Saxon??  Teaching Textbooks??  And what the heck is Singapore Math?

Note:  I first wrote this in August 2012 but got overwhelmed with new school year stuff and never posted it.  I'll add an update at the end.  It will be long and boring to my non-homeschooling friends - sorry - but we homeschoolers always agonize over which curriculum to use, so this is my take on the math debate ...

We are about to start our tenth year of homeschooling.  Gulp.  Our oldest is about to leave us for a traditional Catholic high school.  Double gulp.  On his first day I'll be bawling like a kindergarten parent, but that's a post for later.  Let's talk MATH.

8-16-12:  First Day of School - ever

!

I am no math genius.  (To my kids,  if you're reading this, cover your eyes.)  I don't particularly enjoy math.  (OK, now uncover them.)  I am the daughter of a physicist and chemist, yet all the math/science genes bypassed me and congregated in my baby brother, who is now a successful computer engineer and who continually gets so many amazing job offers that we can't keep straight for whom he's working.  Probably designing advanced missile systems or something. (Kids, if you're still reading, think ENGINEERING - not literature or philosophy.  Like Shakespeare?  Go see a play.)  All that to say that you can take or leave my math recommendations and I won't be offended.

But here's the thing:  my kids rock at math.  It is always the highest score on their standardized tests; Christopher and Peter routinely earn perfect scores in math.  Not saying they love it, but they can DO it, which is good enough in my book.  Please understand that I'm not bragging and take no credit for this whatsoever.  I give all the credit to the good Lord for their brains and to Saxon, yes, Saxon Math, the much loved/much maligned series, depending on whom you ask.  (Ok, perhaps I'll take a teensy bit of the credit since I did spend hours and hours nursing them in the Lazyboy, and I just ran across another great article about breastfeeding and IQ, but once again, that's a post for later.)

I am completely convinced that the constant review required in "Mixed Practice", the daily facts practice, and the mental discipline it takes to get through a Saxon lesson is what has enabled those high scores.

It's not flashy; there are no color pictures or cute cartoon characters.  But it is systematic, thorough, and logically presented.  There is plenty, PLENTY of drill.  Christopher did Algebra I in 7th and 8th grade, and in the midst of this I ran across the Algebra book they once used in our Catholic grade schools here.  (They've since switched.)  It was gorgeous - full color pictures and lots of practical applications.  Lots.  In fact, I kept flipping page after page and it seemed to be nothing BUT practical applications. I could only think, "Where's the real math?  Where's the factoring?  Where are the equations?"  I'm all for practical applications, but surely you should be able to DO some math before applying it!

Back to the kids:  Christopher finished Saxon Algebra I in October of his 8th grade year, and since we knew he was headed to McGill (our local Catholic high school and my alma mater - Go Jackets!) we weren't ready for him to move on to geometry quite yet.  We had 2 tests looming over us:  he had to take the ACT Explore test as a placement exam for McGill in November, and then in May he had to take the Algebra I exam to see if he could get hs credit and go right in to geometry as a freshman.  I knew he needed to keep up his Algebra skills, so I bought Teaching Textbooks Algebra I, a program done entirely on the computer - lessons, quizzes,  tests, the whole shebang.  My idea was that he could do a lesson or two a day to stay primed and ready for the 2 upcoming "moments of truth."

I really wanted to love it.  Truly.  My kids get tired of all the Saxon work, and I thought this might be the answer.  On the one hand, TT did all the grading for me.  I  loved the look of it, too - fun graphics, animated word problems ... it's just cute!  But I'll be honest:  Christopher hated it.  Part of it is that's just him.  He's Carl Frederickson from Pixar's Up, so he found the cute animation distracting and annoying after the first few lessons.  But I'll also tell you that neither he nor I found it nearly challenging enough.  In their attempts to make the program fun and user-friendly, they sacrificed some of the "oomph" of content.

Christopher will tell you that if he had only done TT, he never would have passed the Algebra I test, and he would have stunk up the math section of the Explore (on which he made a perfect score).  On his own, he dropped TT after a few weeks and resorted to retaking the Saxon Alg I tests to prepare.  Can't argue with that approach now, since it worked.  You can read more reviews here and here.  Some folks love TT.

At the same time, I bought TT Math 3 for my third grader, Emma.  Until they can do the Saxon DIVE CD on their own, Saxon is very mommy-intensive, and at that point, Emma just wasn't getting enough face time with me.  (I was homeschooling 4, plus we had a demanding toddler, plus I was trying hard to get Christopher ready for high school.)  On the one hand, she was getting math lessons done every day - which just wouldn't have happened in our house with Saxon that year, if I'm being realistic and honest - and she thought all the Study Buddies and graphics were fun.  BUT, I realized too late that it wasn't challenging and rigorous enough.  She made no grade  lower than an 85% all year - and the vast majority of her homework and test grades were 100%.  So imagine my disappointment when her standardized test scores in math were completely lackluster that year.  We immediately jumped back to Saxon for 4th grade, and tried hard to catch up to where we should be.

So here's my bottom line and recommendations for both ...

• Teaching Textbooks can be helpful if Mom simply cannot get Saxon done at all, and the child is not old enough for the DIVE CD.  I'd be wary of it for college bound kids in high school level math, however.  Don't like how it strips away mathematical language.
• If you do use TT, I would use the grade level AHEAD of your child's current grade, and I would make the student do 2 lessons/day.  (Did that with Emma - doesn't take too long.)  I would also print out the tests and require the student to take all tests with paper and pencil the old fashioned way.  I did let Emma do quizzes on the computer, but for tests, she needed to show the work and not just guess at an answer on the computer. 
• TT might be helpful for summer enrichment, just to keep up math skills, but I will not use it as a replacement for a real math course again. 
• Don't skimp on the Saxon materials!  Buy the workbooks - they should do Facts Practice everyday.  For the little kids, they should do the Math Meeting everyday.  If you have several young children, buy the Saxon Manipulative Kit.  It is used for K-3 and has everything you'll ever need and you won't be tempted to skip a lesson on tangrams because you don't want to dig them out from the closet.
• Saxon can get pricey, esp when you throw in the DIVE CD.  We've had good luck at Rainbow Resources buying the whole homeschool kit.
• Saxon now makes its own version of the DIVE CD.  We prefer good ol' Dr. Shormann on the DIVE, but here's a comparison of the two.
• For Algebra I, just for something different, we use Mr. Reed's "Mastering Algebra John Saxon's Way."  It's a live action version instead of a white board.  Here's a sample.
• Facts Practice, Mental Math, Lesson Practice, and Mixed Practice makes for a long Saxon lesson.  First, I remind my kids that their math time includes the homework they would have to do in the evenings if they were in "regular" school, and wouldn't they rather just get 'er done during the day?  Then we have a deal going.  They always have to do all of the above, but when it comes to Mixed Practice, if they get a 100% on that section, then the next day they can do even or odd only. 
• I xerox a jillion of these answer forms at the beginning of the year.  The masters are in the back of the  workbook.

 

Sorry - still don't know about Singapore Math.  I took one detour away from Saxon, and I' m NOT going to experiment again.

Update:  Summer 2013
Made it to the END of our tenth year of homeschooling, thanks be to God.  Christopher survived his first year at McGill and blazed a trail through geometry and physics.  Thank you, Saxon.  And as for Emma, after a year of Saxon 5/4, her standardized scores skyrocketed, and she, like her big brothers, earned a perfect score in math procedures.  You go, girl!

A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE CHURCH

Below is a reply I have written to an old classmate of mine about the Catholic Church.  I am using this occasion as an excuse to refire-up our long dormant and short-lived blog.  Hopefully, more posts to come on topics far and wide!

Pat, I have written something really long below. To paraphrase Mark Twain, I would have written less, but I didn’t have enough time.  You and I went to Catholic school together for a long long time.  I think one thing we can both agree on is that both of our alma maters did a lousy job of basic catechesis in the faith.  I don’t know how they are doing now, but the 70’s and 80’s were a pretty bleak time for education in the faith itself.  If they had done their jobs correctly, your questions/objections would have been answered to some extent then. 

I am going to address your points one by one, as succinctly as I can.  I am under no illusion that I am going to change your mind. I am still wondering, frankly, how you came to this point, to be so viscerally opposed to the Catholic Church.  So, I don’t know what I hope to accomplish, other than to think that God must have a hand in it somehow, since you’ve engaged me on this on two separate occasions. Please do me the favor of reading the whole thing with an open mind, since I spent all of Sunday afternoon writing it from scratch instead of hanging out with my family.  If you wish to respond, great, but just reading it works for me too.  I won’t be offended if I bored you into disinterest in continuing the conversation.

Your words are in bold below.

Sometimes doesn't "religion" get in the way of relationship? Doesn't all these rules and human additions make faith more complicated?

A lot of what you say I agree with. Rules for their own sake, or legalism, absolutely does make faith complicated.  It can suck the life out of faith, and out of relationship.  This assumes two things, though- that the rules are all the same sort (i.e. human)and not from the Lord, and that they can’t serve the relationship rather than detract from it.

Forget Catholicism for a minute.  Let’s just take the notion of religion, or Church (as a body of believers accountable to one another) in general.  I am assuming, and correct me if I am wrong, that because you do not put stock in organized religion but in Christ alone, that you are a “sola scriptura” Christian; a person who relies on the Bible, the inspired Word of God, alone for his knowledge of Christ and his teachings.  In other words, cutting out the “middle management” of the Church and going straight to Jesus in the Word.

So, assuming that‘s true for a moment, let’s see what the Word, and in fact Jesus himself, says about the Church:

“And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Mt 16:18-20.

After Jesus founds his church upon the rock of Peter, to whom he gives the power to forgive sin, he commissions the apostles to “go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them….teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” Mt 29:19-20. So the apostles are called to evangelize and gather believers into his church, and observe all that Christ has commanded.

So Christ himself calls us into his church, which he founded upon Peter. Later, in 1Timothy3:15, we are told the role of the church: “But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.”

Note that scripture is not called the pillar and foundation of truth, but the Church is.  This makes perfect sense upon reflection, and in fact is the only logical progression.

It is very easy for Christians today to say that the Bible is all we need to know the teachings of Christ. However, consider these questions:

How long was Christianity believed and practiced before the books of the Bible were even written?

Where did the Bible come from?

Who decided which books were inspired and which weren’t?

What were their criteria? In other words, against what standards did they judge the words of the books to be authentic teachings of Christ or not?

How did the common Christian know the stories of the Bible in the 14 centuries of Christianity before the invention of the printing press?

There are countless English translations of the Bible. How do we trust one over another, in terms of accuracy?

If we do not believe that Christ founded a Church to which he gave his divine authority, on what basis do we trust the decisions of those who put the Bible together?

Now, to actually address the question you asked (sorry I got sidetracked!), With just the Bible to follow and no authoritative church to listen to, we have 30,000 Christian denominations (literally), all separated due to their disagreement over  how to interpret what the Bible says and put it into practice.  THAT’S what seems complicated to me.  One church, founded by Christ, guided by the Holy Spirit to infallibly teach its members in matter of faith and morals?  A lot less complicated.  Challenging, yes.  Complicated? No.

Why can't people look to Christ and Christ alone for a role model because we all fall drastically short of his example?

Again, I am in total agreement on looking to Christ as our perfect model. But this need not be an either/or choice.  Why not both/and? Now, if looking to the saints or other holy men and women distracted us from Christ, I would be against it too.  But, the church holds up this people as big flashing arrows of holiness pointing toward Christ.  If you read accounts of their lives, if you read their writings, the resounding theme is of a life, mind, and heart dedicated to the Lord.

It is human nature to seek out role models in all the things we wish to do well, and to follow those examples.  My 13 year-old son is a pretty decent basketball player.  He works hard, practices a lot, and watches a whole lot of classic games on TV.  Why? To see basketball played at its best in a variety of game situations.

That’s how it is with the saints (who are, of course, sinners and human beings just like us). A couple of examples: St. Gianna Beretta Molla, whose feast day it is today, was canonized a saint relatively recently by the late Pope John Paul II.  She would be pushing 90 years-old if alive today.  She was a wife, mother, and physician in Italy.  She already had several young children when she became pregnant again.  It was discovered that she had a life-threatening medical condition that could be fixed with surgery if she would consent to an abortion.  She refused, valuing the life of her unborn child ahead of her own. She gave birth to a healthy daughter, had the surgery, then died of an infection from the surgery three weeks later.  Further investigation into her life revealed a woman of incredible sanctity.  My wife and many of her friends have taken great inspiration from her as they try to be good, selfless wives and mothers themselves.  They ask for St. Gianna’s intercession to the Father in Heaven often.

How about St. Maximilian Kolbe, a priest in a concentration camp who freely offered his life for execution in place of a Jewish man who had a wife and children?  When I try to teach my boys about courage for the sake of Christ, I want them to know all about Maximilian Kolbe, and ask him for his intercession.

Are the saints perfect? No- they would be the first to say they fall short. Do we worship them? No-we admire and emulate them.  Do they point to themselves? No- their lives point to Christ dwelling in them. Does God love them more? No- rather, God invites us to draw as close to him as they did, and through his grace, we all can! The saints are evidence of the love and closeness to the Lord that is available freely to all of us.

Why does the catholic church put some individuals above others especially when the church throughout history is strife with sin?

I think I addressed this above in part, in that while the church recognizes and holds up some individuals as models of sanctity, it in no way suggests that they are better than anyone else.  All have fallen short, all are called to holiness, all are loved by God, and Christ died once for all.

Is the history of the Church filled with sinners?  Absolutely.  Have priests, bishops, and popes sinned, sometimes scandalously and grievously?  Yes. Will this continue to happen? No doubt. But see, this is precisely where Christ’s promise comes into focus; the promise above that he was founding a Church and the gated of hell would not prevail against it.  He also promised to leave behind “another paraclete” (the Holy Spirit). See, if he left the teaching authority solely in the hands of sinful men, it would take about five minutes for the whole thing to derail. That is why he protects and guides the teaching authority of the church (the Magisterium) with the Holy Spirit. So, no matter how flawed or sinful a particular priest or pope may be, the faith and moral teaching of the church is divinely protected.

I don’t believe in the teaching authority of the Church in spite of man’s sinfulness. I believe in it because of man’s sinfulness; those who run the church and my own.  Just as I would not trust a purely human institution to mediate between me and Christ, so I would likewise not trust myself fully, with my own agenda and rationalizations and pride.  By submitting to the authority of the Church Christ’s founded, I can trust in its wisdom apart from my own, knowing that the Holy Spirit is work thru it.

I am a Christian because of obedience to God...God doesn't ask me to join a specific church but instead to accept his soon a my savior...that is my relationship and I don't need a sinful man to listen to my sins and tell me I am forgiven. The blood of Jesus Christ has already cleansed me of my sins past present and future.

Again, we agree! We are both Christians out of obedience to God. And, we agree on the importance of accepting Christ as our savior.  But, the question that remains is, does Christ call us to his church? I think scripture makes it clear that he does. So the question is which church is his church? Since his says the gates of hell would not prevail against it, it must be one that is traceable back to him. If we read Acts of the Apostles, the Church as a structured organization began basically immediately after Pentecost (the descent of the Holy Spirit upon those whom he entrusted with his power). Where is that church today? I believe the Catholic Church makes the only logical claim to be that Church; it is the Church that finalized the canon of scripture, for one.  Without the Church there would be no Bible.

And about confessing your sins to a sinful man- that is a topic that would take another 5 pages. But just think about this one small aspect- “But when Simon Peter saw that, he fell down at Jesus' feet, saying, ‘Go away from me Lord, for I am a sinful man, O Lord!’” Luke 5:8   This is the same Peter (and the other apostles) to whom Jesus said, “Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.” John 20:23   Now if there were no need to ask for forgiveness in a tangible, ongoing manner, why would Jesus say this?

Of course, we are all redeemed by the blood of Christ.  There is no way to heaven except through the cross of Christ. But we must cooperate with that redemptive act all life-long.  Any time I offend my wife, I must ask her for forgiveness; I hate to think what she would say if I told her the one time I asked for forgiveness 20 years ago ought to cover me from now on!  A relationship with Christ can grow and wane, just like any other if we are not dedicated to it.  Paul tells us to “work out your salvation with fear and trembling.” Philippians 2:12.  Why would he say this is it were simply a “one and done” deal? Because it isn’t.

Pat, iIf you have made it this far, I will challenge you with this: Read and study the writings of the early Church Fathers, the first generations of Christians who were themselves taught by the apostles. How did they understand the teachings about Christ’s commands, before folks get all caught up in the Reformation etc?  You will find it eye-opening. If you are willing, here is link: http://www.salvationhistory.com/library/category/apologetics.  If you go here, and scroll down and look at the links under Selected Topics, you will find a lot of interesting reading from the early Church on many Catholic teachings that many Christians have trouble with.

Finally, please know that, for me, my Catholic faith is joy-filled.  It is not about rules, legalism, superiority, or any of that.  It is about experiencing the joy of Christ.  I am deeply sorry that for whatever reason, that was not your experience of the Catholic Church.  Please know that there is another experience there, of what the Church really is, and was meant to be from the beginning.

There is book I’d like to send you (a short one!) if you are open to it.  If so, send me your address.  If not, no problem.

Last thing: I am not interested in winning an argument, or anything like that.  If this discussion is in any way helpful to your walk with Christ, let’s keep it going, by all means.  If not, that’s fine too, and we can end it here. Your call.  I am praying for you either way.