BJU vs..ABEKA

[Love2Smile]

If you have used either of these without the DVD's could you tell me which you prefer and why. Which TE's are easier for the parent..etc...

[Love2Smile]

bumpity bump, I don't want this to get lost:001_smile:

[Julie Herbster]

I have not used either curriculum. I have looked through them at various expos. My opinion is that neither curriculum's TE's are very user-friendly. Even the ones that are intended for homeschoolers seem overloaded with things that are unnecessary. They don't seem to be a whole lot different than the classroom-oriented ones. Homeschooling is so very, very different than classroom education!

Full disclosure: I have an undergrad degree in elementary education from BJU. I was raised on A Beka. If I had to decide between those two on content alone, I'd go with A Beka math, language arts, and history, and with BJUP Bible and science. But, as I said, I've found stuff I like better than either one of these curricula. (I do use BJU's catechism.)

[Ellie]

if I had to use everything from one publisher, BJUP would be it. The teacher manuals are full of information (not to mention having student pages with answers); the history texts are interesting and use a variety of methods for quizes/chapter review/etc.; English requires more writing and has sufficient grammar; spelling is my favorite after R&S.

However, I prefer ABeka for teaching reading, and for science up to biology.

[Melissa in CA]

If you have used either of these without the DVD's could you tell me which you prefer and why. Which TE's are easier for the parent..etc...

Hmmm...

Well...

I guess it really depends on the teacher and what subject your wanting to teach. Do you need your TE scripted, or just a general guideline with suggestions? With Math, BJU is very scripted; say this, do this, etc. My experience with Abeka, and this was for 1-3rd grade math, was more of a list of suggestions; here is the lesson, here are some basic teaching tips, some review ideas, etc. I have not used Abeka in 3 years though so I am sure how it has changed, but I personally liked their Math TE's better. I am not into 'scripted' math, for me it is usually too wordy and confusing. I need things written in a simple, concrete way. That is how my brain works. I am very visual, and if I see a long, drawn out explanation of how I am supposed to say/do something...I have a melt down. :tongue_smilie: Abeka's Math TE's (Curriculum/Lesson Planners I think they are called?) were visually more appealing to me, and I had no problem teaching from them.

Now, having said that, I MUCH prefer BJU's curriculum over Abeka's which is why I love the HomeSat system so much...I don't HAVE to teach from their wordy Math TE's. ;) I am not sure I could pull it off without HomeSat. I would probably not be using BJU's Math if I didn't have those wonderful video teachers doing the teaching for me.

Now, if you are wanting to teach English or Science, BJU's TE's are fantastic and not overly wordy at all. These I could teach from with no problems whatsoever. They give you objectives for the day, review questions to ask, discussion questions, etc. They're great! I have not used the Abeka ones, so I can't give you a comparison. I have used Abeka's English and Science, but we used their video school at the time so I did not teach, just graded, and graded, and graded...(Abeka is really into quizzing and testing). :D

Sorry I cannot be more helpful.

Blessings,

[TraceyS/FL]

I"ve taught from both - and prefer BJU by far. We are also going with Homesat next year so i won't have to teach it all - but i could.

I prefer the BJU Phonics & English hands down. I never had phonics, and i couldn't teach Abeka very well - it just made no sense to me, couple that with DD2's issues, and it was not going anywhere fast. BUT, BJU and I clicked. I can actually "get it right" :D

My oldest came from an Abeka private school for 3's,K4,K5 & 1st, so we went with it for 2nd, then for 3rd. I was pulling my hair out after 2nd, and 3rd was worse. She couldn't write a sentence - had had no grammar to help her build one, it was ugly. Putting her in English 4 from BJU was the smartest move i made that year! It was easier for me to teach and she loved it.

Some of the Abeka stuff i used has gone thru a revision - but overall, i'd say it was the same basic i can't grasp the phonics approach, so i'm sticking with BJU (i admit this is a personal problem btw :lol:)

I haven't used BJU math - we will probably start that next year with the oldest for Pre-algebra, and i'm still deciding if the youngest will do MUS like the middle one or not. I'm going to tape the K5 math class and see how it looks.

[OhElizabeth]

Haven't used Abeka, use several BJU things (science, music, math, not necessarily all at the same time, lol), and I would toss out that you can deal with anything you don't like about the tm's if you find the materials fit your dc. It's like with Shurley or anything else; the tm may be obnoxious, but if it works for your kid, you live with it, kwim?

You can see extensive samples of each BJU tm on the bjup.com website. I think their science tm's are amazing. I haven't used the history (yet), but honestly I was pretty impressed with them for junior high on up too. The music is the older edition, and I find it very easy to use. The math tm, well I ended up not using that at all because I just continue to teach her the way RS explaings things. It's a bit much to trudge through, but there are new editions coming out too, can't say how they'll improve. The science is new and SO easy to use, maybe the math will be too. But like I said, the more important thing is how your dc interacts with the curriculum. If BJU is a good fit, you can deal with the tm's.

As far as differences, BJU's philosophy is that the teacher should bring something to the table. This means they put extra notes in and mean for the teacher to explain things, add to the discussion, etc. Abeka's goal is to make it so anyone could pick up the material and teach. Where this shows up most obviously is in comparing the BJU vs. Abeka student texts. If you read a BJU science text for the student (pick an elementary grade), you've only done HALF the course. The rest was in the tm and meant to be discussed, talked through. Abeka, on the other hand, is pretty much textbook-driven. If you pick up the abeka4 history text, read it, do the questions in the text, do the mapping workbook, etc., you've DONE the course. That's more conducive to independent work (and forgetting, depending on your viewpoint). So you have a bit of a functionality issue, because you have to actually teach most of the BJU stuff, can't just toss the student workbook at them.

It's all stuff to consider. I'm just saying don't let your impressions of the tm bug you too much, because you CAN get over them. Look at the individual subjects and see how each publisher approaches them to make a choice that will fit your dc best.

I'm sure you're curious about this, so also visit www.hightestscores.com to see how Abeka students fare vs. BJU in standardized testing. They're about neck and neck until high school, where BJU pulls ahead. BJU attributes it to a slow and steady wins the pace, taking the time to lay a foundation of understanding, etc. Some teachers feel that emphasis on understanding, especially in the math, is misguided and that they should just focus on doing a lot, letting it spiral, etc, a la abeka. So some of what you're seeing when people talk about prefering one over another has nothing to do with whether one will get the results or the other is bad. They're just totally different approaches, and people have preferences.

[Melissa in CA]

Haven't used Abeka, use several BJU things (science, music, math, not necessarily all at the same time, lol), and I would toss out that you can deal with anything you don't like about the tm's if you find the materials fit your dc. It's like with Shurley or anything else; the tm may be obnoxious, but if it works for your kid, you live with it, kwim?

You can see extensive samples of each BJU tm on the bjup.com website. I think their science tm's are amazing. I haven't used the history (yet), but honestly I was pretty impressed with them for junior high on up too. The music is the older edition, and I find it very easy to use. The math tm, well I ended up not using that at all because I just continue to teach her the way RS explaings things. It's a bit much to trudge through, but there are new editions coming out too, can't say how they'll improve. The science is new and SO easy to use, maybe the math will be too. But like I said, the more important thing is how your dc interacts with the curriculum. If BJU is a good fit, you can deal with the tm's.

As far as differences, BJU's philosophy is that the teacher should bring something to the table. This means they put extra notes in and mean for the teacher to explain things, add to the discussion, etc. Abeka's goal is to make it so anyone could pick up the material and teach. Where this shows up most obviously is in comparing the BJU vs. Abeka student texts. If you read a BJU science text for the student (pick an elementary grade), you've only done HALF the course. The rest was in the tm and meant to be discussed, talked through. Abeka, on the other hand, is pretty much textbook-driven. If you pick up the abeka4 history text, read it, do the questions in the text, do the mapping workbook, etc., you've DONE the course. That's more conducive to independent work (and forgetting, depending on your viewpoint). So you have a bit of a functionality issue, because you have to actually teach most of the BJU stuff, can't just toss the student workbook at them.

It's all stuff to consider. I'm just saying don't let your impressions of the tm bug you too much, because you CAN get over them. Look at the individual subjects and see how each publisher approaches them to make a choice that will fit your dc best.

I'm sure you're curious about this, so also visit www.hightestscores.com to see how Abeka students fare vs. BJU in standardized testing. They're about neck and neck until high school, where BJU pulls ahead. BJU attributes it to a slow and steady wins the pace, taking the time to lay a foundation of understanding, etc. Some teachers feel that emphasis on understanding, especially in the math, is misguided and that they should just focus on doing a lot, letting it spiral, etc, a la abeka. So some of what you're seeing when people talk about prefering one over another has nothing to do with whether one will get the results or the other is bad. They're just totally different approaches, and people have preferences.

Great post OhElizabeth! :D

[BlueGator]

Hi,

I've used BJU:

1st Grade
Reading, TM old version
English Skills, TM old version
Science, TM old version
History, TM old version
2nd Grade

Reading, TM new version
English Skills, TM new version
Science, TM new version
Music Apprec. TM and tapes new version
3rd Grade

Reading, TM new version
English Skills Workbook, No TM new version
I had a hard time between the two. I ordered the 1st Grade BJU and Abeka via E-Bay. They were in a slightly worn condition. I chose BJU because of the creativity and pictures.

My main criteria was their reading program. I'm glad I chose BJU. The updated versions are wonderful. The old TM were wordy and a bit cumbersome. I got used to it after about 20 lessons.

I really liked the characters introduced in the English Skills programs. They also showed up in the Reading Workbooks if I recall. Here are the main ones.


Miss Long - She represents the long vowels and their rules. She has two friends.
Marker E - A silent E dog that trails behind
Miss Silent - A quiet woman who never speaks and always is right next to Miss Long.
Mrs. Short

Mr. Short her husband
Uncle Short
Bossy R

A bossy cowboy that ropes vowels and makes them change their sounds.
My son loved the stories in the readers and these characters. If you make the puppets in the beginning of the year you will use them for two years with BJU 1st and 2nd grade.

I didn't make them because it seemed to be a lot of work for one lesson.