go beyond teaching the simple computation that is what so much of us spent our time learning in grade school in the past. It's heavier stuff, and that can be hard for parents to deal with at home, especially given that a lot of parents haven't had any math since high school, or have negative feelings about math, or love math, but have strong opinions about math being the way they remember it from school.

Thanks for this post. I agree with everything you've said, but it is nice to hear it coming from a calculus teacher.

[Calmegja2]

Our district is now in recovery mode to fix what didn't work from Everyday Math.

We had a crisis that began about two years ago when the first classes of kids that were taught EM in our district started taking college entrance exams. And tanking the math sections. These were straight A, advance track kids.

However- I understand the philosophy behind everyday math. My kids have all done well in it- and are straight A math students. We also supplement a lot at home with other programs, and put our high schoolers in private tutoring after the warning came out from our district, to try and ameliorate the gaps the testing was finding.

I realize our situation was likely district specific. The US Department of Education ( the clearinghouse, the WOW site) doesn't have much positive to say about the program, but I know in some districts it has worked very well.

[larig]

Larig, what is your favorite math curriculum?

I think it depends on the district and the teachers, but if EDM is implemented properly it's what I'd chose for my child. That's not to say there aren't other great mathematics curricula out there--there are. And, that's not to say an individual teacher who was just implementing her own curriculum self-designed curriculum couldn't be even better--it sure could! I think empowered mathematics teachers teaching their students a way they feel comfortable usually yields the best results.

[larig]

Our district is now in recovery mode to fix what didn't work from Everyday Math.

We had a crisis that began about two years ago when the first classes of kids that were taught EM in our district started taking college entrance exams. And tanking the math sections. These were straight A, advance track kids.

However- I understand the philosophy behind everyday math. My kids have all done well in it- and are straight A math students. We also supplement a lot at home with other programs, and put our high schoolers in private tutoring after the warning came out from our district, to try and ameliorate the gaps the testing was finding.

I realize our situation was likely district specific. The US Department of Education ( the clearinghouse, the WOW site) doesn't have much positive to say about the program, but I know in some districts it has worked very well.

EDM is prek-6, and most college entrance exams are based on the mathematics they learn in H.S. I'm not sure I'd blame the elementary curriculum for those scores. ETA: seems like they're choosing the wrong scapegoat.

[Calmegja2]

EDM is prek-6, and most college entrance exams are based on the mathematics they learn in H.S. I'm not sure I'd blame the elementary curriculum for those scores. ETA: seems like they're choosing the wrong scapegoat.

I could write a post for two days outlining all the problems I have with how the district is handling it and what they are choosing to blame. LOL I am pretty sure the phones light up with a warning signal when I call in at this point. LOL

But officially- they are blaming a lack of basic concepts they have traced to EM( our district stops EM in 5th. Or, they did. They have pulled it). I think they were shocked when they started seeing all these kids with fabulous grades unable to score well on ACT and SATs.

My daughter's former calc teacher at the high school actually blames the middle school math program, and I think he has a much better point. Nobody is listening to him, though. And they should.

It doesn't matter to me, at this point. It sounds terrible, but we have decided to work around what our district teaches, since they are continually befuddled. I just worry for the parents that aren't able to do what we have done, or who don't have the ability or resources to do that.

[egoldber]

Most of the ACT and SAT math questions test algebraic concepts and geometry. Which is typically middle school and early high school math. These can be made harder for kids who don't have a good conceptual understanding of number theory and fractions/division. But there is very little actual computation required, mainly an understanding of numeric relationships.

http://www.actstudent.org/testprep/descriptions/mathcontent.html

http://professionals.collegeboard.com/testing/sat-reasoning/about/sections/math

But these issues should surely have come to light long before kids took an SAT/ACT math test.

[Calmegja2]

Most of the ACT and SAT math questions test algebraic concepts and geometry. Which is typically middle school and early high school math. These can be made harder for kids who don't have a good conceptual understanding of number theory and fractions/division. But there is very little actual computation required, mainly an understanding of numeric relationships.

http://www.actstudent.org/testprep/descriptions/mathcontent.html

http://professionals.collegeboard.com/testing/sat-reasoning/about/sections/math

But these issues should surely have come to light long before kids took an SAT/ACT math test.

You would think so, yes?

Our district screwed up. Hugely.

I am not an administrator, nor a math teacher. I am just reporting what my experience with EM was, and how it was viewed in our district before it was pulled. There were points made about how division and fractions - relating to the basics of algebra that did not work with how it was being taught later.

Other than that- I cannot explain further. Because I didn't make those determinations. The curriculum directors did. And that's not my skill set.

The party line in our district is the EM failed the kids on basics- and the students grades were not reflective of their abilities and test scores, as a general rule.

I am very familiar with the ACT/SAT math now. Very. LOL My daughter's prep work for it has been exhaustive .

[mommylamb]

I'm a second generation h.s. math teacher, and my dad always says that education swings like a pendulum--about every 15 years a change from one educational philosophy to another. The various proponents of each field take turns doing battle to make others come around to their way of thinking about how people best learn things. There is a lot of money in education, and that sways thinking too--like the Gates Foundation, which had a big role in the small schools movement 15-20 years ago. Sometimes someone has an idea and a lot of money to put behind it, and it gets implemented, because the group or foundation gives a lot of capital to schools that will follow their ideas. Some of these ideas get researched and tested for effectiveness before, and some don't.

Take charter schools for example...We're in a swing of a pendulum toward them, in large part because there is a lot of money pushing in that direction. Many charters are run by for-profit companies, so they spend money to influence decision makers to implement charter schools that they can then come in and manage.

To answer the question, are we getting better at the way we teach math?--I'd say it depends on your philosophical view of what learning looks like. For me, that answer would be yes. I'm a believer that, mathematics acts as a filter for many people--keeping them out of potential careers and vocations. The mathematical association of america, argued that we should turn that notion on its head and have it act as a pump. In other words create a curriculum so interesting and meaningful to kids that they are drawn into math-heavy fields. This is important, because so many of our jobs in the future will depend on people being mathematical thinkers. I believe given the proper tools all students can understand mathematics. To that end I've been a strong proponent of reform-based calculus and other mathematics--in which we approach teaching from graphical, analytical (the symbol manipulation traditionally thought of), and numerical points of view. The graphing calculator has been a boon to this end--as it has put a strong visualization tool in the hands of the teacher and student. (It revolutionized both my own understanding and teaching of mathematics).

EDM comes out of the University of Chicago and has been around at least 20 years. I taught out of it when I was substitute teaching for middle school classes as I was trying to earn my own teaching certificate in Illinois. There are other texts, like Saxon, that subscribe to other philosophical views. I'd say Saxon is about as traditional as they come. So, yes, we are teaching kids other ways too, but it depends on the educational leadership in a district and their points of view.

As to who is evaluating, well, that is done by the districts themselves, and educational researchers at universities (I am ABD in the learning sciences, and from that world of educational research myself--something I took a break from teaching to pursue before DS was born). It is almost impossible to get federal funding to implement a program without a grounding in quantitative research. If you look in google scholar you can find lots of academic articles about EDM and other programs, and their effectiveness as judged by educational researchers.


Larig, this makes me wonder if I would have been a better math student if I had had someone like you as a teacher. As it is now, I'm a math-phobe. Math literally makes me shut down. The only math class I ever took and enjoyed to the slightest extent was statistics in college where we actually learned why one would use an ANOVA vs a chi square, and had to do them out by hand. It made the work have meaning. This is in direct contradiction to my grad school stats class where we just plugged everything into SPSS, and I didn't understand it at all.

Rote math facts can all be done with a calculator. I honestly can't remember my multiplication tables, though I memorized them once a long time ago. It doesn't matter to my life because I have a calculator on my phone that I can use whenever I need to. Actually understanding the fundamentals behind the math would have been helpful.

[larig]

Larig, this makes me wonder if I would have been a better math student if I had had someone like you as a teacher. As it is now, I'm a math-phobe. Math literally makes me shut down. The only math class I ever took and enjoyed to the slightest extent was statistics in college where we actually learned why one would use an ANOVA vs a chi square, and had to do them out by hand. It made the work have meaning. This is in direct contradiction to my grad school stats class where we just plugged everything into SPSS, and I didn't understand it at all.

Rote math facts can all be done with a calculator. I honestly can't remember my multiplication tables, though I memorized them once a long time ago. It doesn't matter to my life because I have a calculator on my phone that I can use whenever I need to. Actually understanding the fundamentals behind the math would have been helpful.
That's kind of how I approached things with my students, and I'd have lived to have you for a student. I'd rather have someone leave my class with mediocre mechanical computational skills and a deep conceptual understanding than someone who is a mechanical whiz, but struggles to apply that ability due to lack of understanding. But, again this is a personal philosophical stance of my own FWIW. There were people in my department who disagreed with me. And, it's not that my kids didnt have to know stuff cold, they did have to know what all of the basic functions graphs looked like (we used to do a da CE for this), and had to know a few trig identities (they could derive the others from them), but I tried to keep this to a minimum. (I seriously can't wait to get back in the classroom!)

[egoldber]

I'd rather have someone leave my class with mediocre mechanical computational skills and a deep conceptual understanding than someone who is a mechanical whiz, but struggles to apply that ability due to lack of understanding.

I totally agree.

When I was in grad school I taught an intro stats class for business majors. They all had to take it and it was fairly universally hated. By students and instructor alike. ;) I taught this class for several semesters and by the end of the second semester if was easy for me to pinpoint the students who would do well and those who would struggle. The students who did well were those who knew how to conceptualize a problem algebraically. They knew how to break a word problem down into knowns and unknowns and could fill that information into the appropriate formulas.

The students used to freak about having to memorize formulas or doing calculations by hand. So I gave them the formulas and let them use calculators (this was long before the days of internet capable devices, so cheating was not a concern.....). It made no difference. The students who didn't know how to think about the problem algebraically still didn't know how to do that. Being able to do the arithmetic calculations didn't help because they didn't know how to apply them.

I tutored for Calculus for Business Majors on the side to make extra money and universally the students either 1) just needed a little extra help with a different explanation, or 2) were completely overwhelmed because again, they simply did not understand the basic concepts of algebra and how to think about equations with unknowns. I also really started to respect early elementary teachers then, because I knew how to explain calculus, but I didn't know how to explain the building block mathematical concepts.

[bisous]

I think there is a certain point at which mathematical computations are important. I see both a lack of conceptual foundation AND a lack of basic "math facts" (for lack of a better term, sorry Dogmom!) are important. I just figure that if you can't get the right answer, whether that is because you don't understand the concept or know the process OR because you simply cannot multiply 49 X 3 you will be frustrated and lost and if this isn't rectified, a fear or dislike of math will follow. BTW, I'm a huge fan of math TUTORING. I worked as a tutor in High School. I'm NOT mathy like Lariq or Egoldber. I was in the top class but got there through study, through reading the book, etc. and was able to help many students who were missing just a few steps or just a concept or two. Once they "got it" and got up to speed, they enjoyed math and were able to make sense out of it.

But back to the subject at hand. I don't think "math facts" require a certain curriculum while I do think that some mathematical concepts are tricky to explain. I'm okay with EDM but like I said, DS did "algebra" (it was called that) in Scott Foresman and it was less complicated to me as a parent to follow what he was doing. I like that the kids at our school are using both EDM and follow a program (can't remember what it is called) for learning rote math facts. I think both are very good for math mastery.

Hey I found something I like about DSs school! Thanks, thread. :)

[GaPeach_in_Ca]

I just figure that if you can't get the right answer, whether that is because you don't understand the concept or know the process OR because you simply cannot multiply 49 X 3 you will be frustrated and lost ...

So for 49x3, I do (50x3) -3 in my head. IMO, that is the kind of thinking they encourage in the "new math" programs. I like it.

Like you, I think there is room for both expanding conceptual foundation and drill. I have found that to be the case in my son's school.

[brittone2]

So for 49x3, I do (50x3) -3 in my head. IMO, that is the kind of thinking they encourage in the "new math" programs. I like it.

Like you, I think there is room for both expanding conceptual foundation and drill. I have found that to be the case in my son's school.
:yeahthat: This is how my DC do things via Singapore Math as part of our HSing. I solve that way on my own, but it isn't how I was taught in school (In my area, things were very focused on one-size-fits-all algorithms in those days).

I haven't ever looked at the Everyday Math curriculum first hand, but a lot of the conceptual stuff is similar to SM from what I've read. We also do drill math facts, etc. with games, we use a lot of manipulatives (base 10, cuisinaire rods, etc.) to help the ideas sink in concretely. IN addition to SM, we also use Miquon in the early years, and that relies heavily on Cuisinaire rods). I encourage them to pull out the manipulatives often, and over time they move from concrete to more abstract on their own, with a better overall number sense. We play games with math facts, SM places a high value on mental math fluency, etc. I prefer all of that to the rote methods of my childhood when I learned to borrow, etc. by algorithm. Heck, I didn't even really *get* what I was doing when "borrowing" until I was an adult (this is so sad to me!), and I was fairly mathy compared to many (not anywhere near as mathy as many here, but someone who took analytic geometry, college calc, college chem and physics, statistics, etc.) As an adult, I adapted and figured out my own methods, and I continue to learn as I teach my own kids, because I think about math much differently now than I did as a child (and I was a very math competent kid). I think learning via heavily algorithmic models was really a detriment in so many ways!

I posted before about having one of the easier chem profs in college. I had to leave his class though and enroll w/ a tougher professor because the guy simplified everything (exponents, logs, etc.) in his head, and I couldn't follow his examples. I needed it worked out *for* me as a model. I got through calculus, etc. just fine but really, in many ways I was just good at "following the steps" on neat and tidy problems, you know? I don't want that for my kids.

I think conceptual thinking and drill are both important. I think kids should have a good number sense and not have to rely on a calculator. I don't think a calculator is a bad thing, but IME too many kids can't mentally cross check their answer and judge how reasonable it is in higher level courses unless they have a good number sense.

eta: I posted up thread, but I do think the implementation of Everyday Math sometimes leaves something to be desired. I know our local SD uses it and some parents feel poorly equipped to help their kids. I think you need to have resources and so forth available to parents who are not comfortable using methods other than the ones they learned with. It also seems that sometimes the teachers aren't using EDM in the way it was designed to be used, based off of what I've read. Again, no personal experience, just lots of reading about it over the years, and realizing some of the complaints are about things like partial sums, etc. that are also used in Singapore Math (which I'm very happy with).