My Personal Experience with On Cloud Nine

Super, Des! That gives us hope for the kids! :D

Janis

I do this automatically but I bet my 10 year old son does not. Is On Cloud Nine easy to do without training? I can see that it might have ways to present material that would strengthen my son’s math skills.

Beth

I am like Beth, but I have a feeling that my son does not “visualize” math that well. He does well with computation on paper now- mostly due to having Saxon math for a year- but I have an impression that he just crunches numbers and does not have a “view” what he is acctually doing… (even more important for manipulation on fractions…).

Waiting to hear whether OCN can be done at home… I think rather of taking some tricks from it…

Ewa

OCN *can* be used at home. It is NOT like LiPs that is very difficult and might require some background in speech and language. The manual is all you need as the materials are easy enough (might take a little time- but nothing that is not doable). The only material you must be is unifix cubes (about $12). You could buy some of the stuff but might find it cheaper elsewhere. YOu don’t need to make everything at once, but more as you go along.

The OCN manual is user friendly. Each chapter is summed up and there is a model lesson that shows how to present the stuff and how a student might respond. (It is necessary to go over it well first). I wouldn’t just look at it and try teaching it.

At the LMB centers they teach OCN and Visualizing and Verbalizing together. I can see the logic of this and I am about 3/4 of the way thru V/V (which has also been helpful to me personally). I can definitely see the logic of this but would not think it is absolutely critical. The OCN visualizing is much less specific than in V/V were they are visualizing whole sentences instead of just numbers and number lines. Perhaps there is some process that happens when you are doing both. BTW, I am going thru this like a kid/ teacher myself, so maybe I am getting some benefits here that I wouldn’t get if I skipped the V/V. Someone who has actually had the training may be able to splain this better.

Funny I have always thought I was good at visualizing as this is my more preferred way of thinking, but I think I was a bit TOO good at visualizing. Visualizing a lot of detail. (Might be an issue for Asperger kids, as I have AS as well.)

BTw, I am getting so good at this now it is scary. I am USED to having to write things out and don’t trust it when I just come up with the answer. I work it out and find out, yes I was right.

But yeah, I doubt your kids can do this. I think this is something that is almost automatic with people who are “good in math”.

—des

Here is my resource for Unifix cubes and related products:

http://www.didaxinc.com/

The site is down now so I can’t tell you the things that are compatible in the OCN program, but they have some of them.

You DO need the plastic Unifix 1-100 number line, and so far, I think I have only found that through Lindamood Bell. But their price on Unifix is about the same as elsewhere, so it’s okay to order it from them.

Des can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe you start at the beginning of OCN to develop the visualization skills at a basic level before moving on to the child’s current level. The child I intend to use it with desperately needs V/V, too, so I am going to try it the way LMB suggests and take her through “sentence by sentence” in V/V before beginning OCN.

Truthfully, that workshop was just one day, so it barely skimmed the surface of OCN. So you shoudl do fine with teh manual. My understanding is that they are working on video training tapes as well as workbooks.

Janis

>You DO need the plastic Unifix 1-100 number line, and so far, I think I have only found that through Lindamood Bell. But their price on Unifix is about the same as elsewhere, so it’s okay to order it from them.

Thanks fro the link. I had not found a plastic number line. I made a cardboard one with the numbers the size of a single unifix block. I can’t see why this won’t work but a plastic one would certainly be nicer.
For some reason, I don’t think that the LMB set uses a plastic number line??

>Des can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe you start at the beginning >of OCN to develop the visualization skills at a basic level before moving

Yes, you are supposed to be at the sentence by sentence level at introduction. Higher order thinking goes with place value. Says so right in the manual.

>on to the child’s current level. The child I intend to use it with desperately needs V/V, too, so I am going to try it the way LMB suggests and take her >through “sentence by sentence” in V/V before beginning OCN.

I think this may be quite a common LD pattern. My first student also will need V/V and OCN. And I also have problems with comprehension of fiction and math. I think Harry Potter remediated my fiction comprehension. :-) However, I went thru the “structure words” in my head when trying to describe something more than a few times. I definitely think they have something there!!!

>Truthfully, that workshop was just one day, so it barely skimmed the surface of OCN. So you shoudl do fine with teh manual. My understanding >is that they are working on video training tapes as well as workbooks.

I really like the manual, and I think it is maybe the strongest of the LMB manuals in clarity. (And I also think V/V is a very easy manual to follow).
I have also heard parents say that they could use the SS manual as well. I have heard no one say this about the LiPs manual. But I did talk to someone at Gander (the people who are selling the manuals and kits) and they had some mom crying on the phone that LiPs was the only thing that would help their kid and they could not afford the training or a tutor or the center, and they did use it successfully. But I think it is the only one that is really that hard. I’m sure the training is valuable in many respects but the programs (with the exception of LiPs) are certainly user friendly.

>Janis[/quote]

—des

Can one of you explain what you should be able to do with V & V before doing Cloud Nine? My son has had therapy addressing visualization, which made a big difference in his reading comprehension, but has not had V & V. I had intended to followup with V & V but at the present time comprehension is not is biggest issue.

Beth

Briefly V/V starts at a picture level (perhaps this will be done quickly with most kids). They look at simple pix and try to describe what they see. You are looking for some richness in description. They have structure words to help with that like “color, size, when, background, movement, etc.”
Then they word imaging where the child describes a word like “boat”, “Christmas tree”, etc. Same thing. There are substeps that might be necessary to some kids (imaging a pet, a real object, etc.) The next step is single sentence imagery where the kid images a short sentence like “the cat is under the tree”. The kid figures out (with you) what things can be imaged and then does this. Then they go to imaging sentence by sentence (using regular written material with high imagery content, preferable). This where you can start OCN. There is sentence by sentence with higher order thought where you have the child work on main idea, inference, etc. It goes on from there.

I would recommend the manual. It is very easy to follow, has it’s own materials, etc.

—des

Thanks. My son can do the sentence level. He can do some of the inferential stuff too, although I know he would benefit from V & V as well. It is a matter of what to spend time on now.

I will get the OCN manual.

Beth

I really like the OCN strategies. Not much else out there like it.

Des, the plastic number line is called the Instructor’s Unifix Numberline $33.95 in the LMB catalog. You are correct that they sell cardboard ones for students, but I’ll use my plastic one since I work one-on-one. Didax has it, also, and it is called the Unifix 100 Track.

From Didax, type in Unifix and all the Unifix products will come up. I think the following would be useful:

10x10 number tray, 1-10 Stair, Value Boats, number tiles, Dual Purpose Number Board

Janis

Hi Des,

Did you follow the Math ladder strictly? I’m thinking of jumping to place value before I proceed to addition because it seems to make sense to me to do this.

During the training we were told to follow the sequence strictly, but I’m wondering if we could change the order of teaching it.

Maricel

Someone commented that their kid could visualize at the sentence to sentence level and do some inferential stuff— then I think the OCN manual would be great. I think they do need some ability to visualize to do the OCN.

I wouldn’t skip around as someone suggested. My problem with that is that one part builds on another. I might use other materials/programs like that, but this one wouldn’t be it. I lot is based on strongly visualizing the number line. If you can’t visualize it, you can’t do “jumping” as they explain, etc. I suppose you could do the fraction section, but I would guess that many kids with problems with fractions also has problems in multiplication and esp. part whole stuff like division.

Also the stuff in addition is all 0-10 addition (and subtraction). It makes no sense to skip this, unless, say the kid were very automatic in addition and subtraction. But if the kid still takes time, I mean you ask say 7+3 and there is a bit of a pause before the answer, then imo the kid doesn’t really have that at the automatic level. Then you go on later to “jumping” and the kid isn’t going to have the addition strongly enough to do this.

So yeah, I plan to keep it by the book— unless I got some rare kid who could add one digits very quickly say… Still I might want to at least go over it so the kid gets more practice at the visualization.

Anyone with the OCN training want a stab at that question?

—des

My tendency is to follow their sequence, too, for the reasons des mentioned. I’m not ready to use it yet because of havign to do V/V first.

Janis

As a math person, I would say in general to stick to the sequence of a good program. It takes a couple of times through a program, even for someone who really knows math, to see how each step builds on previous work.
For example, you’re talking about doing base ten before addition. But base ten *depends* on addition. Maybe you have never even thought of this, because it seems so simple to you, but when you’re doing base ten you split up 17 = 10 + 7 and 43 = 40 + 3 and so on. If a kid doesn’t have at least a basic grasp on what “plus” is, this lesson will go over his head and cause more confusion than it solves.
Of course this depends on the student and the situation — if he understands just fine what plus means and can add well but is just slow because he takes a long time to memorize tables and still counts, well then yes you could do the base ten and keep working on tables on the side. This is a matter for judgement and experience.
Of course, if you have a *bad* program, for example one that introduces decimals before fractions (and how do you get any real meaning at all in decimals if you don’t know what tenths and hundredths are) because decimals are “easier” (ie you can teach mechanical rote rules quickly, if you test fast before the memory botches up), then you need to work out your own logical sequence, or find a good program and base your sequence on that.

Your explanation, Victoria, makes sense. They have to understand base 10 first before place value. I didn’t know that the initial addition and subtraction part is only up to ten, Des. I have to look at the kit again. :lol:

Okay, the sequence then is logical. Addition and subtraction first up to ten, then word problems, place value, then + - facts up to 20 etc.

I guess I’m being pressured into following the regular curriculum and getting my kids to catch up right away. I teach in the school and I do some inclusion and pull outs. Their current lesson is on place value. But I have to remember to do it slowly but surely!

I have to tell you, the lesson on imaging the numerals and number line really works. Getting the students to count by 1’s, 10’s, 5’s and 2’s has never been easier. They do it first on the concrete number line, then they visualize the number line in front of them with their eyes closed. They can picture it!!! Of course they’ve had V/V for weeks before this, so visualizing was easier. Now if only I have enough time! I get to do OCN for 30 minutes only because I also do LiPS, V/V and SS. Oh well, these kids are so lucky to get these programs in the school.

>Your explanation, Victoria, makes sense. They have to understand base

It does, and it is of course the way kids learn math. They add and subtract a lot of apples before we worry about whether they can do tens or hundreds of them. In fact, I bet that was the whole evolution of math. Started in the ones column (not that it was called that) where people were counting a lot of things. And then they ran out of fingers and toes and had to device a system. :-)

>Okay, the sequence then is logical. Addition and subtraction first up to ten, then word problems, place value, then + - facts up to 20 etc.

And then think about word problems a bit, you first start with things like John has three apples and Bob gives him three more, things like that.

>I guess I’m being pressured into following the regular curriculum and getting my kids to catch up right away. I teach in the school and I do some inclusion and pull outs. Their current lesson is on place value. But I >have to remember to do it slowly but surely!

Yeah too bad that is, but lucky they have you, huh? But if you get too pushed by the regular curriculum— the kids will never get it. My first kid in tutoring is so slow at adding and subtracting, by the time they got any higher… I think the kids just get farther and farther behind. But pushing them up before they are ready won’t help. Just like reading, sometimes you have to go back before you go forward.

>I have to tell you, the lesson on imaging the numerals and number line >really works. Getting the students to count by 1’s, 10’s, 5’s and 2’s has

I know from experience. It is boggling my mind, how all these things that were hard are getting lots easier.

—des

Des,

Here I am again asking for your help :lol:

In teaching addition, did you go through the practice activities, imagery and cubes alone, imagery and number line with cubes, imagery and number line without cubes etc… or did you skip these?

I’m now on discovering addition and fact imagery cards. So far so good.

Well first of all I have never taught it. I plan to use it with my new student but we are just finished with the picture to picture level on V/V. They recommend a child be at the sentence to sentence level.

What I did myself as I am going thru it slowly so that I learn the program. (In the process I am learning some math, but that wasn’t the purpose of me doing this.) LMB techniques are challenging and require some new sorts of thinking, that I think can only be gathered by going thru it experientially. Others may differ on this.

In doing so, I am going thru it pretty much as outlined in the book. Would I do this with a real student? Most likely. I would follow the cubes, to real number line, to imaged number line. The reason I would do this is with each imaged step you build the kids (poor) math imaging abilities. The imaged steps don’t make much sense without the real ones. Now in a real situation there may be some things that are learned/ established quickly. If that were the case I think I would jump thru some of the steps quickly. Say if the student were really able to automatically do addition.Though I may linger at anything with the imaged no. line. Then I might just sort of outline the steps, maybe all in one session. Then the kid could take on the remainder of the book.

But the more advanced knowledge would have to come from the kid. I wouldn’t say, move the steps up because I thought they were tedious or something. As a matter of fact, may seem strange to you, but *I* needed some of those steps. Working off the imaged number line is still a bit tricky for me, implying that maybe it isn’t so clear to me yet. Many kids seem to have problems with multiplication, when you can really see that the problem is much earlier. The kid I am tutoring, for example, counts on her fingers when adding, although she makes no errors. This indicates that the process involved in adding is not yet at an automatic level. It might be akin to decoding each and every word in reading a passage.

Keep in mind that I have not had any LMB training (other than that which I am giving myself). So I would be less likely to alter steps than someone who say has more background and knows the ropes a bit better. I also don’t know for sure that what I say is gospel according to Stes LMB. :-)
Others might have comments here!

—des

I’m not an LMB person but I am a math person.

Yes, counting on fingers to add is on the level of sounding out each and every word.
Sometimes it’s a real memory problem; more often it’s bad teaching crossed with destroyed confidence.
I strongly recommend *NOT* having kids count on fingers to add, ever. Simply, finger counting is extremely error-prone as soon as you go over a total of five — which finger is the counter and which the countee? Kids who get over this hurdle and who count large numbers accurately are putting so much thought and attention into the counting process that there is very little left to actually pay attention to what the problem was about — similar to the kid who has memorized two thousand words by sight and won’t decode, and who apparently reads well but is terribly slow and fails miserably on comprehension.
It is much better to use some other sort of counters; abacus is neatest and includes base ten automatically; pennies and dots on paper and other things are also very useful.
I personally have a bit of a prejudice against unifix cubes; the classroom I took over where they were being used had kids who had lots of fun snapping them but whose math skills were nonexistent — unless well supervised they can be distracting toys as much as or more than teaching tools.

Yes, definitely, do go through all the steps of visualization etc. *You* may think something is tedious — but it may be the skill the kid needs most. Like teaching the alphabet in reading — not the most fun job in the world, but you know it must be done right as a foundation for everything else. If the kid sails through a section with perfect answers on everything, well, skim through it. Sometimes if you think something is known you can pre-test and if it is really mastered you can skip that section — but make sure it really is at least 90% mastered. When you hit a snag where the student can’t get at leasdt 90% right, then slow down and teach.

>I’m not an LMB person but I am a math person.

All is forgiven. hah hah! :-)

>I strongly recommend *NOT* having kids count on fingers to add, ever. Simply, finger counting is extremely error-prone as soon as you go over a total of five — which finger is the counter and which the countee? Kids who get over this hurdle and who count large numbers accurately are putting so much thought and attention into the counting process that there is very little left to actually pay attention to what the problem was about — similar to the kid who has memorized two thousand words by sight and won’t decode, and who apparently reads well but is terribly slow and fails >miserably on comprehension.

Yes, I had the kid I’m working with count words in a sentence. She almost blew the task because she could not keep track of the numbers counting, like you say “where did she start”. This was part of my problem, in fact. Getting up to more complex problems and here I am, as an adult, still adding some nos like 9+7 by counting on fingers. But if you can “see” 10+7= 17 and one less is 16, well this makes the problems much easier right?
Then I can go on with the multiplication or whatever.

> personally have a bit of a prejudice against unifix cubes; the classroom I took over where they were being used had kids who had lots of fun snapping them but whose math skills were nonexistent — unless well supervised they can be distracting toys as much as or more than teaching tools.

OCN uses unifix. And I don’t see anyway around it, as there are things you could not do using some other counter— they aren’t strictly used as counters either. I think you would, in some cases, have to control the materials. I think it is generally used in a clinic situation where you can have better control of the materials.

In some places they are used in a template, so you can’t really move them around so easily.

>Yes, definitely, do go through all the steps of visualization etc. *You* may think something is tedious — but it may be the skill the kid needs most. Like teaching the alphabet in reading — not the most fun job in the world, but you know it must be done right as a foundation for everything else. If the kid sails through a section with perfect answers on everything, well, skim through it. Sometimes if you think something is known you can pre-test and if it is really mastered you can skip that section — but make sure it really is at least 90% mastered. When you hit a snag where the student >can’t get at leasdt 90% right, then slow down and teach.

I think that LMB makes a strong case for people being good at math automatically doing a lot of what she says! Maybe the big difference between Virginia’s math and mine. This ability to visualize is gradual not an over night thing. Another thing is that I think that OCN is a fun type of program. I don’t think the kids will see it as tedious. You might, but I don’t think they will see it that way. Then again, when you see kids learning do you find that tedious? I don’t. And I bet you don’t either. The handling of the language is something like this: “you are getting better at visualizing the addition families, so we’re going to try something different to help make your pictures in your head stronger”. I think this helps the kid understand why you are repeating the same thing in a different way. Also there is some drill but the drill has been preceded by really being able to visualize first. I had all the drill in the world, but without both understanding what I was doing and being able to see it in my head, I was never able to really learn those things that you might take for granted.

Also i think there might be some push to get the kid there faster. To compare it to reading, you can’t get the kid to read faster by sort of skipping over CVC words. Of course it is done, but it doesn’t actually work so well! If the kid can’t read 100% of any regular CVC word thrown at them, they are going to have problems when they get to syllables.

—des