Author | |
KackyK Forum All-Star
Joined: May 22 2007 Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline Posts: 1811
|
Posted: June 18 2009 at 4:09pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I'm basically sold on TT, or I think I am.
My dd struggles with math. She did Jacobs Elementary Algebra this past year and hated it and is barely "getting it" the way we would like her to.
We have done Saxon, hate it. We have done Abeka in the past too, which seemed too fast for her.
So...I'm praying TT will be the answer for her! However! I have heard (as I know many of you have too) that TT isn't as rigorous, which is generally okay since my dd isn't rigorous either
Has anyone done all or most of the upper level TT programs and if so, how did your child fare with moving on to Calculus and taking the SAT?
I feel like I have switched math programs so much, that now that my dd is entering hs, I really want to get one and stick to it. I'd really like to be able to see TT through to the end basically.
__________________ KackyK
Mom to 8 - 3 dd, 5ds & 4 babes in heaven
Beginning With the Assumption
|
Back to Top |
|
|
hylabrook1 Forum Moderator
Joined: July 09 2006
Online Status: Offline Posts: 5980
|
Posted: June 19 2009 at 2:34pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
We've used Alg 1 and 2, Geometry, and Pre-Calculus. My son's Math SAT was 730. I don't think he suffered from any lack of rigor in TT.
(In another thread, that I can't locate right now), there was some discussion of how rigorous TT is, and I shared my *rant* or *insight* (probably a bit of both).
Peace,
Nancy
|
Back to Top |
|
|
KackyK Forum All-Star
Joined: May 22 2007 Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline Posts: 1811
|
Posted: June 19 2009 at 2:37pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Nancy I barely remember the thread you are talking about. I tried searching for it too and couldn't come up with it.
Thanks for adding your two cents here!
__________________ KackyK
Mom to 8 - 3 dd, 5ds & 4 babes in heaven
Beginning With the Assumption
|
Back to Top |
|
|
ALmom Forum All-Star
Joined: May 18 2005
Online Status: Offline Posts: 3299
|
Posted: June 19 2009 at 3:17pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Cannot give you any insight into test scores as a result of TT, but here goes some encouragement to use whatever makes your child successful at understanding basic, foundational things. He can build from that.
Folks learn in a variety of ways. I have seen my children flounder in science texts because these things threw out too much complicated stuff too fast. My children could not get the foundation through all the extras! These same children used something way more simple (ie a teacher doing a K presentation on rocks and minerals) and came away with an age appropriate understanding of the materials. Granted we had all the other materials still sitting around the house. Once they had the foundation, they taught themselves the rest without me really knowing how.
I don't even know what is in TT, but my take is that if it works to lay the foundation and you have a wealth of materials in your environment, your child will learn tons more than force feeding from material that doesn't suit or just frustrates and confuses. Go for it - and have lots of things around the house for fun. Often, especially in math and science, if the child has the basic foundation, they can build easily on that, making connections and learning through other things - real life work, other reading, etc. and generally are not behind. Honestly my child is learning quite a bit of geometry from a computer sub simulation. He wouldn't do that without some basic understanding of math. If someone tells you TT is not thorough enough - then ask them what is missing? If there is really something not covered, then you can supplement. If there is really something not there, they should be able to tell you exactly what it is - not just some fuzzy it isn't thorough enough. (Okay is this Physical Science text thorough because it covers nuclear chemistry in 8th grade or does that just become an obscuring, unimportant detail). Get people to give you specifics so you know yourself what is covered in one that isn't in another. Is it just that they stick with teaching the basic concepts and don't throw out all those thinking cap, brain teasers. (Some of my kids had fun with these in Jacobs. Some of mine hated them. One of mine would have been totally unsettled by them when she was learning the material to begin with, but had fun pulling out this book which we had not used and reading these kinds of things later).
What often happens is that people will say that something isn't as rigorous and what it really means is that the material is explained in more everday language and is related to real life experiences making it easier to understand. (It is designed more for the big picture learner). It sticks more to the basic concepts to make sure you have these solidly in your mind and understanding and why you need them. These texts don't typically throw strings of precise vocabulary words at you. Most of the time, the vocabulary is in there and for some children it sticks better this way than the more typical vocabulary heavy materials. Of course, if some vocabulary is never ever used, it isn't hard to just use it in conversation. At least by then, they know what you are talking about.
Bottom line is to use what helps your child move forward. A good foundation is just that. It is meant to be built on. It does no good to cover more than the child is able to handle. Without the foundation, you have all this information with nowhere to set it so everything comes crashing down (child may manage through faking and memorizing for a while) - and it happens at some point or other unless you have the foundation.
Bottom line - go with what works and don't worry overmuch. Just my 2cents.
Janet
|
Back to Top |
|
|
KackyK Forum All-Star
Joined: May 22 2007 Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline Posts: 1811
|
Posted: June 19 2009 at 4:10pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Thank you thank you thank you Janet!!! I could just you for that pep talk!
I needed to hear that for a lot of subjects!
__________________ KackyK
Mom to 8 - 3 dd, 5ds & 4 babes in heaven
Beginning With the Assumption
|
Back to Top |
|
|
|
|