Hello

We're happy with RS, but noticed the colored base ten set in Shiller Math that seems to incorporate some of RS and MUS + more. A friend and I purchased RS A and B level, and needed to enhance with MUS blocks because the children could not understand the concept with the paper models included in RS which really wasn't montessori at all. Additionally, the geometric volume set in Shiller we feel is another feature we'd like to see in RS. We still feel the Alabacus is a better visualizing tool especially for my dominant visual learner, but there seems to be some missing pieces. I hear a lot of RS use Singapore for those kids wanting more paper work, which is nice to have as an option in addition to the games. The games work fine for me, but my friend who has RS B needs a product to motivate at the end of the lesson for his temperament.

I haven't reviewed Shiller overall, but another friend made the purchase at a conference which I'd like to see. Can you breakdown the differences or is there somewhere on your site that does like Shiller does. Of course, they're highlighting their product, so I'd like the RS perspective.

thanks,
Linette

Linette,

Hello! Thank you so much for your inquiry! We are different than Shiller of course as each program is unique in its own way!

I talked with Dr.Cotter a little on this subject and with the rods, and I agree with what she says as far as "Shiller's colored rods don't work for the same reason that Math-U-See's don't work: they're not visualizable because they're not grouped in fives."

We have two volume sets: one that is wood for the earlier grades and one in RightStart Mathematics: A Hands-On Geometric Approach, where the students make their own.

In addition if you are looking for additional worksheets I would advise using the Worksheets for the ALAbacus Book. This would be a very useful tool! (http://www.activitiesforlearning.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=39)

I would also advise to check out the area of our website, under Resources, Program Information, Differences Revealed. You will find a wealth of knowledge in that area!

I did a search on our forum for past responses to RightStart vs. Shiller, and have listed this example below.

Please feel free to contact us with any additional questions. Have a wonderful day!

Cassie :)

May 9, 2005 - 1:53PM
Quote Reply Re: rightstart vs. shiller math

Dear Sandy,

Thank you for writing us on the board.

RightStart Math was written by a certified Montessori teacher, Dr. Joan Cotter (she received her diploma from Mario Montessori, Dr. Maria Montessori's son). It was in her Montessori classroom where she developed the AL abacus. She also has a Ph.D. in early childhood and mathematics education.


The RightStart program is the result of Dr. Cotter's research. She actually wrote Level B for her dissertation, showing results vastly superior to traditional methods. Her research has been published in Teaching Children Mathematics.


Since 1993 it has been known that young babies can add up to 3 by visualizing quantities in their minds. This is the skill, and not counting, that we should be fostering. Incidentally, countries that use this approach score much higher on international tests. This is why RS promotes visualization with chunking in groups of fives for larger quantities.


Cotter agrees with Dr. Montessori that young children should be observed, not tested, to determine when a child is ready for the next activity. In math this is accomplished through gentle questioning, which causes the child to think and thus learn. From the answers, the teacher determines how to proceed. Montessori never advocated drill (flash cards or timed tests or worksheets); instead, she provided tools for understanding and interesting repetition. From brain research we know that a child under stress stops learning. The only person who likes flash cards is the one who doesn't need them.


In harmony with this philosophy, one of the resources in RS is Math Card Games: 300 Games for Learning and Enjoying Math. Parents say their children really love these games and learn their facts without drill or tears.


Because all learning styles are addressed in RightStart Math, it was awarded the Outstanding Learning-Success Resource Award from the Learning-Success Institute of California, which specializes in learning styles. A learning style is the way a person best processes information. For example, a visual learner learns best through their eyes. It does NOT mean "lots of eye movement" or doing tons of worksheets. Songs are appropriate for learning rote material, such as the months of the year, which is really a language activity. Songs should not be used for math facts, which are relationships, because they are stored in the language part of the brain. Most young children are visual learners, who also need to move to learn.


Dominoes are not used because they are not additive. That is, adding 1 to the 5-pattern does not result in the 6-pattern.


In summary, the RightStart Math program is fully comprehensive, including geometry, graphing, and other skills. Standardized testing shows that children using this program are advanced compared to those using other programs. Parents using RS say they spend little time in preparation and the program fulfills our mission: To help children understand, apply, and enjoy mathematics.

Please feel free to email, call or post any other questions you might have.

Sincerely,
Rosine

P.S. I invite you to go on the RightStart Yahoo group, where a parent answers this question in detail in messages #751 and #752.

I understand about the units, and rod blocks in MUS and Shiller not being visualizable, but the cardstock pieces in RS aren't either. The kids were able to understand what all those drawn units on the boxes were once they were actual 3-D objects. I'm not saying that having the base 10 set would help on it's own, but together, the "aha" was understood, and we could move on. Somehow, actually manipulating the pieces made more sense than a drawn on paper box representation of 100 or 1000. Any other suggestions of getting this concept across instead of using a base 10 set? How about a geometric volume set? I still can't figure out if my left overs will fit into a container or visualize a room plan of furniture placement, or organizing a shelf with different objects unless I actually do it....so I never move my furniture around ; ) understanding space and volume is such a deficit for me, and I thought, in the future I'd get a set of plastic geometric volume set, which are different than my geometric solid set. We really, really enjoy RS math otherwise, and look forward to completing, and continuing with Geometry.
Linette