Navigate KTM
- KitchenTableMath
- What's New
- FAQ
- Book-style Index
- Ask a Question
- Search Comments
- Search Blog Posts
- Monthly Archives
- Search by Category
- Register as a User
- Register as our Guest
Kitchen Table Math
KTM User Pages
Service Groups
- Mathematically Correct
- WhatWorksClearinghouse
- Progressive Policy Institute
- Education Trust
- Illinois Loop
- Fordham Foundation
- New York City HOLD
Parent Groups
- Plano Parent Rights
- Informed Residents of Reading
- Teach Us Math
- Save Our Children from Mediocre Math
Personal Pages
Blogs
- Animals In Translation
- Eduwonk
- The Education Wonks
- Instructivist
- Jenny D
- Joanne Jacobs
- Learning Curves
- Math And Text
- MathMan
- Number 2 Pencil
- Oh, snap!
- Parent Pundit
- Vlorbik
- D-Ed Reckoning
- Teens And Tweens
Special lists
Help
29 Nov 2005 - 15:23
review of Math TRAILBLAZERS, under consideration for California state adoption
take-home message: Objectively measured student performance did not improve.
Back to main page.
Please consider registering as a regular user.
Look here for syntax help.
Here in the comments thread I'll add that curriculum designers like Siegfried Engelmann have now been foiled. Engelmann's book is around 10 years old, and one of his main points is that no curriculum should be installed in a school until it's been extensively field-tested in classrooms. The constructivist textbooks have evaded this common-sense requirement by doing extensive field testing and then reporting it as a success. -- CatherineJohnson - 29 Nov 2005
The constructivist textbooks have evaded this common-sense requirement by doing extensive field testing and then reporting it as a success. When are they doing this field testing? It seems that the only "field testing" that is being done is unscientific. No pre-tests, no SES compensation, no control groups, etc. The only testing I see being done is showing that tests scores go up every year, but even the worst curricula have some learning taking place. The main questions that need to be answered are: 1. did the test group outperform the control group; 2. did the test group learn one year's worth of math in one year; and 3. is the test group on schedule to take algebra by some date certain, i.e., teh beginning of 8th grade. -- KDeRosa - 29 Nov 2005
It seems that the only "field testing" that is being done is unscientific. No pre-tests, no SES compensation, no control groups, etc. Definitely. -- CatherineJohnson - 29 Nov 2005
Any sufficiently advanced curriculum is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.* * My variant of a James Klass riff on Clarke's Law, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." — Arthur C. Clarke -- DougSundseth - 29 Nov 2005
Doug! I can't believe you quoted that line! I've been quoting it for years, but I've never had the real words! I'm logging that into Wit and Wisdom now. I love that line. -- CatherineJohnson - 29 Nov 2005
I googled the web to in vain today trying to find someone who has done the hard work of debunking this pseudo-research. No luck. (And, I don't like just relying on the bias route because the appearance of bias doesn't necessarily mean bad science --though in this case it likely does.) Also, I couldn't find any of the "research" online either. Coincidence? -- KDeRosa - 29 Nov 2005
You're right about taking the bias route, but in this case I'll make an exception—especially given the fact that within academia it's customary to have outside evaluators when departments and faculty members are up for review. The standards of a profession come into play here. In the pharmaceutical industry it's standard procedure for the company that developed a medication to assume the costs of testing it and reporting data. That's not the case in academia, and I don't see any need to treat a piece of TRAILBLAZERS 'research' that has been conducted by the author of TRAILBLAZERS and then posted on the NSF web site with no mention of this fact with the kind of respect I would a study done by a pharmaceutical company. -- CatherineJohnson - 29 Nov 2005
Re mathland: here's a recent quote from Prof Bishop over at math-Teach: Well, astrology has lasted for millennia so all reality-based predictions are suspect but my prediction is that the pattern of these will follow California's model of the 90's. At the time, MathLand or Quest 2000 were followed by IMP or CPM, sometimes with a couple of years of ad hoc activity-based mathematical programming in between. The approach help drive the orientation to our genuine standards-based approach (not the NCTM bait and switch variety). The programs were so ineffective that Quest 2000 never found Year 2000, it was dead by 1998, and MathLand was already dying by 1998. It is, I believe, also now out of print. Almost every high school - hundreds across California - that tried IMP have dropped it because of its ineffectiveness and CPM, bless its heart, single-handedly spawned Mathematically Correct. -- KDeRosa - 29 Nov 2005
BTW, a new AIR study was recently released that placed DI as one of only two programs having a "moderately strong" research base. -- KDeRosa - 29 Nov 2005
Ken! wow! Can't wait— -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
Unfortunately, I think this is yet another study-of-studies....which is what the NRC study is, an evaluation of the evidence produced by studies of the curricula. When a program gets a 'zero,' all it means is that there isn't any evidence one way or another. Still, it's good news for DI. They do say, quite clearly, that the evidence that DI actually works is 'moderately strong.' They aren't just saying that the studies of DI 'meet criteria' for a good study, but that the study results are valid. GREAT. -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
wow Engelmann has a program for teaching handwriting. I need that desperately. Meanwhile, I despair with Andrew. -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
The Full Immersion Model of Direct Instruction has two foundational principles: all students are capable of learning if taught using proper techniques, and all teachers can be effective if provided with researchbased strategies and materials. Thus, the model seeks to accelerate learning for all students and provide teachers with appropriate strategies by targeting factors that are within a school’s control. These factors include assessment, instruction, grouping, scheduling, professional development, and resource allocation. accelerate learning for all students -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
Notably, the model does not rely on parental involvement or technology; NIFDI believes that school leaders often cannot control these factors or use them efficiently. I have a feeling Siegfried and I would knock heads if I actually had a child in his program..... -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
Which is not a rap against him, btw -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
Re parental involvement: it is optional in DI, which is just their way of saying that the lack of parental involvement will not be used an excuse to impede success. The reason why we have public schooling in the first place is because many parents are either not capable or not willing to educate their children on their own. It is especially odious that our public schools have stooped to this level and have made this one of their favorite excuses. I believe the worksheets for the handwriting course are available for download for free here. Although, there are probably additional instructional materials needed. -- KDeRosa - 30 Nov 2005
Re parental involvement: it is optional in DI, which is just their way of saying that the lack of parental involvement will not be used an excuse to impede success. Absolutely. Also, the further I go with 'afterschooling' the more dissatisfied I am with what I'm doing. Don't get me wrong. I like teaching my own child; I like doing all the things I'm doing. But I'm dissatisfied with the results. It's an ongoing battle, I'm 'learning on the job' in a way that's not especially calm-making for the household, I'm harried & overwhelmed, etc. We're fighting our way from one Chapter test to another, while neglecting Christopher's other subjects..... The single best thing I've done is sign Christopher up for KUMON, because that is a fully scripted, field-tested supplemental educational program. One thing I'd love to see happen is the development of 'afterschool curricula' like KUMON for parents to teach. For instance, you could, I'm positive, create a much briefer, more streamlined version of SINGAPORE MATH that could be taught by a parent in 10 to 20 minutes a day. I'm not sure what it would look like....but I feel certain it could be done. Same thing for reading, writing, and other subjects. As I think about it, we already have such a curriculum for spelling and grammar. Megawords works as an afterschool program, and the grammar book Susan recommended, Same thing for spelling (actually, that's covered; Megawords handles it), Steps to Good Grammar by Genevieve Walberg Schaefer is fantastic—fantastic, and highly compressed. Christopher told me last night that he got a 97 (IIRC) on his latest grammar test. I asked him what the test was on, and he said linking verbs, etc. Then he said, 'Mrs. Roth didn't really teach it.' I said, 'How'd you learn it?' Christopher said, 'You.' He learned enough to get a 97 on his test at school from the handful of pages we've managed to get through in Schaefer's book. I need books like that for math and for writing. (I think it's possible that there are workbooks one can use for this purpose, so I'm thinking that over. The Kelley Wingate Pre-Algebra book in particular may work well...) -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
Thanks for the link! -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
But I'm dissatisfied with the results. It's an ongoing battle, I'm 'learning on the job' in a way that's not especially calm-making for the household, I'm harried & overwhelmed, etc. Don't give up (Of course, I know you won't) You'll get better and more streamlined. I promise. It's taken me years and I finally feel like I'm actually getting somewhere and that it hasn't all been for nothing. I was all over the map when I started (and that was with no math at all.) Seriously, I was creating curriculums based on what I thought the kids needed right then. If there were 48 hours a day and I needed only an hour of sleep I would have succeeded, but I drove myself nuts constantly trying to tailor everything to each boy perfectly. Now, I'm getting better at knowing when something is way too much work on my end for the results I'm going to get. I now instinctively know how long something is going to take of my time. I didn't before, plus nothing was too great a task for my kids, by golly. -- SusanS - 30 Nov 2005
Christopher told me last night that he got a 97 (IIRC) on his latest grammar test. I asked him what the test was on, and he said linking verbs, etc. Then he said, 'Mrs. Roth didn't really teach it.' I said, 'How'd you learn it?' Christopher said, 'You.' You go, girl! She says, dabbing a tear from her cheek. I love that Steps to Good Grammar. It looks so regular and boring, but it is coherent (my new favorite word) and to the point, thank you very much. No dilly-dallying around. I need to pull mine out again, too. -- SusanS - 30 Nov 2005
For instance, you could, I'm positive, create a much briefer, more streamlined version of SINGAPORE MATH that could be taught by a parent in 10 to 20 minutes a day. I'm not sure what it would look like....but I feel certain it could be done. Catherine, FWIW, I homeschool using Singapore Math and I have yet to have my child do more than 20 minutes per day. We school year-round, so that might make the difference. I have a just turned 9 year old and he is finishing up 3B. We also use some SM supplements. There are also Home Instructor Guides, but I haven't felt the need for them yet. -- NicksMama - 30 Nov 2005
Seriously, I was creating curriculums based on what I thought the kids needed right then. If there were 48 hours a day and I needed only an hour of sleep I would have succeeded, but I drove myself nuts constantly trying to tailor everything to each boy perfectly. I was just talking to a mom at tennis who's as disgusted with the English Language Arts program as everyone else. She said, "Why am I up all night pulling grammar lessons from the internet?" Answer: BECAUSE THE TEACHER DOES TEACH. I gave her the reference to STEPS TO GOOD GRAMMAR. That book is in my pantheon, for sure. It's even in Christopher's pantheon. WHAT I DESPERATELY NEED IS AN AFTERSCHOOL WRITING PROGRAM..... I may have to re-read Lou Kelly.... -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
I now instinctively know how long something is going to take of my time. I didn't before, plus nothing was too great a task for my kids, by golly. Right, exactly. All your mama-bear instincts get activated, and then look out. Zero sleep, zero Career Path, etc. -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
I love that Steps to Good Grammar. It looks so regular and boring, but it is coherent (my new favorite word) and to the point, thank you very much. Plus it's K-7; it's the whole thing. All grammar, right there, organized into tiny little discrete lessons-with-answer-sheets. -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
FWIW, I homeschool using Singapore Math and I have yet to have my child do more than 20 minutes per day. We school year-round, so that might make the difference. Well.....that is very interesting. It's true: those lessons are extremely compact. -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
Something to think about. Definitely. -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
I haven't found the perfect writing program for the afterschooler, either. That would have been helpful. -- SusanS - 01 Dec 2005
Horrible story today from a woman whose daughter went through Irvington schools. The daughter, a sweet, well-put together girl, is having a terrible time at college. She's already left once, and will probably leave again. A big part of the problem, her mother says, is that she can't write. She was in all honors English classes at Irvington High School. -- CatherineJohnson - 01 Dec 2005
Wayne Bishop review of TRAILBLAZERS for California DoE
review of Math TRAILBLAZERS, under consideration for California state adoption
AB 2519 Content Review Panel
REPORT WRITING TEMPLATE
MATHEMATICS PROGRAMS
Name of Publisher: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co.
Name of Program: Math Trailblazers
Identification Number: None Indicated in Standards Map
Intended Grade Level(s): 4-5
conclusions:
- Based upon evaluation of its content only, this submission is NOT recommended for adoption as either a BASIC or a PARTIAL program.
- This submission is not comprehensive, and it does not contribute clearly and significantly to the course of study.
- This submission is not based upon the fundamental skills required by mathematics, including, but not limited to, basic computational skills.
- This submission does not provide for basic skills instruction that is systematic and explicit.
- This submission does not enable instruction in almost all (if not all) of the individual standards for the intended grade level(s) or discipline(s), either in whole or in one or more of the subject area(s) or discipline(s) listed above, in a cohesive, clear, systematic, and significant fashion.
- This submission is not aligned with the standards for the intended grade level(s) or discipline(s), meaning that (1) it does not enable successful instruction in the individual standards it covers, (2) it includes something fundamentally contrary to the standards, or (3) some content extraneous to instruction in the standards does detract from the ability of teachers to teach readily and students to learn thoroughly the content specified in the standards.
- This submission is not factually accurate and the inaccuracies cannot reasonably be corrected.
- To the extent this submission incorporates principles of instruction that are not reflective of current and confirmed experimental research, the bases of those principles are either not appropriately identified or are misleadingly presented as experimental research.
- This submission is not adequate in its coverage.
other comments This submission falls far short of the standards for the grades at which it was submitted. It should not seriously be entertained as a candidate for these grades. AB 2519 Content Review Panel
REPORT WRITING TEMPLATE
MATHEMATICS PROGRAMS
notes and citations This submission continues to survive in spite of the existence of experimental research that it is not effective. The student books, evident from looking at the teachers' guides, are really a set of separate units that were widely distributed under the name TIMS, a curriculum project out of the University of Illinois at Chicago. More than ten years ago, this reviewer heard the lead author discuss the concept and curriculum which had already been class tested for several years. In response to a question from the audience about student performance, he admitted that student performance in mathematics "had not gone up", which many of us interpreted as had, in fact, gone down. He assured us that the understanding of mathematics did go up with his curriculum but did not tell us how that had been determined. He also reassured us that the understanding of science, another goal of this integrated curriculum, did increase. No data was provided for either mathematics or science and the science conclusion should be considered speculative since 4th and 5th graders are not often externally tested in science (California's STAR scores, for example, do not indicate a science grade until grade 9). What instruments they may have been using to make their conclusions is unknown. The mathematics component, however, is known. Objectively measured student performance did not improve.
take-home message: Objectively measured student performance did not improve.
Back to main page.
Comments
After entering a comment, users can login anonymously as KtmGuest (password: guest) when prompted.Please consider registering as a regular user.
Look here for syntax help.
Here in the comments thread I'll add that curriculum designers like Siegfried Engelmann have now been foiled. Engelmann's book is around 10 years old, and one of his main points is that no curriculum should be installed in a school until it's been extensively field-tested in classrooms. The constructivist textbooks have evaded this common-sense requirement by doing extensive field testing and then reporting it as a success. -- CatherineJohnson - 29 Nov 2005
The constructivist textbooks have evaded this common-sense requirement by doing extensive field testing and then reporting it as a success. When are they doing this field testing? It seems that the only "field testing" that is being done is unscientific. No pre-tests, no SES compensation, no control groups, etc. The only testing I see being done is showing that tests scores go up every year, but even the worst curricula have some learning taking place. The main questions that need to be answered are: 1. did the test group outperform the control group; 2. did the test group learn one year's worth of math in one year; and 3. is the test group on schedule to take algebra by some date certain, i.e., teh beginning of 8th grade. -- KDeRosa - 29 Nov 2005
It seems that the only "field testing" that is being done is unscientific. No pre-tests, no SES compensation, no control groups, etc. Definitely. -- CatherineJohnson - 29 Nov 2005
Any sufficiently advanced curriculum is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.* * My variant of a James Klass riff on Clarke's Law, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." — Arthur C. Clarke -- DougSundseth - 29 Nov 2005
Doug! I can't believe you quoted that line! I've been quoting it for years, but I've never had the real words! I'm logging that into Wit and Wisdom now. I love that line. -- CatherineJohnson - 29 Nov 2005
I googled the web to in vain today trying to find someone who has done the hard work of debunking this pseudo-research. No luck. (And, I don't like just relying on the bias route because the appearance of bias doesn't necessarily mean bad science --though in this case it likely does.) Also, I couldn't find any of the "research" online either. Coincidence? -- KDeRosa - 29 Nov 2005
You're right about taking the bias route, but in this case I'll make an exception—especially given the fact that within academia it's customary to have outside evaluators when departments and faculty members are up for review. The standards of a profession come into play here. In the pharmaceutical industry it's standard procedure for the company that developed a medication to assume the costs of testing it and reporting data. That's not the case in academia, and I don't see any need to treat a piece of TRAILBLAZERS 'research' that has been conducted by the author of TRAILBLAZERS and then posted on the NSF web site with no mention of this fact with the kind of respect I would a study done by a pharmaceutical company. -- CatherineJohnson - 29 Nov 2005
Re mathland: here's a recent quote from Prof Bishop over at math-Teach: Well, astrology has lasted for millennia so all reality-based predictions are suspect but my prediction is that the pattern of these will follow California's model of the 90's. At the time, MathLand or Quest 2000 were followed by IMP or CPM, sometimes with a couple of years of ad hoc activity-based mathematical programming in between. The approach help drive the orientation to our genuine standards-based approach (not the NCTM bait and switch variety). The programs were so ineffective that Quest 2000 never found Year 2000, it was dead by 1998, and MathLand was already dying by 1998. It is, I believe, also now out of print. Almost every high school - hundreds across California - that tried IMP have dropped it because of its ineffectiveness and CPM, bless its heart, single-handedly spawned Mathematically Correct. -- KDeRosa - 29 Nov 2005
BTW, a new AIR study was recently released that placed DI as one of only two programs having a "moderately strong" research base. -- KDeRosa - 29 Nov 2005
Ken! wow! Can't wait— -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
Unfortunately, I think this is yet another study-of-studies....which is what the NRC study is, an evaluation of the evidence produced by studies of the curricula. When a program gets a 'zero,' all it means is that there isn't any evidence one way or another. Still, it's good news for DI. They do say, quite clearly, that the evidence that DI actually works is 'moderately strong.' They aren't just saying that the studies of DI 'meet criteria' for a good study, but that the study results are valid. GREAT. -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
wow Engelmann has a program for teaching handwriting. I need that desperately. Meanwhile, I despair with Andrew. -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
The Full Immersion Model of Direct Instruction has two foundational principles: all students are capable of learning if taught using proper techniques, and all teachers can be effective if provided with researchbased strategies and materials. Thus, the model seeks to accelerate learning for all students and provide teachers with appropriate strategies by targeting factors that are within a school’s control. These factors include assessment, instruction, grouping, scheduling, professional development, and resource allocation. accelerate learning for all students -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
Notably, the model does not rely on parental involvement or technology; NIFDI believes that school leaders often cannot control these factors or use them efficiently. I have a feeling Siegfried and I would knock heads if I actually had a child in his program..... -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
Which is not a rap against him, btw -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
Re parental involvement: it is optional in DI, which is just their way of saying that the lack of parental involvement will not be used an excuse to impede success. The reason why we have public schooling in the first place is because many parents are either not capable or not willing to educate their children on their own. It is especially odious that our public schools have stooped to this level and have made this one of their favorite excuses. I believe the worksheets for the handwriting course are available for download for free here. Although, there are probably additional instructional materials needed. -- KDeRosa - 30 Nov 2005
Re parental involvement: it is optional in DI, which is just their way of saying that the lack of parental involvement will not be used an excuse to impede success. Absolutely. Also, the further I go with 'afterschooling' the more dissatisfied I am with what I'm doing. Don't get me wrong. I like teaching my own child; I like doing all the things I'm doing. But I'm dissatisfied with the results. It's an ongoing battle, I'm 'learning on the job' in a way that's not especially calm-making for the household, I'm harried & overwhelmed, etc. We're fighting our way from one Chapter test to another, while neglecting Christopher's other subjects..... The single best thing I've done is sign Christopher up for KUMON, because that is a fully scripted, field-tested supplemental educational program. One thing I'd love to see happen is the development of 'afterschool curricula' like KUMON for parents to teach. For instance, you could, I'm positive, create a much briefer, more streamlined version of SINGAPORE MATH that could be taught by a parent in 10 to 20 minutes a day. I'm not sure what it would look like....but I feel certain it could be done. Same thing for reading, writing, and other subjects. As I think about it, we already have such a curriculum for spelling and grammar. Megawords works as an afterschool program, and the grammar book Susan recommended, Same thing for spelling (actually, that's covered; Megawords handles it), Steps to Good Grammar by Genevieve Walberg Schaefer is fantastic—fantastic, and highly compressed. Christopher told me last night that he got a 97 (IIRC) on his latest grammar test. I asked him what the test was on, and he said linking verbs, etc. Then he said, 'Mrs. Roth didn't really teach it.' I said, 'How'd you learn it?' Christopher said, 'You.' He learned enough to get a 97 on his test at school from the handful of pages we've managed to get through in Schaefer's book. I need books like that for math and for writing. (I think it's possible that there are workbooks one can use for this purpose, so I'm thinking that over. The Kelley Wingate Pre-Algebra book in particular may work well...) -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
Thanks for the link! -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
But I'm dissatisfied with the results. It's an ongoing battle, I'm 'learning on the job' in a way that's not especially calm-making for the household, I'm harried & overwhelmed, etc. Don't give up (Of course, I know you won't) You'll get better and more streamlined. I promise. It's taken me years and I finally feel like I'm actually getting somewhere and that it hasn't all been for nothing. I was all over the map when I started (and that was with no math at all.) Seriously, I was creating curriculums based on what I thought the kids needed right then. If there were 48 hours a day and I needed only an hour of sleep I would have succeeded, but I drove myself nuts constantly trying to tailor everything to each boy perfectly. Now, I'm getting better at knowing when something is way too much work on my end for the results I'm going to get. I now instinctively know how long something is going to take of my time. I didn't before, plus nothing was too great a task for my kids, by golly. -- SusanS - 30 Nov 2005
Christopher told me last night that he got a 97 (IIRC) on his latest grammar test. I asked him what the test was on, and he said linking verbs, etc. Then he said, 'Mrs. Roth didn't really teach it.' I said, 'How'd you learn it?' Christopher said, 'You.' You go, girl! She says, dabbing a tear from her cheek. I love that Steps to Good Grammar. It looks so regular and boring, but it is coherent (my new favorite word) and to the point, thank you very much. No dilly-dallying around. I need to pull mine out again, too. -- SusanS - 30 Nov 2005
For instance, you could, I'm positive, create a much briefer, more streamlined version of SINGAPORE MATH that could be taught by a parent in 10 to 20 minutes a day. I'm not sure what it would look like....but I feel certain it could be done. Catherine, FWIW, I homeschool using Singapore Math and I have yet to have my child do more than 20 minutes per day. We school year-round, so that might make the difference. I have a just turned 9 year old and he is finishing up 3B. We also use some SM supplements. There are also Home Instructor Guides, but I haven't felt the need for them yet. -- NicksMama - 30 Nov 2005
Seriously, I was creating curriculums based on what I thought the kids needed right then. If there were 48 hours a day and I needed only an hour of sleep I would have succeeded, but I drove myself nuts constantly trying to tailor everything to each boy perfectly. I was just talking to a mom at tennis who's as disgusted with the English Language Arts program as everyone else. She said, "Why am I up all night pulling grammar lessons from the internet?" Answer: BECAUSE THE TEACHER DOES TEACH. I gave her the reference to STEPS TO GOOD GRAMMAR. That book is in my pantheon, for sure. It's even in Christopher's pantheon. WHAT I DESPERATELY NEED IS AN AFTERSCHOOL WRITING PROGRAM..... I may have to re-read Lou Kelly.... -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
I now instinctively know how long something is going to take of my time. I didn't before, plus nothing was too great a task for my kids, by golly. Right, exactly. All your mama-bear instincts get activated, and then look out. Zero sleep, zero Career Path, etc. -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
I love that Steps to Good Grammar. It looks so regular and boring, but it is coherent (my new favorite word) and to the point, thank you very much. Plus it's K-7; it's the whole thing. All grammar, right there, organized into tiny little discrete lessons-with-answer-sheets. -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
FWIW, I homeschool using Singapore Math and I have yet to have my child do more than 20 minutes per day. We school year-round, so that might make the difference. Well.....that is very interesting. It's true: those lessons are extremely compact. -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
Something to think about. Definitely. -- CatherineJohnson - 30 Nov 2005
I haven't found the perfect writing program for the afterschooler, either. That would have been helpful. -- SusanS - 01 Dec 2005
Horrible story today from a woman whose daughter went through Irvington schools. The daughter, a sweet, well-put together girl, is having a terrible time at college. She's already left once, and will probably leave again. A big part of the problem, her mother says, is that she can't write. She was in all honors English classes at Irvington High School. -- CatherineJohnson - 01 Dec 2005
| WebLogForm | |
|---|---|
| Title: | Wayne Bishop review of TRAILBLAZERS for California DoE |
| TopicType: | WebLog |
| SubjectArea: | TrailBlazers |
| LogDate: | 200511291023 |