I have a set of requirements for each subject. They are not time-bound, but content-bound (I do not require X amount of time to meet them, only X level of coverage and proficiency). With areas of special interest, my children typically self-regulate. So, I do not remove their time from their preferred activities, but they still have to meet the requirements for ALL areas. If that makes sense.

Yes. Practical arts (drawing / design, music lessons), modern languages, religious stuff, and even high level science for one child. If we reach a conclusion together that what they need to truly blossom is some kind of tutor oversight and help, and we have it available, we incorporate it too. I really got into outsourcing in the past two years, though. Prior to that, I was a model DIY mom, with only minimal and occasional outsourcing (e.g. drawing lessons). My life has become infinitely easier by outsourcing some areas (it still does not mean I am *inactive* and do not discuss it with DC, but the bulk of the responsibility and oversight is not on me) and, in many ways, it has enriched our homeschooling rather than crippled it.

We know quite a few classically educated people and those who are professionally into classical languages, and have a tradition of studying Latin in family / social circles / even country as a whole, etc. So, when you have such a situation, studying Latin is not only not particularly impressive since it is by many people considered a regular school subject on par with math, but you also end up faced with the same mild suspicion as when you teach math to your children without a professional background in the field. Saying that we study Latin has rarely, if ever, particularly impressed anyone, except if we specified just how far along we were. The only people who were truly impressed were those whom I allowed to check out my kids' knowledge for themselves. Most teachers I know do know Latin way beyond what they actually teach even if they do not have doctorates in the field. They teach at high school level what they themselves studied at high school level, but obviously they went on to specialize in it at university, which is a whole different level of approaching the language and literature. But good for you if you found a way for people to quit being suspicious. :D I will have probably stopped homeschooling by the time I find a perfect argument which makes them wow, LOL.

This is far from the standard practice, from what I know. Guests, of any kind, whatever kind of party it is, do not pay the cost of the party itself. It does not matter where it is held, the hosts are to provide for it - many teens we know have parties which do include restaurant bills, theatre tickets, or in some cases reserving entire facilities for the party (paintball facilities, hiring a private club for that evening, etc.) and the guests are never supposed to pay towards it. The entire cost of the party is on the host, always. It is actually against common etiquette to require from the guests to pay for anything. Even when our acquaintances reserved an entire club for their (older) teenage daughter's birthday, not only were the guests not paying the standard entrance fees (there was a list and they would enter for free), they were also not paying for anything they consumed, either (and the parents put a limit on drinks and provided for outside food), and they most certainly did not donate any money towards the reservation of the club, which was a hefty sum. If you cannot pay for it, you do not host it. As simple as that. You never assume your guests are going to pay. If you cannot afford ensuring all the cost of the party is covered for all guests, you set up for a more modest party which does not include going-outs, reserving facilities and whatnot. Ridiculous. I thought it was a common knowledge that a party like that is not an excuse to *get* things, but something where you principally *give*. Few people end up "profitting" for the parties they throw, because gifts are pretty symbolic at that stage amongst kids, so celebrating a birthday is always viewed as a financial investment, something where you will lose money. So in my mind it goes without saying that, yes, if I organize a party, I can do whatever I please, but the cost is on me. I would let my child attend and I would not mention anything to anyone, but personally, I would think the whole thing was arranged in extremely poor taste.

Reasonable, yes.

I would have flunked American colleges too, LOL. Thankfully, I grew up in a different academic tradition which until fairly recently actually emphasized knowledge, concrete knowledge, and not attendance / participation / homework points and other, in my mind, "kindergarten stuff". ETA: On a second thought, I am actually not sure, though, whether I would have flunked them. I had the ability to estimate what is in my interest and to satisfy some petty and silly requirements if they were in my interest as a student - and I actively teach my children the same, *not* allowing them any excuse for not satisfying the formal requirements. Because such is the world, and I find it a much more reasonable attitude to turn the system into your favor ("If you cannot fight them, join them." - or at least be okay with them by doing what you are required) than taking on the victimhood of "poor me, this is so stupid, why are they making me do that" (some smart kids I know have such attitudes and unfortunately, I do not see them very successful if they cannot satisfy the formal requirements too).

Oh, absolutely, but it is not only about the *subject* - it is about the *student*, too. People end up with less than stellar knowledge of Latin after having studied it for a while for same reasons why they end up with less than stellar knowledge of math, chemistry or art history - not everyone "clicks" with some fields, not everyone "clicks" with the dominant methods of teaching them, etc. Also, to reach a stage at which you read fluently and automatically texts which are lexically and syntactically complex takes a lot of time and sustained effort in any language. Most people after having studied French for the same amount of time cannot just open Maupassant and read with perfect comfort. It took my daughter a full year and a half of fairly intense study to be able to comfortably read French literature in original and to be able to switch to schooling in French, and she is a native Italian speaker with a lot of childhood exposure to French (which means she got an 80-90% "discount" when studying French). It simply does not happen overnight and if you duly put in an hour a day over a few years in high school, you will certainly end up with some knowledge, with good knowledge, but people tend to pose double standards when it comes to Latin and expect a level of comfort you would not expect in modern languages. And then you get complaints that Latin is abnormally difficult, that grammar-translation method "does not work" (sure it does, but it takes time, like any other sustained intellectual effort - no "shortcuts"), and alike. It is not abnormally difficult, but it is a subject studied for purposes of general education in high school, and expectations must be in line with that. Unless one has a particular interest in it, but then we are stepping out of the framework of "Latin for purposes of general education".

I get a "page not found". :confused:

My two regrets are music and French. If I had to start over, I would include those two from the beginning, and formally. And save classical languages for a few years down the road (starting about late elementary, not earlier).

I have not found this to be true. Students of modern languages struggle just as much to decode syntactically or lexically complex literature. "Decoding" of Latin *stops* at some point, one gets into the flow - the reason why students continue to translate as an exercise is because the art of translation in and of itself is one of the objectives of the study, not because they 'need' it to figure out the text. At some point, you get the text, but you still experiment with ways of rendering it artistically and as faithfully as possible in another language. True, Latin lacks an active component, but with modern foreign languages it is not significantly easier if you tackle older / classical literature and attempt to translate it or understand it linguistically on its own terms. It is often very far removed from modern colloquial language which you learn for practical purposes.

LOL, true! A friend with a doctorate in Latin: "Wait. *YOU* are teaching them Latin?" EM: "Well... yes." Friend: "Okay, okay, I get, they learn at home *with* you around, but you do not mean that you are their main source of Latin?" EM: "Uhm... yes." Friend: "But you said they get privately tutored for some subjects." EM: "True, but not Latin." Friend: "So how far did they come? I imagine they are on syntax already, right?" EM: "Well... past syntax... you know, we started young... so it is all literature now." Friend: "In other words... you presume to know Latin if you are teaching them past morphosyntax?" EM: *blush* Friend: :lol::lol::lol: "Ester, Ester... Your self-confidence has always been charming... scary charming sometimes." *change of topic* :glare:

... So, that being said, why on Earth would one be impressed by those cold regions in which classical and humanities education as we know it in Southern / Western / Central Europe is basically unheard of? I would never subject my child to such a system, because I view education primarily as a transmission of culture, and no PISA results in the world would make me view such an education favorably. Besides, I find the "homey" atmosphere of those schools creepy. What is romantic about a youth without cutting school not to be interrogated and making up excuses for absences, without arguing with professors, without sabotaging exams, without passionate discussions... Like, they take all the fun out of it and make it so calm and sterile and all "child-friendly" and all... blah. Not cool. :D

:lol:

Grammar is typically covered over 3 years on a middle school level, over 2 years on a high school level, and over a single year in post-secondary education. The first year after the grammar is "done", however, typically syntax is revised and broadened again, in the context of texts you study, and then you only have metrics to do when you get to poetry. After the grammar is covered, do a yearly grammar exam to make the kids revise it occasionally.

Roma, -ae, f. Don't forget the gender.

But it is a part of the vicious cycle. There is not a lot of free time *because* kids are babied into being at schools all days long *because* schools are not "business, academics only", but fill time in other ways too. Normally grade school kids should have school half days anyway, and by the time you reach full days, i.e. high school, absence tracking should end anyway and teens should be allowed some flexibility as to attendances. In my little bubble :tongue_smilie:, but it was not very far away from that when I was a child. If we eliminated non-academic stuff from schools (barring minimal breaks, one longer recess and making sure each class is about 10-15 minutes longer than what it should be to allow for tardiness / chit chat / revision / a bit of downtime because one cannot keep one's concentration on the raw material for so long, etc.), the school day would be significantly shorter.

From my perspective, you are not. :) The reasonable degree of involvement would be to ensure that physical violence between children is stopped if it happens, that the child receives medical help if they need, stuff like that - extreme. In my eyes, you are not responsible *at all* for the social dynamics between children (it is a problem to address on PTA and ask parents to talk to their kids about subtle forms of bullying, etc., but it is NOT your job to babysit kids on recess and micromanage their interactions), you are not responsible *at all* for whether they eat or they do not and what do they eat (and I would never dare to call you on it as a teacher - it is between me and my child), and so forth. The only thing I, a parent, am asking of you to ensure are academics and academic honesty as to the evaluation. That is all. Really. Now, in your concrete example, a private school which is if I understand well also a parochial school, and which as thus has some additional values / lifestyle to teach and parents obviously agree to that, there will probably be a greater degree of involvement. But in public schools? Nope. You do the academics and intervene only in extreme cases outside of that sphere, we the parents should deal with the rest. I do not even think you should ensure my child is physically present there in the upper years - I find the practice of tracing absences ridiculous on a high school level. Kids have to grow up and own their education, rather than be controlled all the time. I can - I went to such a school. It was fine. Really. :) Children ate what their parents sent with them, or they did not eat at all, or they bought whatever they wanted before school... And nobody really cared. Allergies and such were to be dealt with between the parent and the child, rather than dumping the responsibility onto the teachers, and *most* issues were handled that way, leaving them up to parents' discretion. It is not that you are "letting" a child something you cannot "let" other child - their parents made that decision, not you. As long as those are not illegal substances, of course.

Sorry, was typing quickly, I meant to include parenthesis with "I know this is not what you said". I was not trying to impute it to you, I am sorry if it ended up that way. :) I sort of get irked (but that is my problem, on my side of the fence, not your problem :)) when I see the identification of atypical intellect with a particular disposition / personality, which I thought your post did in a way (but perhaps I was wrong). I am the dummy of our family, but even I am reasonably smart - and an extrovert. My husband is one of the sharpest minds I know. And a very normal, down to Earth, well-adjusted guy. Quite organized too, not like your typical scientist stereotype. One of our daughters would most likely qualify as profoundly gifted, although I am loath to drag her to psychologists to have it confirmed because I am firm about keeping my children very AWAY from them. She most definitely does not have social challenges and had only minor ones as a child. I always strictly separated her character issues from her academic issues and never justified one with the other nor romanticized her problems with self-control (MUCH better now!) as a side-effect of giftedness nor anything. I know a LOT of people who are IMO doing a disservice to their very smart children by doing exactly that. Our other daughter is very bright. And a social butterfly who, while she values her time on her own, is actually really good with people. Both my older daughters have a lot of common sense, warm and energetic temperaments, and most definitely do not fit any stereotype about poor, misunderstood, depressed and awkward gifted kids. They know their manners and are not one of those obnoxious smartish kids who cannot shut up about their interests or who moralize to other people. They have skills in relating to people of not only different intellect levels, but also from different cultures and backgrounds. They are really not withdrawn weirdoes and I know many talented individuals who are very far from that stereotype, which is why it always sort of irks me when I feel somebody is identifying intellectual gifts with a particular personality. It is really two different issues, not every gifted child will have all those stereotypical problems.

Just curious - do you have to use them? Your kids are young, presumably you would know the material anyway, why not just order books and workbooks? And why can you order only a set of five workbooks? :confused: It sounds so complicated. Is it because they are treating you as a school and would normally not sell to individuals?

Nope, my tradition is with genitive second, actually. :) It is when it comes to verbs where I actually prefer a different tradition. Our way of classifying verbs is (1) first person singular indicative present active, (2) second person singular indicative present active, (3) first person singular indicative perfect active, (4) active / first supine, (5) infinitive present active. So we actually say laudo, laudas, laudavi, laudatum, laudare. Too long-winded and pointless IMO - I prefer your way of doing it with laudo, laudare, laudavi, laudatum.

No.

Of course. :) No need to feel terrible about it. I am very much against craftsy stuff as a part of school. It is a hobby. On the other hand, I am *pro* offering a technical arts education (focus on technique and skill, not "personal expression" - in a sense of actually systematically learning to draw as opposed to random creative projects). But costumes and acting out and coloring pages and time fillers of the kind, nope. Not as a part of school.

Yes, it is enough, and no, there is no need for projects of the kind they do in PS to meet your educational goals. I do not do them. At all. I do "business", strictly academics, no costumes anything and no presentations of that type. Research and presentations, yes, but in a more serious vein and at an older age. Generations of kids grew up without those types of activities and were educated just fine.

Relax. Continue doing what you are doing, with genitive second, that is more cool. :D They will be able to switch if needed. Just like they will be able to use a different pronunciation if needed. Those are minor issues. You just make sure they know Latin, as one who knows can easily adapt to a different classification of things.

But what is 150€ worthy there?! What can possibly justify that price?! :confused: This is the most insane thing I read today and I cannot figure out what is possibly 150€ worthy in one teacher's manual. If they had golden edges maybe. Geeeez.