Our district will be in the process of adopting a new math curriculum. I've been doing some peeking online about the different programs, but I want to know what your thoughts were. Here are some questions: What program do you use? Rate the program on a scale of 1-10, 1 being horrible and 10 being outstanding. Pros: Cons: Was it more centers based or worksheet based? Were there any "holes" in the curriculum where you had to supplement a lot?

Program: Everyday Math Rating: 4 Pros: Spiraling curriculum, math used in everyday life, games Cons: no computation practice, no mastery of skills, if a new kid comes in-they have no idea what's going on. Last year was my first year teaching and teaching the program. I have a Math Emphasis and this program was really hard to teach. My team leader thought it would be a good idea to skip around lessons and only focus on what would be covered on CSAP in January. After the test we needed to go back and teach what was missed. I supplemented materials from Houghton-Mifflin's Math series. It was better than EM.

Each one has pros/cons. The key is that the book shouldn't be your focus. Your state's standards/objectives should be. The book should be used as a guide, as a tool. (that's how I see it) I've used Scott Forseman and liked it. Last year I used Trailblazers. I liked certain parts of it; but I didn't follow it to a T. I REALLY liked the fraction lessons (grade 5). This year the district has chosen a new series--Hougton Miflin Expressions. We shall see....

Math Expressions 9...outstanding Cons...it's a different approach and different vocab. so I had to learn as I went too. Time consuming so it doesn't leave room for supplementing but I really didn't have a need to supplement either. Pros...kids love math! They are eager to attempt challenging problems. Much of the addition and subtraction is money based just like in the real world. I highly recommend this one.

Ditto, except I give it a 3. In my district, we are struggling with EDM. Our state scores have gone down every single year since we have used it. Now we are busy-AGAIN-piloting new programs.

Thanks for providing the link. Right now we are using Harcourt Math. I give it a 2. Its awful, plain and simple. I found that I used most of my own materials to teach the math skills anyway.

I hate everyday math. I think the math boxes are crap. I go in and I sub all these classes and of course the teachers don't want you to confuse the kids with new info, (no qualms here) so they ask you to do math boxes with them. In my experience about 3/4 of the kids have no idea what to do and I always go over schedule in math getting it done, (or I blow over it and don't worry because it tends to be busywork anyway). It gets worse the younger you go. I also don't like all the emphasis on alternative algorithms for multiplication and division. I am all for learning alternatives if a child is having difficulty, but presenting 3 algorithms is just confusing and distracting from what is actually happening in the math. I would also agree that it does not push mastery of skills. You really have to supplement it. In my ST (5th) we used Houghton Mifflin. It seemed to be a good flow of information, but it was a lot crammed into one year.

Scott Foresman Investigations. So far (you know I've only been able to look at it, not teach from it yet)- 8, perhaps. There is a lot of hands-on practice. 90% of the curriculum is hands-on. You don't have to supplement, but you can. There is also an assessment CD where you can "build" your tests. The standards are right in there. However, it is somewhat of a spiral review, though I sort of teach that way, anyhow. I do worry about shy students a little, though, those who would rather work on their own than always in groups. You know I give students the choice at times, though, (with whichever subject) and they either work alone or in groups.

I'd give Harcourt a 5 at the most. In fourth grade, there isn't a whole lot in the hands-on realm. I always had to supplement!

I just posted on another thread before I saw this one, my school uses Saxon. I would rate it a 4. Pros: It is repetitive so the students get a lot of review on certain skills. Cons: It is a little too repetitive, which makes it boring. It is almost all worksheet based. Also, there are no chapters or units that group like skills together. One day you will be working on fractions, then the next day area. You might not see fractions again until weeks later. This makes is hard to plan for all levels. I would not recommend it. Last year was my first year using it (the school has had it for about 3 years I think). Next year I will definitely be rearranging the lessons to group skills together.