I understand the addiction to free books! (Or even those that cost a little. Or a lot. . .) What I want to know is this: are Glencoe texts incremental? When we started with K12, I noticed immediately that they introduce a concept, cover it for a unit, test on it, and then drop it for eternity, or so it seemed. That is devastating for a 4th grader--are they really going to remember how to add fractions when they studied it in September and don't see it again until assessments in April? Saxon shows it to them every day, or at least every week, for the entire course. They don't LET you forget concepts. Maybe some educators believe high schoolers are better able to retain information for a whole school year, but I'm pretty sure they are less retentive than I am, and I can't remember what I had for breakfast. So does Glencoe teach something and build on it, or do they teach concepts as individual units and never tie them together? Same questions apply here for Beecher/Peena/Bittinger Trig and Stewart Calculus, too. And on the California question, I want to know why everything causes cancer in California. Apparently lab rats in California are far more susceptible to every known/unknown toxin in the world. We are building a house, and it seems that every component we purchase wears a label that announces it is known to cause cancer in California. (Why not New Jersey? Or Oklahoma? Arkansas?)

When you figure out the Latin angle, let me know how to learn Logic before teaching it!

Eldest DS is entering PS after being homeschooled K-8. Our local school uses Glencoe Algebra 2, and Geometry. We have been extremely satisfied Saxon users. We started K12.com for DS's 5th grade year, and were sorely disappointed in their math program because it is NOT incremental. So all 4 kids have done K12 math AND Saxon each school year, using the K12 as somewhat of a review/overview. What should I expect with Glencoe? How about Stewart's Calculus? Bittinger Trigonometry? Thanks for any observations!

This program came out just when we finished FLL, and it was really a great next stage. . . Anyway, I ditched the dictation early on and use the daily vocab words for dictation. Maybe I shouldn't have done so, but I have 2 kids in the 6th grade level right now--one dd who can do everything in her sleep, and one ds who struggles with pencil allergy. I then have them read the lesson aloud, we do the practice problems, then usually the first half of the review set verbally. The last 15 problems are done independently.

Uses: Opening packaging on UPS boxes. Cutting string on hay bales (okay, probably not highly applicable in your environs). Losing/laundering (my experience is that the pocket knife is a big deal until the first change of jeans, then it becomes part of the detritus on top of the washing machine) Cleaning under the fingernails, depending on the blade--some are too pointed Whittling (good hand-eye coordination training as long as he is old enough to safely handle the knife--my kids all started whittling by age 7 or 8) Not acceptable uses: Carving furniture Whittling the cat Threatening friends and siblings Rules: If I see unsafe use, the pocket knife is mine for the rest of the day. If I see a second unsafe use, the pocket knife is mine for the rest of the week. And so on. Hope this is what you were looking for!

I've been a little disappointed with Red Herring Myteries in that they don't give you the information required to solve the mystery. That said, my eldest DS, 11, LOVES them. The others, ages 10, 9, and almost 8, think they are "okay." I also thought they were pricey. I always think that about the Critical Thinking books, though I admit we are Mind Bender junkies. Another suggestion is to check out your library's collection of . . . coming up blank here . . . who is the fifth grader who solves the crimes his dad, the police chief, encounters? Leroy Brown, Boy Detective? Each mystery is a few pages long--and each is self-contained so you can do one or five or whatever--and all the pertinent details are provided. Okay, what's the kid's name?!? It's not Leroy Brown. . . Help!! Also, we used some Building Thinking Skills books. Again, I think they are pricey--though cheaper than Mind Benders, per page! One student loved them and did them independently for fun. The other three couldn't have cared less.

Thanks, all! So I'll hold off on the formal logic until later. We've been using Anita Harnadek's Critical Thinking 1 as a read-aloud, discussion text. I have one student copy (used 1992 version, I think) and no teacher manual. We might be missing some of the answers without the tchr book. I had in mind that we would go through it again in a couple years in a more formal fashion and with the teacher manual. (It is already helping in the family setting--I overhear my kids squabbling and one will pipe up with: That's NOT a logical argument!) As for Fallacy Detective, etc, should I have a copy for each student or is it a share/read-aloud. Thanks again! You all have saved me a lot of money and a lot of hair! I've had a couple of Canon Press items before that got stowed in the back of the closet and never looked at again. (Anybody want to buy the 3rd grade history? Barely used!)

My big question is this: I'll be using it with 3 students at once (grades 4,5, and 6). Do they each need a student text or can we share? Do I need the teacher guide? The test booklet? Has anyone used both Canon and Memoria Press enough to compare them? What other questions should I be asking?

Anyone (else) out there sick of hearing about Kansas State Assessments? I was doing fine homeschooling without K12 before and if LVS loses accreditation, I'll be better for having known them but I won't shrivel up and die. In fact, I'm considering ditching K12/LVS for next year partly because of the assessment infatuation. Are the PS's like this, too, and I just don't hear about it? Thanks for letting me vent!

OH, AM I SO GLAD TO HEAR YOU ALL SAY THAT!!!!! My dc (grade 2-5) do cursive in their handwriting texts but print almost everything else. I write in a hybrid sort of print, so I figure they may, too. Gee, I love my dmil's Palmer style handwriting, but I've tried teaching it and--besides the fact that it is difficult to teach--I can't do it very well, either.

I think I've tried ALMOST every writing program. Well, okay, only 3 or 4. I guess I'm seeking that perfect, hands-off, teach-itself program. Apparently, we have to actually teach writing. My new thing: every day, I have each dc (grades 2-5) write a page on the same topic (youngest dictates to me). One day, they write about an animal, next day it's a favorite holiday, then a poem, etc. Then I sit with them individually for a couple minutes and go over grammar, vocabulary, punctuation, etc. It takes very little time. We also do Classical Writing's Aesop 2-3 days a week (when the weather is nice:)--more if it's yucky outside!) I sit all 4 dc at the table and we do 15-20 minutes of some or all: reviewing parts of speech, diagramming a couple sentences or checking out spellings of some of the words in the story, retelling/reading the story, re-writing, etc. I used the manual more or less as intended for a while then adapted it to my own taste.

Thoughts? Impressions? Ease of use? Stifling?

Ditto to the above. We are Catholic and tried R&S. I like the rigorous learning involved but the King James Bible version is not my cup of tea. When they ask you to unscramble a sentence with thee and thy, I can't always figure it out (maybe I'm a little slow but as an author with a doctorate, I kinda think I have a handle on the English language-- I just don't speak very fluent King James). I love FLL, haven't tried WWE but I am sorely tempted, even though I shucked out a lot of $ last year for Classical Writing. I am betting WWE is a lot more user-friendly for the teacher, if it's like FLL. One of my dd's wanted to try the R&S last year because it was on the shelf (collecting dust because of my previous experience) so we gave it a few weeks. She begged to return to FLL for Level 4. Theoretically, R&S could be a more independent book because the kids can read the lesson in their own book, unlike FLL where you have to have the teacher's manual. However, my experience was that they either couldn't or didn't want to read the lesson and do the lesson work independently.

I tried R&S briefly for lower grades but had already started with FLL and loved it. The thy and thou stuff in R&S confused my kids, especially when unscrambling sentences! That aside, I started using Saxon for 5th grade last year with 2 students and I love it. It is comprehensive, academically strenuous, and, like Saxon math programs, incremental. It is set up similarly to FLL, IMHO. One thing I didn't like was that it took a while to figure out how to use it. The teacher's aids are somewhat convoluted for a distracted mom. Once I got it sorted out, it worked okay. For example, I had a hard time finding the exams. I kept finding the corrected exams. A couple of tabs fixed the problem but it did take a while. The kids LOVE the stories where they have to fill in, say, an adjective, a collective noun, an adverb, etc. then read the finished version with their words in the story. Okay, I'm getting punch-drunk tired; I'll quit! Hope this helps!

It definitely gets more interesting when the fourth one hits the books, doesn't it?!? Fortunately, my now-2nd grader (youngest) is a very early riser. His parent-at-elbow courses (math, English, phonics) are usually finished by breakfast at 6:45. That means starting around 5:30am. Then he practices piano for a half hour while I'm helping others, finishes hovering-parent courses (spelling, penmanship), reads, plays with his tractors, does chores, etc. We use a pretty rigid schedule and have to stick to it. Science and history are all together (grades 2-5). I admit there isn't as much writing from any of them as I'd like in history and science. But I hope they are retaining the information, anyway. None of this is different than any of the other posters but I add it just to show that we're all kind of on a similar track. And I'm having several simultaneous conversations. Hope some of this makes sense!