Hi,
We are using SRA's Real Math series. I absolutely love it. It is challenging with some things like word problems - but I think it's strength is that it constantly reviews from chap. 1 forward. Lots of supplimental materials and great teacher editions. I would highly recommend you at least looking at it.

We currently use Saxon - DO NOT like it. It doesn't cover nearly all the objectives and teaches a ton that it doesn't need to cover. We have the consumable version and it's a pain in the neck to sort through it all. I hate that it teaches one skill a day and that's it. IMO the kids need more than one day of a skill to really learn. It's easy to teach, but I honestly don't think it's what's best for the kids (at least not mine).

We have Houghton-Mifflin for reading, LA, and S.S., so I'm curious what theirs is like. I like their other texts! We have math adoption this year as well.

We use Saxon. I really like it. My grade uses the text book. I know the younger grades use the preprinted sheets, which would seem like a mess to sort out. It is difficult in the beginning of the year for the students to get used to using a book instead of the preprinted sheets, but after a few days they do fine with it. I think Saxon covers a lot of areas and they just don't teach it once and then move to something else. The students are repeatedly practicing the skills throughout the book.

We just started using Saxon this year and I really love it. We were worried that it was too easy at the beginning, but now that we have been using it for a quarter the pace seems just about right. The strength of the program is that they do review the skills over and over again. As far as the sheets, Saxon provides the bins and marked folders to put them in. Everything is clearly marked and easy to follow. I really like how the program uses manipulatives. There is a lot of set up but once you have a system set up it isn't too bad. If I were you, I would definately have a rep come to your district.

I really like the ED Math program. No program you find will be the end all, be all, but it seems be be a very good fit. I would recommend you look at the highest tests scores across your state (across all grade levels) and find out what math programs those districts use. That would be a big factor to me if I were on a committee like you are. Good luck in your search!

We use Saxon and I love it! It is dry at times, so we spice it up. Sometimes it is too easy and others times to hard. Sometimes it goes fast and other times it's slow, but our math scores on standardized testing are up and going up even more! It must be working.

This is our first year with Everyday Math. Our district bought it for K-4 only. I am a SPED teacher and I give my resource students who have math goals a preview of the lesson for that day. What I wish is that I could lower the grade level for my students, they and others are struggling alot. Teachers report that it takes 1.5 hours to teach a lesson. I know the preview that I do with my students takes 45 to 50 mins alone. I know that will get better but the 1st year there is a lot of work. We have so many kids falling behind that we are going to start a math club (we will test it with 3rd & 4th grade) twice a week during afternoon recess, plus a math preview in the AM for struggling learners.

We use Math Advantage which sucks. Luckily, we're previewing books for a new math adoption next year. I like Everyday Math, but one of my collegues hates it. Everyone seems to like McGraw-Hill (I think).
We also use an out-of-adoption book and just make copies from Scott Foresman. It's a book I found in a classroom of a retired teacher. I like it because there's lots of practice. It's so old that the pages are yellow.

We have harcourt and I really like it. It covers everything we need to cover. It came with plenty of manipulatives. I like the sequence and pacing. That being said the first year we used it doing place value first was hard, but now it is not. It also has a good practice book and SAt preparation book. I will be interested to see how they improve it for the next time that we must adopt a new series.

We use Investigations. I am not really thrilled with it. It has some good points, but I am not really happy with it. We are supplementing it this year. I have used Everyday Math before, and I liked that. Those are the only two I have ever used formally in the classroom.

For general math in elementary we use Silver Burdett Ginn. It's good and has lots of materials and aligns very well with our state/district standards.

For compacted/accelerated math we use the Glencoe Middle Grades math and it's ok. It's a much more confusing text book, but gets the kids ready for middle school I guess. It's hard for a 5th or 6th grader to understand the organization in that book....

We use everyday math. I don't like most of it. I like how everyday math tries to teach things so that they make sense but my students always need more practice to grasp the concept than EM allows. At our school, the testing grades are putting EM aside to make sure our students have a firm knowledge of the tested skills before the big test.

I see that you teach Everyday Math. We are piloting this year and getting for a new series next year. How well does it flow from year to year??? I teach 4th grade and it seemed like I had to do a lot of filling in the gaps this time. Will it get better as they have it for several years???

We have harcourt Math. I like it. There is a lot you can do with it. I teach second and this year we changed the order. It abegins with place value. We did the addition and subtraction (no regrouping) first and they are doing better this year.

We are in our third year with the HM math series for third. I think it's a solid program. There are a few curve balls in the text from time to time (i.e. the geometry chapter doesn't explicitly discuss trapezoid but later asks a question about it...we just noted that we need to introduce it with the other quadrilaterals).

There are several CD roms for lesson plans, etc. and the eduplace link. Several resources for printing/copying but no real manipulatives. I like it, still use previous Scott Foresman series to supplement as needed.

We use Investigations. This is our first year using it and it has been an adjustment because some of the methods used are very different than traditional math. However, I have REALLY liked it so far! For the first time ever, my kids are excited and interested in Math!!

We looked at Harcourt for adoption and I really liked it as well.

Last year we used Saxon. It did not meet our state objectives and I did not like how it constantly flip-flopped from one topic to the next. It was not very hands- on and the kids always seemed to be bored.

I have found it often has disorder to what should be taught, ex: teaching one concept prior to teaching another concept, but the book/chapters/lessons are not set up in that order, so you have to teach ahead, or back track after you have pretaught.

We had math advantage previously, and I thought I didn't like that, but now I believe I liked it better than the MacMillan/McGrawHill.

I use Harcourt and I vary the scope and sequence based on the students needs. The series has great manipulatives and resources (challenge, reteach, solving problems, state testing practice and student consumables with review imbeded in every lesson) I have used it for three years and it is a solid program.

Our school uses Saxon--grades K-8. We like it pretty well. The downfall (as mentioned) is that there is often not enough practice when a skill is taught--and the books certainly are not bright and colorful. The upside is that our children that are in the system do quite well on testing and it certainly continually reviews and tests.

I teach a 3-4 combination and that's hard because it takes the 4th a lot longer to do their work than the 3rd. In my opinion the third don't have enough work to do. I guess there is the option of worksheets in 4th as well, but we have never used them.

I think there is way too much teacher direction with 3rd--everything is scripted for you--and not enough for 4th--really nothing but the answers and the lesson set.

We use Scott Foresman and Investigations Joint Usage. It is amazing! The kids really love it and those who have never been excited about math are raising their hand and sharing strategies.
I was on a committee that looked at all the programs 2 years ago so I would be happy to help in any way I can!

We are using the updated version, which we love. I think it really helps the children become problem-solvers and understand the concepts of math, as opposed to memorizing the algorithm. We have used Investigations for 6 years. It is very different from a traditional all paper/pencil series. We use a lot of manipulatives.

Our district has been using EM for 3 years now; I fortunately came in the year that they introduced it, and my student teaching had been in a classroom with EM too. I like it a lot, for the problem solving strategies emphasis and for the games, which my kids enjoy. I also like the Explorations, which are hands-on activities to introduce new topics or explore topics further; they're interspersed in each unit. I would agree with the other that said it's a lot of work the first year to introduce the new methods, but it does get easier.

It is a little more difficult for students not strong in reading, as there is a little more language involved than some other math series.

K-5 we use everyday math. This is the 5 year we have had it and our math scores are amazing. 6-8 uses Connected Math. The transition from EM to CM is a struggle, but again our math scores are amazing. There are 2 major downfalls with Connected Math. First, if English is not the first language, then there is a struggle of understanding what is being asked. Secondly, since it is problem solving based, basic skills are not really incorporated.

Guess you cannot edit after a while? I meant I liked Math Their Way (lol, dating myself?) for 1st grade, which is the only other math program I have used besides Investigations. I liked Math Their Way for K-1. We use Everyday Math for Calendar Math, and it is good for that.

More on Investigations-- I really liked last year (my first year with it), but I find this year I am not thrilled about the prep work, I do not like the fact that a few of the concepts were not clear to *me* as the teacher (5th grade level). I had to review with other information to be sure I understood the concept. There are also several kids who just do not seem to get it. I do not know if the second version of Investigations offers anything different as far as making the connection in a different way.... I think that would be useful. There are some great ideas in Investigations. We have a few teachers who have a *lot* of trouble figuring out how to teach it, as math is not their strong point and they cannot understand this conceptual math without more explicit instruction.

everyday math. it's really good; however, we did just get the updated edition and a lot of us feel like the authors think we teach math all day (lessons have a lot of content in them). There is 3 parts to each lesson. Part 1 and 2 you have to get to, and Part 3 is differentiation (which is only if we have time). It's a great spiral curriculum. The students sometimes seem to get frustrated when we just move on after teaching a skill, but they will practice the skill atleast 5 more times before it should be a "secure" tested skill. Our scores are also amazing in math. It seems like EM is doing something right for kids!

We use Trailblazers and I don't really like it. I teach Kindergarten. My school is K-2 and we have to supplement a lot of our lessons to meet up with state standards.

I can't begin to tell you how frustrating it is to have to practically tear the book apart to teach it. My team (2nd grade) knew we were in trouble 3 years ago when it was initially adopted. Our 1st grade team uses Saxon, we use MMH, our 3-4 gr. uses Saxon and our 5th grade uses Harcourt. Now, doesn't that sound good?!

Our curriculum director PROMISED that we'd never have the hodge-podge of math texts that we are suffering through now, ever again. Math adoption can't come soon enough for us.
We even tried to develop our own but that too was a nightmare. We're educators, not writers of textbooks.
I wish there was a challenging, yet interesting program out there. We used Saxon for many years but I found it to be too easy and way too boring to teach.
I try to use lots of hands-on teaching and very little of the workbook pages for classtime. I do use MMH's Practice and Extend sheets though for homework.

This is my 5th year with Everyday Math, and as others have said, it has its good and bad qualities. We started it in th 5th grade, with students not having the background, so the first few years were tough. Now we are getting kids that have had the program for several years and I'm definitely seeing an improvement.
I used to teach Special Ed though, and let me tell ya, it is NOT the program for those kids who need extra practice and are below grade level. Its not "patient" if that makes sense.