Abeka Math vs. Singapore

[rni'smommy]

I am trying to decide which math to use for kinder with LHFHG. I was decided on Abeka because it is what I used in school but I am intrigued with the Singapore method and just wondering if they cover the same level academicaly. Or if one is more advanced and in what way. I tried to look at the scope and sequence for Earlybird K but it is difficult to follow all the checkmarks and the one online is for the new standards edition. Any info would be really helpful. Thanks.

[Lori_in_Austin]

I cannot specifically help you, but I will tell you that I narrowed my math choices down to Singapore and Right Start Math. I did consider Abeka, but I wanted something that had a strong Asian influence and a more abacus mindset/bent teaching math from using bases of "fives and tens". Right Start is definitely much more time intensive, but there are virtually no worksheets and it is basically activity and game based using things you have around the house.

I like math and am good at math and both my husband and my father are very "math-wired" in a HUGE way. My husband is also a mechanical engineer by trade, training, profession, and hobby. He also dabbles in chemical & electrical so I wanted to make math a HUGE deal for us. Plus, my dear son is totally mechanically inclined (like takes apart and puts together things everywhere, builds something out of nothing, kind of obsessive about it, etc !) I think Singapore is a sort of "combo" between western and asian influences and it looked very good to me. I have not used it, however. If I had not chosen RS Math I would have chosen Singapore. I can tell you that my son and I have LOVED RS Math, but it has a learning curve (for the teacher) and does not use the typical "schedule" of introducing concepts that almost every other math curriculum does. If there is any kind of serious "math talent" in your dear child, I say go with Singapore, but if not, I know people who have used Abeka and like it a lot.

Sorry to ramble a bit.

[ncmomof5]

This is my first year using Singapore Math, so it is hard for me to say much about their scope and sequence. However, I have used Abeka math extensively. I taught it in Christian school and have taught it to my own children at home.
Abeka uses a spiral method that incoporates constant review while adding in new concepts regularly. My dd really struggled with this, because they were always throwing something new at her. She learned a lot from it, but it was NOT FUN! My oldest ds, however, could've done it forever because he gets new things quickly and just runs with them.
Singapore, however, is more focused, from what I can tell so far (we are using 1A), on getting the student to understand the concept rather than merely drilling facts. I know, from reading other reviews on Singapore, that the actual teachers that use the Singapore curriculum do drill facts, but it just seems to me that it is a whole different approach to learning math. So far, for my third ds, he has enjoyed Singapore and he is more like his older sister who struggled with math.
I said all that to say, for me, Abeka is time intensive (especially when you have more than one grade to teach) and sometimes overwhelming to the student, especially as you progress to higher grades. (Last year we did Abeka 4th grade math and it took them 1-2+ hours to finish one lesson - including teaching time). Singapore seems to have a more teacher friendly, gentle approach that allows you to teach deep. I think in some ways, Abeka is trying to grow the tree too high before sending out a strong enough root system. Some students need time to develop their conceptual understanding. They just can't see abstract concepts that we take for granted.
I hope I don't sound too down on Abeka. I guess we just got burned out on it, and are enjoying a different approach that over the long haul will help the "lights come on" without so much agony.

HTH,
In His love,
RuthAnn