Talk:Kumon

Page is bordering on two topics

Please note that this page, "Kumon Method," is wavering from talking about the Kumon Method to talking about Kumon Inc. and Kumon Learning Center services. The aforementioned info should be separated into a "/Kumon" and "/Kumon_Method" page here on Wikipedia. Markn26 (talk) 16:15, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Changed "Thinking Face" Logo Section

The "Thinking Face" Logo section seemed the worst offender as far as advertising goes, I changed it, but I couldn't think of any way to remove anything advert-ish it without losing some information. The last sentence bothers me, so if someone could change that without losing too much info that would be great. I also added a "Criticisms" section that may not agree with NPOV rules, but I think it's OK. As someone enrolled in Kumon, I can say that what I wrote is not biased or opinion, rather I have written it using my and others' experiences as reference.

Vinnie 20:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Based on your experience or not, it's not sourced and it's definitely not NPOV. Also, it's pretty poorly written. I'm going to delete it for now, though a criticisms sections would be fine if it were sourced. Lateralus1587 (talk) 05:01, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

The section was removed for obvious reasons, I'm going to keep this article free-ad DodgerBr (talk) 00:40, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Discussion deletion

Deleted conversations in this section of the Talk Page as they are violating Wikipedia's Talk Page guidelines: See section Behavior that is unacceptable / "Do not use the talk page as a forum or soapbox for discussing the topic". --Markn26 (talk) 16:13, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Restoring deleted discussion below (the "Balance" section) as the outright deletion of others' comments violates Wikipedia's Talk Page guidelines: See section Others' comments / "you should not delete the comments of other editors without their permission". The only reasons listed for outright deletion of others' comments are because they contain prohibited material (not merely discouraged), personal attacks, trolling, or vandalism. None of these possible reasons apply to the deleted discussion. --70.41.70.6 (talk) 18:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Balance

No critics? Surely it can`t be all good? Just googling tells me there is a huge drop out rate. Why? Is there corporate editing going on here?Andycjp (talk) 04:46, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

That is true, however staying to the end of the program isn't necessary in all or most cases. Most people in Kumon centres (that I've been to) are really there to gain mastery of core maths skills, which generally washes over to other areas such as algebra etc... There is also IMO/My experience a considerable difference between the drop out rates of people in the Language Program and Maths Program. Many people do stay for the duration of the English Program or at least a considerable extent, however at my centre, the last time someone completed the maths program fully was 14 years ago, and from what I've heard the maths program is also considerably harder than the language program. My understanding is that the Maths program will cover right up to Uni level maths, also explaining why many people don't have a huge need to complete the Maths Program Lawnmowers Rock! (talk) 10:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Second answer.

I'm a Kumon completer (well, almost, just XS left). Most people don't continue on with Kumon math for several reasons.

Kids don't have time to continue on.

The algebra section of Kumon is REALLY REALLY hard, much harder than school, and therefore many people can't take it and quit.

What's the point? Kumon pretty much teaches everything that's taught in Calculus 2 in university, and has other topics in the university level (although not as thorough).

By the time you're at the higher level, you're going so slowly you probably want to quit.

By the time you're at a high level, you probably have a lot of school work and quit.

Not all Kumon centers have people that can effectively teach high level math. After all, how many people remember what they learned in university, and for the people that do, what are they doing in Kumon?

Kumon is quite confusing at the higher levels, barely teaching you anything (only the basics), you figure the rest out yourself. A very notorious one is trigonometric substituion in calculus. We basically figured it out ourselves. It is like this:

$\int {\frac {dx}{\sqrt {a^{2}-x^{2}}}}$

Kumon gives you a hint to substitute $x=a\sin \theta$

We do the rest ourselves.

Turn the page

$\int {\frac {dx}{\sqrt {a^{2}+x^{2}}}}$

No hint, we have to magically know to substitute $x=a\tan \theta$

So yeah, very few people make it. I'm lucky I had parents that could teach me this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.53.48.250 (talk) 02:45, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Vandalized

There is a lot on this page. Maybe it should be locked? mbslrm 02:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbslrm (talk • contribs)

No. Locking is only done when a page is chronic vandalism from several sources at once, not a few times a month or however much it was. It's usually best just to keep reverting it occasionally or to block the few IP's (and one narrow IP range) responsible for it. Most IP contributions have been positive and some have even helped revert the vandalism. --70.41.70.6 (talk) 18:35, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Your opinion on kumon.

I hate it. Brickman10857 (talk) 18:22, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

It does not matter. Here, we have to deal with only facts and informations, not opinions. DodgerBr (talk) 00:24, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

My Opinion on Kumon: My Daughter was struggling with Maths in Primary school when she was Year 2 to 3, so much so it was hard to get her to go to school. We started doing Kumon books with her for 20 minutes everyday before school for a couple of months. We then got told by the teacher that other girls were copying our daughters work because she was getting the answers right and was doing it quickly. She gained so much confidence and we didn't have a problem getting her to go to school anymore.

A few years on and we are in a situation where we had to take our daughter out of school as her Grand-Mother was terminally ill in another country and we are using Kumon again to keep up with her maths. And to be honest, her normal school classes are now collaborative classes with 54 students and two teachers - they are not getting their foundational skills solidified in these environments and its easy for kids to not get noticed and fade into the background. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.194.53.20 (talk) 12:21, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Stages/levels

Informations about the Kumon stages/levels are not a top secret informations, however, it seems inappropriate to show them in a public page like Wikipedia. If you want to know it, please, visit some KIE official pages around the world. DodgerBr (talk)

If it is publicly available on other sites, why do you think it is inappropriate to show it here? Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:04, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Business reasons, business reasons... On official sites, the informations can not be modified by any people. But here, can be. This article was written as an advertisement, that is why I want to remove these informations about the levels. DodgerBr (talk) 15:55, 6 April 2016

If the information is factual and uncontentious, there seems no good reason to remove it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:59, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

So, I'm going to get some references to verify these informations. Have a nice day DodgerBr (talk) 12:10, 6 April 2016

Effort to improve the article

Due to the unwanted advertisement content present in this article and a major absence of references, I am going to rewrite and watch carefully it, like I did with the equivalent article in Portuguese/Brazil. I ask the help of all other contributors to keep this article clean and suitable. DodgerBr (talk) 00:23, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

In order to verify informations, two sections written as an advertisement will be removed (Kumon values and Kumon at home). I hope your comprehension. DodgerBr (talk) DodgerBr (talk) 23:14, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Referencing certainly needs to be improved - but section blanking of uncontentious content will be reverted. And, please try to improve your command of the English language - which is poor. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:02, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Criticism has absolutely no basis

I came here for random reasons and looked up the sources of this page. I found the "criticism" section wanting. I am not myself a supporter of the Kumon system (afaik, there is no Kumon in my very country and the first time I heard of it was on Wikipedia). It puzzles me the need to introduce a criticism section at all costs: surely it is being done bona fide, that is, to offer different perspective on the issue. Nevertheless, I find it unsettling that criticism is voiced as "opinions of X and Y". So I went straight to the original soruce, i.e. the article criticising the system. It turns out that, despite NYT being an esteemed publication, Kate Zernike is just doing "bad journalism" -- that is, the kind of journalism based on the opinions of a couple of "experts" and a lot of emotional writing... such as criticism of the Kumon company based on the *way* the journalist felt when she entered the building? Is this fact or fiction? Let us dissect the arguments included in the NYT article: 1. Psychologists are interviewed, not Education specialists; 2. Gopnik (psychologist) is a Professor. To my knowledge, she has carried out no specific research on the Kumon system. So how comes she is regarded as a primary source? 3. Gopnik does not cite facts or figures, but just some kind of general "feeling" that the child is being overburdened. 4. Parents are accused of enrolling kids in the Kumon system because they are anxious, but instead we are faced by a series of parents who are very okay with what the kid is doing. The anxious ones, in the article, are the "psychologists". 5. Katy Hirsh-Pasek (another psychologist) claims Kumon is not beneficial, and yet she also claims "it does no harm". Is this criticism? Where are facts? "Einstein did not use flashcards" does not undermine the Kumon system. Bottom line: if you find me academic articles that undermine Kumon at its core, I am very happy to edit the criticism section. However, if the source of criticism is Zernike's article, I am afraid every rational NPOV human being would dispense of it immediately. As it stands, the section must go. MarcelloPapirio (talk) 18:50, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Plz add sim. Eng, ver.

add a simple English version plz. Tomiwa278 (talk) 21:21, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

This is a more appropriate addition to the Simple English project. Thanks for the note, though---I will create a page there when I have a moment, if nobody has gotten to it first. JeanLackE (talk) 20:31, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Kumon Method Logo.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:07, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Kumon Method of Tennis section

What does "Tennis" have to do with Kumon? I suspect it is a teaching term they use (although I can't find anything online) but this isn't explained in the section. 5.148.84.234 (talk) 10:17, 26 February 2023 (UTC)