Do I need to spend the money on the math?

[Teach05]

I’ve purchased every piece in the level 2 package except math and I’m having massive FOMO. We currently use Math U See for mastery practice and Saxon for instruction. (The Math U See is introduced by me with the video, but is otherwise used as independent work when I’m working with another kiddo and I do a quick check once completed.)

I love MUS’s “tricks” for the facts. (9 gets one suck from the vacuum to become a 10, 8 gets two sucks from the vacuum. If you know you know. Lol) It seems to have worked pretty well, and I’d roughly guess accuracy is 80-90% when assessed. I also have a kid who rushes, so I’m not sure if that’s part of it too. I know how important mastery is, so I don’t want to muck it up. We are already over budget for the year on HS stuff, but as I sift through old threads it sounds like most are thrilled with going over to R&S. Please help me figure out if I should just dive in and complete the MP 2 package with math. We currently have MUS Beta and Saxon 2 we are working through.

[Heather in GA]

It sounds like your math is working well, so I would stick with it. R&S is not a magic bullet. It can be great for families who have had trouble with other programs, but you certainly won't miss out on anything by using Saxon and MUS instead. I have used both R&S and Saxon over the years.

[enbateau]

Keep what you have for the coming year. My enthusiasm for R&S helped convince a friend to switch after MUS alpha, and her student is doing great in R&S 2, but as long as you have a mastery-based math program, you'll be great. You can keep advancing with what you have it if it works, or when your order a year from now you can try R&S out then.

[Teach05]

Keep what you have for the coming year. My enthusiasm for R&S helped convince a friend to switch after MUS alpha, and her student is doing great in R&S 2, but as long as you have a mastery-based math program, you'll be great. You can keep advancing with what you have it if it works, or when your order a year from now you can try R&S out then.

After using MUS do you feel like there is a big difference in success of fact mastery between the two programs? That’s my worry.

[enbateau]

Automaticity is the goal, but some parents treat R&S like it's an autonomous program and assign the workbook pages only, or they feel the level of work required is absurd and thus reduce it. Many students will decry that it's boring because they "already know how to do that." But as students reach the halfway point of R&S2, the house of cards of insufficient review can begin to tumble. Multi-digit addition and subtraction with borrowing or carrying can bog down a student with poor retention of math facts, and the slog makes for painful math sessions, and this results in parents assigning even fewer rows.

The truth is that you could probably do any math program so long as you are correcting errors so students can learn from them, running flashcards of common math fact families daily (add/sub & later mult/div), and doing the program as written. The way MP schedules R&S, it is more explicit what is required. It's up to the parent to implement it correctly, and plenty of parents don't, wind up disliking it, and search for a program that will solve the problems they might have addressed with full implementation. If you only do the workbook or you skip the drill sheets or flashcard reviews or skip the TM's "concept" math portion, it will feel very "workbooky" and incomplete.

R&S isn't a magic bullet, but it's a great price point for a comprehensive math curriculum, and the more I compare it to the myriad other math curricula I have, the more I appreciate it.

Again, you could save a lot of money by just using what you have and doing it well. Don't get caught up in FOMO unless you currently dislike what you're doing.

[Teach05]

Automaticity is the goal, but some parents treat R&S like it's an autonomous program and assign the workbook pages only, or they feel the level of work required is absurd and thus reduce it. Many students will decry that it's boring because they "already know how to do that." But as students reach the halfway point of R&S2, the house of cards of insufficient review can begin to tumble. Multi-digit addition and subtraction with borrowing or carrying can bog down a student with poor retention of math facts, and the slog makes for painful math sessions, and this results in parents assigning even fewer rows.

The truth is that you could probably do any math program so long as you are correcting errors so students can learn from them, running flashcards of common math fact families daily (add/sub & later mult/div), and doing the program as written. The way MP schedules R&S, it is more explicit what is required. It's up to the parent to implement it correctly, and plenty of parents don't, wind up disliking it, and search for a program that will solve the problems they might have addressed with full implementation. If you only do the workbook or you skip the drill sheets or flashcard reviews or skip the TM's "concept" math portion, it will feel very "workbooky" and incomplete.

R&S isn't a magic bullet, but it's a great price point for a comprehensive math curriculum, and the more I compare it to the myriad other math curricula I have, the more I appreciate it.

Again, you could save a lot of money by just using what you have and doing it well. Don't get caught up in FOMO unless you currently dislike what you're doing.

You are always so helpful. Thank you!

[KrisTom]

I do not know what FOMO means, but I actually purchased the second half of R & S grade 2 math after my daughter completed her Abeka grade 1 math this year. I wanted her to have something to do. The workbook pages were 4 pages long plus the teacher book exercises, so we just didn't get through many of the lessons due to the sheer length of them. So we will likely go a different route for next school year.

[Teach05]

I do not know what FOMO means, but I actually purchased the second half of R & S grade 2 math after my daughter completed her Abeka grade 1 math this year. I wanted her to have something to do. The workbook pages were 4 pages long plus the teacher book exercises, so we just didn't get through many of the lessons due to the sheer length of them. So we will likely go a different route for next school year.

Do you have a guess what you’ll go with?

[KrisTom]

Do you have a guess what you’ll go with?

I think we are going to try Singapore Dimensions. I actually do like the Abeka math program, but I'd like to try something more conceptual. Math Mammoth is also on my list, but the teaching is built into the lessons. I learned this year I much prefer a separate teacher manual. I can see how R&S would work well for some kids. Last year I fell into the trap of wanting all the little pieces from MP, and I spent a lot of money because I kept adding. And we ended up with a lot of empty or partially completed "things," but that was for 3rd and 4th grade where it intensifies.

[howiecram]

I do not know what FOMO means, but I actually purchased the second half of R & S grade 2 math after my daughter completed her Abeka grade 1 math this year. I wanted her to have something to do. The workbook pages were 4 pages long plus the teacher book exercises, so we just didn't get through many of the lessons due to the sheer length of them. So we will likely go a different route for next school year.

Jumping into the middle of the R&S 2 math text is a bit of a learning curve. The program builds, so the daily drills, etc can be difficult if they weren't done in the beginning (ask me how I know 😂). It did take me 3 kids to understand the R&S program (I've now completed R&S through the 6th grade, my oldest in 1st and 2nd grade did Singapore, MUS, Abeka, Horizons and CLE.....). I would say we did a decent job of Horizons and Sinagpore through grade 2. I was only using R&S as enbateau suggested most people handle R&S math (assigning workbook pages). Finally, at the end of 2nd grade, feeling totally frustrated, I read the R&S 2 manual and discovered that it did in fact cover things from other program, just presented differently. I did actually try and go back through R&S2, but it was so hard! I decided to just give R&S3 a try for her 3rd grade year. The first 40 lessons are complete review and allowed us to spend some time learning how to do the drills. After the 40 lessons I understood the drills better and I was able to cut back on them or they moved so fast that I didn't need to. My second child, a boy, did R&S 1, but after my experience with R&S2, I decided he needed something else, so he did CLE. He did CLE 1, 2, and 3 and started CLE4 this year. We hit a wall with CLE and we had to move over to the R&S4 math text. We are able to complete 2 lessons a day (mostly orally, he does the supplemental drills in the back for written work) and he can now do longer division and double digit multiplication. (CLE just doesn't break down the steps well enough so one day you are multiplying 3x4 and then BAM, let's do 34x42). The only thing I find "missing" from R&S is geometry, but they teach you everything you need to know in R&S 6. So, if you complete the program, you do "get it". My last child is about to begin R&S3 and I will say that is one year that feels a little awkward to me, but it's a good entry point into learning the R&S way. 3rd grade has so much else going on in it, that if the math is "easy", I'm ok with that. I now have the experience of the rest of the program to be ok with that though. (just a little FYI, after R&S 4, during the summer I was looking for some worksheets for my older daughter to do over the summer. A friend had given me the Horizons math book 5. I just decided to let her do that over the summer. She was able to complete the whole first book (as it was all review), so I give props to R&S4 math for sure!

[howiecram]

I’ve purchased every piece in the level 2 package except math and I’m having massive FOMO. We currently use Math U See for mastery practice and Saxon for instruction. (The Math U See is introduced by me with the video, but is otherwise used as independent work when I’m working with another kiddo and I do a quick check once completed.)

I love MUS’s “tricks” for the facts. (9 gets one suck from the vacuum to become a 10, 8 gets two sucks from the vacuum. If you know you know. Lol) It seems to have worked pretty well, and I’d roughly guess accuracy is 80-90% when assessed. I also have a kid who rushes, so I’m not sure if that’s part of it too. I know how important mastery is, so I don’t want to muck it up. We are already over budget for the year on HS stuff, but as I sift through old threads it sounds like most are thrilled with going over to R&S. Please help me figure out if I should just dive in and complete the MP 2 package with math. We currently have MUS Beta and Saxon 2 we are working through.

Math can be exhausting to figure out. I think you have solid programs, so for this year, I wouldn't give it another thought at this point. I do think the Alpha and Beta are great years from Math U see (and possibly Gamma), but it starts to get a bit odd with Delta. I might suggest just using what you have this year. Next year, maybe consider buying R&S 3 math. It will feel really easy, but there is so much going on in the 3rd grade that "easy" might not be so bad. It's also a good year to learn how to use the R&S teacher's manual. We had to do the entire first 40 lessons to get that feel (which is all total review) but after that I was able to evaluate which lessons needed to be conducted and which didn't. I think about mid year, I assigned some pages and ended up doing the drill work every other day. Many families treat the hardcover R&S3 student book as a consumable workbook. There are two pages for each lesson. The left side is a facts page. We would do that orally. The right side of the page I did have the child do that on lined paper. (we had to spend the first 40 lessons working together to make the paper look nice - if you don't have that time, just let the child write in the book). I will also tell you that that particular year, the child doing R&S3 math started earlier than her siblings. We spent about 30 min in August doing those 40 lessons. By the time Sept started we figured out a rhythm and it was much easier to add the other children in.

Good luck!

[Teach05]

Math can be exhausting to figure out. I think you have solid programs, so for this year, I wouldn't give it another thought at this point. I do think the Alpha and Beta are great years from Math U see (and possibly Gamma), but it starts to get a bit odd with Delta. I might suggest just using what you have this year. Next year, maybe consider buying R&S 3 math. It will feel really easy, but there is so much going on in the 3rd grade that "easy" might not be so bad. It's also a good year to learn how to use the R&S teacher's manual. We had to do the entire first 40 lessons to get that feel (which is all total review) but after that I was able to evaluate which lessons needed to be conducted and which didn't. I think about mid year, I assigned some pages and ended up doing the drill work every other day. Many families treat the hardcover R&S3 student book as a consumable workbook. There are two pages for each lesson. The left side is a facts page. We would do that orally. The right side of the page I did have the child do that on lined paper. (we had to spend the first 40 lessons working together to make the paper look nice - if you don't have that time, just let the child write in the book). I will also tell you that that particular year, the child doing R&S3 math started earlier than her siblings. We spent about 30 min in August doing those 40 lessons. By the time Sept started we figured out a rhythm and it was much easier to add the other children in.

Good luck!

Thank you so much for the insight! The fear of missing some critical part of MP is real! Haha

[KrisTom]

Thank you so much for the insight! The fear of missing some critical part of MP is real! Haha

This was totally how I felt last year!