Proponents of a more traditional, rigorous approach to teaching mathematics should read this piece from the Los Angeles Times about the success a struggling Hollywood elementary school has enjoyed with Singapore Math.
Several Core Knowledge schools have reported strong results from Singapore and Saxon math programs, and the paper does a good job of showing why. Describing what appears to be a standard timed drill (the dreaded “drill and kill” that reform advocates blithely dismiss) the Times smartly reports: “What isn’t obvious to a casual observer is that this drill is carefully thought out to reinforce patterns of mathematical thinking that carry through the curriculum. ‘These are ‘procedures with connections,’ math coach Robin Ramos said, arranged to convey sometimes subtle points. This thoughtfulness — some say brilliance — is the true hallmark of the Singapore books, advocates say.”
Also this week: an anticipated report from the National Mathematics Advisory Panel, which is expected to urge U.S. teachers to promote “quick and effortless” recall of arithmetic facts in early grades. Taken together, it’s a potent one-two punch that coupled with a rising tide of parent activism, may be turning the tide against reform or constructivist math programs like Everyday Math.
A consummation devoutly to be wished.







Some comments:
We do Saxon, and have examined Singapore and know people who use it. Saxon is ok from 5/4 and above, but K-3 is terrible. John Saxon wrote 5/4 as the intro text, but had to start it at 5/4 for schools and then made three more silly books for K-3. They are really bad. So we just memorize the math facts and start in 5/4 around age 6-7.
I’ve never found Singapore very good. I don’t see what everyone sees in it. And even though I like Saxon best, I’m still not very impressed. I think there could be a better program.