and I've only taught with it for two years. It does not teach and reinforce basic facts very well. I also don't like that it doesn't allow much time for students to practice new skills. It does spiral and come around later, but they didn't have enough exposure to it the first time, and they don't get it the second time. This is just what I can tell from the couple of years I've taught it.
I use it in first and we have to supplement a lot because it doesn't cover everything on our standard course of study (and report cards) well enough. Also some of the lessons are way too hard and not necessary for first graders - counting quarters, nickels, dimes, pennies and dollars all mixed up, using a tape measure, measuring to the centimeter, etc. It is a good challenge for my high kids but WAY too hard for my low and average kids. It's very frustrating for them. The homework is frustrating for the parents too because its hard for the kids.
Good to hear that others are feeling the same way: It is better for high students and really bad for low students. They are never given a chance to just absorb the material. It does spiral back to a concept, but often adds something new as it does. The skill practice is terrible. Very little addition and subtraction. They almost expect subtraction to be a natural conclusion for children because it is "related" to addition. We give supplemental activities like timed tests. I think the pace is too fast and all of the language is overwhelming for special needs populations. It is challenging material and it is surprising what kids do seem to learn. We hate the Homework. Parents DON"T get it. The answers were all wrong. Parents were overwhelmed by having HW every night. We are changing the homework to be fact practice and easier activities. This is definitely not a developmental program. They say it is full of manipulatives, but that is not clear from the teachers manual.
We've been using it for a few years, and we really like it for the most part. We do have to supplement fact practice. However, we see our kids gaining a much deeper understanding of how math actually works. It is challenging, but the kids can definitely do it!! The K-2 teachers felt it was a challenge our kids really needed, and it generally meets or exceeds our state standards. We have a fairly high poverty and ELL population. The biggest challenge for our ELL kids is the reading and writing that goes with the curriculum, especially in the upper grades. I think teachers have to be a little bit flexible with the homework. My son is a second grader, and he has a week to get his homework done. If we are busy one night, we just set it aside and finish it another night when we are less busy. Our teachers don't always send home every homework piece either.
We just got rid of it, and I miss it so much! I LOVED Everyday math, and so did all of my fellow first and second grade teachers who used it.
There is a myth that low students need programs that are more behavioral than constructivist because of the way it's presented and organized. I don't agree... low students need the same conceptual kinds of presentation as high kids, they just need a lot of modeling and support.
Everyday math had math boxes for every single day of the year-- our program right now lacks that. It does not automatically spiral. My kids would forget everything we taught at the beginning of th eyear unless I spiralled it myself- which I find to be extrememly time consuming, not to mention HARD.
When I used everyday math, I could let the class work on them and meet with a small group to do them or pull a small group who need extra practice with something. It was the perfect math workshop program. Our new program is watered down-- I assign a page, and most kids are done before I can even form the group!
One more thing-- I wrote a masters paper on EDM and I studied the way that it came into being. While all these other programs are written by "people" (who knows who??) and have mathematicians faces in the front, EDM was designed by mathematicians working with teachers. They wrote each year from the ground up. SO they wrote kindergarten, then piloted it a year in a kindergarten building. They made all the changes the teachers wanted, then moved on to writing first grade. They continued that way the whole way up....
You really need to give EDM a chance- it put out some of the best, most flexible thinkers I've ever seen. It would be a shame if teachers in your district went in with a negative attitude b/c then it surely won't work.
We use it and none of us really like it. It is okay as far as teaching it, but my middle and low students don't ever really get it. Plus, it teaches the concept in some bizarre ways sometimes. Even though it does spiral somewhat, your students didn't get it the first time so you find yourself having to reteach from the beginning when it pops back up and using valuable time to help them with one question. We also have to supplement a lot with basic facts.
One thing that really gets us is that our 3rd graders come to us without knowing how to do basic 2 digit addition and subtraction. We have to go back and reteach things they were supposed to get in 2nd grade. I'm sure the 4th grade teachers feel like they are doing the same thing.
I know at our school we can't wait until next year when we get to start looking for a new program to adopt!
I love Everyday Math!!! The first year was really challenging, but it was easier the next year. I teach ESOL (ELL) and I feel it is really helpful. Our district bought the assessment CD that you can use to make tests and worksheets for all the skills. It is the best supplement. I don't use any thing else. I like the fact that is on a cycle. My kids will say "we did that last year!"
A good example of how those "crazy" ways of doing things help kids. I have a boy in my class that was struggling with multiplication, I taught him how to do partial sums multiplication, and he gets it. I made a quiz today, and he got a perfect score. I have even seen an improvement in my own math abilities.