Saxon Math - LD Students

Please disregard. I found an earlier thread on the issues.

Chuck

Where is the earlier reply? I have the same type questions regarding Saxon.

I used Saxon Math with my 6th, 7th & 8th Grade students It is a wonderful series for this age. However, it is not a good series to use in high school.

I bought the primary books but just could not use them effectively. In a remedial setting, you need to work only on areas in which the child is behind…filling gaps. Saxon is wonderful for first time instruction. My own child’s school uses it and I love the daily review. But when I need a child to work on place value, for example, I don’t want to have to pull 20 worksheets for a child to do one problem per page. I want a whole chapter or section on that topic. Primary Saxon will only work if you are teaching the complete curriculum as far as I am concerned.

Janis

I dislike Saxon - no consistent presentation of concepts - jumps around from one skill to another. There is only a few problems of the new ones taught. - not good for kids with learning problems.

What research would support the use of Saxon with students with learning disabilities?

Perhaps there is no research. Based on what I have read here, people like the following and you could look into all these at some level:
Math U See; Landmark School Math; Singapore Math (there are perhaps some others but these are ones I see listed here most commonly).
I think at least most of these go up to a fairly high level in math.

I’m a fan of Math U See but that wouldn’t denigrate some of the others that I haven’t even seen.

—des

Oh yeah, lots of references to On Cloud Nine. I love this but don’t at all consider it a complete program. IMO, it is a philosophy or approach more than a program.

—des

I agree, On Cloud Nine is a method to apply to a math program, not a math program.

And there’s rather a big problem with “what does the research say?” — there are different ways of thinking, and different ways of teaching to match that thinking — and depending on where you are and what you are learning, your background instruction has a *huge* influence on what is going to work for you and what isn’t.

Structured and multisensory would be my vote, anyway :-)

I think that Saxon Math, and other programs that offer a spiraling curriculum can be extremely beneficial for students with and without learning disabilities. I teach remedial math to students in 5th, 6th and 8th grades. The 5th grade core math teacher spirals her curriculum and the 6th grade teacher does not. I have noticed differences in the performance of students based on their curriculum approachs.

One of the greatest challenges as a math teacher is seeing students succeed on a quiz or test after weeks of an instruction, and then seeing students forget the skill when the topic is encountered again after it’s already been assessed. For example, my 6th grade students study decimal concepts and operations in the beginning of the school year and do well with them, but if I gave them a decimal problem tomorrow, I would see many students forget how to solve it.

Curriculums that are spiraled allow for many days of repeated practice before assessment, rather than the 1 or 2 nights of homework that traditional textbooks offer before the quiz or test. My 5th grade students are much better than my 6th grade students at simplifying fractions because the core math teacher has given them repeated days of practice with that skill — she didn’t teach it every day, but she included at least 2 of the problems on their homework every night for 2 weeks.

Regardless if your school chooses to adopt the Saxon Math program, it would be very beneficial for you to offer your students mulitple opportunities to practice a skill throughout the school year in order to increase the rate of memory retention.

I’m not a particularly big fan of Saxon — too much emphasis on calculation skills over comprehension, though a good teacher could probably deal wtih it — but I coudln’t agree more on the need for spiraling and reviewing.
I think this is one of the most neglected elements of learning math, and I think it comes from teh embarrassing reality that so many students learn the stuff to the point of barely being able to pass a test — so if that test had old stuff, too, that they’d forgotten because they hadn’t mastered it, they’d fail and then we’d have to run them through the same routine again. So, we pass them forward… and they struggle even more becfause they’re missing the foundations — but it’s okay, they think, I got by last year andbefore long I will not have to ever take math any more.
These same “math incompetents” could be competent if back at the beginning we taught it better and weren’t satisfied ‘til some semblance of true mastery was in evidence — and *then* reviewed the basics often and well. Tossing 1/2 + 1/4 and “what’s 4 to the third power” on the blackboard twice a week once those things have been introduced would mean people came to me at the college with at least two skills under their belts.

Our school uses it, but I’ve found as a parent of someone with learning problems in math, it’s hard. There isn’t much drill and skill and not much in the way of mastery.

One problem in math is using words to mean two different and often incompatible things.
I get very worried about the operation “and” which according to my students and their class teachers means either addition or multiplication or sometimes subtraction or division, depending on the phase of the moon or something.
I completely ban the operation “cancel” which according to my students and their class teachers means either subtraction or division or multiplication or the inverse of a root or the inverse of a logarithm or four or five other things, all with different answers sometimes zero and sometimes one and sometimes a letter and sometimes just invisibility.
A word that means two or six different things with two or six different answers doesn’t mean much of anything, does it?

I’m starting to get the same feeling about “spiralling”. One sense is just plain good traditional pedagogy, and the other is a serious problem.

Good: *of course* you learn something by using it constantly.
Math skills that are presented (I won’t say taught) for three days in November and two days in May and then show up on a multiple choice test are just not going to be learned — by any real definition of learning which includes retention and transfer. Quick-memorizing students will fake them and forget them, while the rest will just decide that math is a mystery and something to avoid. What would happen if you did this in reading? Oh, yeah, it’s called “whole-language” and we know how the fragmented approach is succeeding there, too.
Good teachers *use* a skill once taught, bringing it into various discussions as appropriate, setting it up as a base to build the newer skills on, giving problems that require using various skills, and so on. This meaning of “spirallling” works, good plan.

Problem: the other sense of “the spiral curriculum” is a course plan that tries to teach the whole of mathematics in one year, throws thousands of facts at kids in the hopes that a few will stick, and then repeats the process every year. This kind of course plan/textbook is the *cause* of the problem that topics are brushed through superficially at high speed.
The Third International Math Study (managed by US, so the “outsiders” excuse doesn’t fly) made a strong point that the USA stands out from all other developed countries in several ways: trying to cover far far more topics every year, most dependent on following textbooks to the letter, most time and money spent, teachers handing out formulas and worksheets constantly, teachers *not* spending time discussing and “developing concepts” — and among the lowest levels of performance. *This* meaning of “spiral” is a proven failure.

I don’t know the Saxon curriculum, and have heard both good and bad opinions of it. Does it present new ideas concretely and provide lots and lots of massed practice in new topics?
For example there’s a boy I can only see once a week now; we have his writing straightened out to acceptable (a year ago in Grade 2 a non-writer), his reading in *two* languages actually above grade level, and now we are putting a push on in the math. He can add although he still counts too much, getting more accurate, can carry and borrow most of the time; his teacher wants the kids to have the multiplication tables memorized. I am doing what succeeded in the addition and subtraction, drawing dots, counting pennies, doing pages and pages of mixed practice, adding up, counting more pennies, grouping the pennies in tens and looking at the patterns as we go up the table, more pages of mixed practice … This boy is quite smart and sees patterns right away, but it is a real feat to get the concept from understanding into permanent RAM. We’ve put in several hours on multiplication, besides all his school work, and there are several more hours to go. I hear about the Saxon doing a little bit of various topics all together, and my concern is that the harder math is for a student, the more he needs the kind of massed practice we are doing to get an idea clear in his head and then to have good retention.

I used Saxon math for several years in a remedial 7th and 8th grade class. I was very disappointed in this series. There is a lot of homework and most remedial students are not homework doers to begin with. There also was simply not enough practice on new material. Only 1 or 2 problems per day. It was too easy for kids who hate fractions to skip the fraction problems on each days assignment but still get a decent grade. The kids hated the same ole thing each day and frankly so did I. Sue

The charter school I am working at at the moment uses Saxon. I’ve been in the fourth grade classes and have yet to see a single manipulative. I don’t know whether they have them or not but they must not be highly
integrated in the curriculum.

—des

My experience in general is that if practical applications or manipulatives can be avoided, they will be. Even if theoretically they are integrated int the curriculum, most teachers won’t get them out of the closet even if they are there, and most schools won’t buy them. Students absorb these attitudes and either refuse to work with what they see as baby toys, or else go wild because it’s play time and not “real” teaching.
Don’t judge the program by how it is being applied by people who are probably untrained and more lost than the kids. Take some time to look at the texts and teacher guides and try to work with the kids a bit before condemning it. Then, of course, there are a lot of pretty terrible math programs out there so condemn away if appropriate.

I think that the whole spiral learning approach that makes for the student to just basically walk in the door with a semblance of knowledge of certain mathematical principals is too hard. The whole idea of spiraling and whatnot is as Victoria puts it, there is the good, then there is the ugly. It is very hard for the learning disabled student, at University or High School, to sometimes put up with the shoddier approaches to the sprial method of learning math.
It is impossible to sit at home, re write your class note, read them over a good two times, and then just do your homework when you haven’t any real examples to guide you. I do not mean that in a copying sorta way, it is bad to copy along with an example for math (in Foreign Language you can do that a bit for verbs or something, but it is very bad to do that for math). You cannot be a learning disabled student and sit at home, and do oyur homework, where you have thrity problems that go from 5+X=7; and then five problems later go from 5^3+44=X; that is too much too fast and there is no sense to that sort of sprialing approach at all. How do you know what 5^3 means, if you have yet to have gone over it with your class and all of that? Saxon was made by some fellow who was in the airforce or something, eh? He became a very religious fellow and felt it was his mission to educate youngsters. Jesus Christ and all the Saints cannot help you learn something you have yet to have been exposed to in the classroom setting. That would be a true miracle, if you can magically laern what polynomial division is, just because your textbook has twelve problems on it towards the end of your homework assignment for the day.
You cannot go from 5/X=25 and then for those last 12 problems do hard core polynomial division…no ld persons brain works that way. No spiraling approach is that good, y’all. You cannot learn something that your professor is not going to cover until later on down the line, the only students who can do that are the ones who have been exposed to scads of math.

Some die hard advocates of the spiraling think that just having the material presented that way, will magically increase the students critical thinking skills and for the learning disabled student, that is not the case. You can’t be sitting at home with a soda pop and open up your math book and just know from the break things that you have yet to have learned at all; I think it is better to be patient; and if you are an older student at University you are far better off just consistently reviewing everything at a good steady pace.

I am sorry for this post being soo long. But, the mathematics book my University is using is all about the most far out aspects of spiraling. It is called Basic Math, Algebra, and Applications, by Cheryl Cleaves and some other lady. It has been very hard for me to really follow this book at all, I used to think it was just me, but I found out from a very nice professor that this is not the case. The remedial math professors have had to band together and rewrite this book so that they can plan lessons that makes sense to all us students who just plain never took algebra and all of that. However, they are scared to speak of this with Cheryl Cleaves, becasue she runs their department…when she is not making bad textbooks, she is running thier department. The professor I spoke with says that this book, which none of you folks are ever going to use unless you are in Memphis, Tn or some smaller area of Mississippi; is just not logical because the authors came in with a notion of spiraling without really learning more about it.

In the fall I am using a book that is better, it is by Dugopolski and is called Intermediate Algebra. he is not all with the spiraling. I am taking this course online also, because I (cannot say read) but I went through this book and it is scads better than the one that is all spiraling all the time. That is why I miss my resource room teacher, she did spiraling the patient way and that is the way I think is best. Just a little extra at a time, things that build upon one another in a fair manner is the way to go; not throwing everything you learn during the span of a month into one homework assignment, that is crazy spiraling.

[quote=”victoria”]My experience in general is that if practical applications or manipulatives can be avoided, they will be. Even if theoretically they are integrated int the curriculum, most teachers won’t get them out of the

That’s true. I haven’t really sat down with it to see what it actually is, or if they are part of the program and either weren’t purchased or aren’t used.

>Don’t judge the program by how it is being applied by people who are probably untrained and more lost than the kids. Take some time to look

Or maybe you should say “misapplied”. But then I had math in the elementary school circa 1980. This manipulative stuff was in that class, in fact very strongly in it. I suspect perhaps that the message still isn’t entirely out there or that teachers are reluctant to use it for some of the reasons you mentioned.

—des

My son’s private school uses Saxon. He is in 8th grd and in 1/2 algebra book. This is a problem because of no repetition, he can miss the ones he really needs work on a still pass. He has vision troubles, double vision, we are trying to get him in to therapy, so a + can seem like a x to him. I asked his teacher about making his papers larger in type, [it helps], she looked at me like I was nuts and avoided the question. He needs a standard to follow. He has trouble with his muliti tables, he knows the pattern, but remembering it cold is not an option, and past the 5’s oh well. We have tried and tried to no avail to get them memorized. He has trouble with fractions, he cant seem to catch on with only one or two problems per day. Yet he can “seem” to be able to “do” algebra problems in his head with the right answer. His processes are off, he cant do it on paper so its back to the basics. I cant seem to get these things through to his teacher or the headmaster. I am just a parent, they are the professionals. He needs help, he is getting discouraged and his chosen profession of engineering requires him getting this right. What do I tell them? This is private school so I dont know how much to throw a fit to get the right help or even what help to ask for, HELP!

They may not really understand the difference bigger print could make. Is there a copy machine that will zoom so you could do an experiment and provide real evidence.

Teena — he needs some good *organized* tutoring from someone who really knows how math works; something that progresses step by step through the system. Don’t even think about helping with his homework, just teach him math in an organized way and in a little while he’ll be doing that junk independently. You can get better organized books and follow them yourself, or you can hire a good tutor. Fighting the school is usually a losing battle — schools know how to stonewall , have had years of experience with hundreds of parents. Just get him taught effectively and when the school claims the credit, either just ignore them, or tel them exactly how he did learn despite them.

I am using Saxon level 3 and level 4 with my self contained class of 4th and 5th grade special ed students. We just had our first assessment and my lowest grade was an 85. I was worried that my students would not learn all of the different objectives by just doing them in math meeting and on the guided practice but I am sold now. This group of students were doing connecting math concepts level A and B last year with another teacher. Many of them had few of the skills needed for this first assessment. I think this is a good test of Saxon’s use with LD students. The test measured calendar skills by asking questions about the date three days ago or four days from now. It asked for the day of the week if the practice was in three days etc. It had time to the half hour, elapsed time questions, making all of the possible two digit numbers from specific digits. It had measurement, both measuring and drawing lines of specific length. It had money questions and number patterns where they had to complete the pattern and give the rule. I had many 100’s and almost every student had an A. I think one of the keys to Saxon is to follow the program and for students to do their homework. I call parents if students do not do their homework. I now have almost 100% homework done everyday.
Nan

I successfully used Saxon as my sole math program with LD students for many years. I’ve written this before, but for those who are new to Saxon this school year, please remember this: if you use any of the [u][b]hard covered [/b][/u]text books (45, 54, 56, etc ~ I may have some of the numbers wrong), it is essential that you also purchase the Adaptations for Special Populations package as well; it is well worth the $200+ price tag. This binder will help alleviate many of the issues LD kids have: copying problems onto separate paper, remembering formulas, etc. I don’t believe there is a binder for the Algebra books, but all the others from 4th through 8th have them.

Jenn