Oooooooo - promising. It even includes both McHenry and RS4K! Thanks! Thanks - that is good to know!

Yea, we were using the Pre-Level 1 Chem. Even that was too much for her in 1st grade. I see now why SWB held that off until 3rd grade - not only to line up with history, but due to the fact that Chemistry is an abstract subject. I also find it very interesting that Gravitas altered the grades for the levels. It was my mistake! I'm looking at my Pre-Level Chemistry book and think we could get so much more out of it now - in 4th grade. It might be considered simplistic, maybe, but there is still plenty of meat and it would be meat that would be actually understood and retained. At least that is what I'm hoping! So maybe I should try it again. Spend a year or even 1.5 years in the Pre-Level topics before moving up. Hmmm..... On the Gravitas website, the information about the study folders made mention of "Lesson Plans". Maybe it is something new? Have you, or anyone, used the study folder? I saw that kit!!! I probably won't use the Pre-Level Biology or Physics for my eldest, but I might for my youngest. I wonder if it is worth it...... SIGH - I really, really love kits. Thanks!!!!!

Thanks! :o

This is totally off-topic, but why is there a star by my thread?

That is very cool, Julie! And very kind of you to share! But it sounds like Mr. Q is out for me. We don't have a tablet and I'm like some of the other posters - I need to have something in my hands. 900 pages is an awful lot to print and, knowing me, it would never get done. Hmmm. Is Ellen McHenry best left to higher grades or would it work in 4th? I'm finally learning that my eager desire to try a curriculum doesn't always quite yet match my daughter's abilities. That I need to be patient!!!! Where does Ellen fit in? I don't know why, but the page layout/type-setting for RSO really throws me for a visual loop. I've heard good things about it and I've also heard it is "light", but I can't get past the aesthetics. It reminds me of those swirly images that give you a headache after a while....too much on one page. It is probably a great program and I'm just weird. Sorry, I feel a bit all over the map with this decision. I'll check out other programs that were mentioned - thanks! I showed my daughter our old RS4K and she practically started salivating. Maybe I should just try it again......but I really, really, really love kits. Love them. Really love them. It's hopeful, though, if RS4K has lesson plans now. Anyone know? And has no one used Easy Classical? THANKS and DOUBLE THANKS!

Wow - all these recs for Mr. Q. I'll need to take a closer look at that. I've ruled out RSO and NOEO, I think. Hmmmm....maybe I should think about building my own kit to go along with whatever program..... I'm actually considering trying RS4K again - perhaps, at 4th grade, it will go over better. RS4K has lesson plans now, don't they?

I'll have to look into all of these. I forgot that Apologia might come out. But I really need it well-laid out and kits, kits are good. NOEO might work.... No one has used Easy Classical?

Hmmmmm, interesting. So why Mr. Q?

My eldest wants to do Chemistry next year. Per her words, she wants to make things explode. :tongue_smilie: I tried RS4K Chemistry in first grade and that was a total bust. Too abstract for that age - don't know what I was thinking. Also, I really need to have things spelled out for me and supplies on-hand or it just won't get done. Strange thing, though. My daughter STILL remembers the SINGLE experiment that I managed to complete with RS4K.....THREE years ago. Because it exploded. Ha! I've been using NL Science for the past two years with great results. We've really enjoyed it. I WAS going to continue on in the next level of NL, but my daughter REALLY wants to study Chemistry. NL 3 offers one unit in Chemistry, but I'm considering digging a bit deeper this year. SO, any recommendations? Here is what I am considering: Plan A: NL Level 3, Add Ellen McHenry's "The Elements" Plan B: Easy Classical Chemistry Plan C: ???????????????????? Has anyone used Easy Classical for Chemistry? I like the schedule, the books, and the kits....very tempting. Any reviews? If not EC or NL, then what is the BEST 4th-grade Chemistry out there????? I need a schedule! I need kits!! I need help. :lol: And things need to explode. Thanks in advance!!!!

Sorry! I'm so used to going to Rainbow Resource for these types of things that I didn't even think about the website. You even mentioned it earlier! I'll stop being lazy now and go look! :)

Oh my goodness, I'm so excited! I had given up on this thread as a lost cause for replies. Imagine my very pleasant surprise to see these responses!!! Thank you so much for taking the time! Wow, so it seems like a lot of busts, with a few positives. I'm still drawn to Writing Strands...I wonder....my daughter is very much the creative writer. She will sit down and spend an hour writing in her diary or will write a 10-page story. BUT, she will then malfunction when it comes time for narration or constructing paragraphs. Part of me wonders if Writing Strands could be a good fit. At the same time, I know structure is her weakness and need to build those skills up. It sounds like WS does eventually include expository writing, correct???? Ellie, do you know? Or should I find a program that focuses on structure? I'm concerned that something like IEW would not work and those ly words just bug me. By the way, my daughter will be in 4th grade. She is too young for WWS, I think. This year, we've been using the small lessons out of Rod & Staff and use narration/dictation with history and literature. Maybe I should use WWE 4 and the outlining in SOTW. But I'm still drawn to the creativity in WS. Any more thoughts on WS, folks? Thank you!!!!!

Bump :bigear:

I'm considering this for next year. I hear that it isn't formulaic, which is very attractive, and I think the simplicity and humor are right up my daughter's alley. BUT, I do hear mixed reviews. Can anyone tell me about Writing Strands? Also, does it teach outlining? If so, at what level? Thanks!!!!!

Ouch. Ours was 31% Math / 35% Reading vs. International. Only 17% Math / 27% Reading when compared to Singapore. We knew we lived in a non-desirable district, but ouch.

Thanks! That's really helpful! I might just have to give them a try next year....

I've been wondering this for a long time....Do the MBtP literature units discuss literary elements and terms or are they based more on comprehension?

Hmmm...well, I was once hiking in the mountains of Switzerland. The trail was situated on the side of the mountain, with a pasture on the steep slope beneath us. We came upon a herd of cattle and one enormous cow rested its head right on the path (again, very steep slope). I don't know what I was thinking, but I bent down to say hello to the cow. And the cow said hello to me. It straight up licked me from chin to hairline...over my lips, nose, eyes, everything! It was apparently a VERY friendly cow with a VERY large tongue. :ack2:

I'm a heretic too, then! :lol: We do the exact same thing. We are stretching GSWL over 2 years, 3rd and 4th grade, and do Latin only a couple days per week! Though I don't know where to go after this..... OP, GSWL is AWESOME. Effective, brilliant, non-intimidating. AWESOME. We have learned sooooo much. As we progress through the lessons, I'm constantly amazed that we can look at the sentences and actually understand them. My daughter just said to me yesterday, "Mom, I've really learned a lot in this book." Also, I saw on the website that Mr. Linney (the author) is creating a downloadable lecture series to follow GSWL. He uses an ancient book called The First Year of Latin. His lectures aren't complete yet, but here is the info in case anyone is interested: http://www.linneyslatinclass.com/

Yes, I think NL 2 would be a good fit, especially if you've already had a lot of exposure to life science. I'm actually using NL 2 for my 3rd grader. :001_smile: NL 1 is definitely just an intro to life sciences and many consider it basic...maybe even too basic. Personally, I DID find it simple, but to me, it was rather deceptively so. As basic as it seemed, my daughter learned a LOT of scientific vocabulary that she carries to this day. It was more systematic and concrete than I had realized and I'm now seeing the same thing with NL 2. The difficulty is stepping up with each level, but you'll probably find that it is simple to do with a 3rd grader. Don't let that fool you, though!

One thing - if you love the literature in Sonlight and Noeo, the folks at NL offer a literature list that coordinates with each lesson. They are very helpful and easy to contact. As far as the experiments, yea, that's a tough one. I add a bit here and there -for instance, we'll use some K'nex projects when we discuss machines and we'll dissect a frog when we get to that... But yea, NL is more activity-based rather than experiments. But yea again, the retention has been awesome. LOL - I'm not helping, am I?

I'll bite. I've never used Sonlight Science, so I can't say much there. I just notice that a lot of reviews for Sonlight mention a certain level of choppiness; that readings and experiments don't necessarily coincide. But I've never used it, so please take what I say with a grain of salt. As far as Nancy Larson is concerned...well, I adore it. I wanted a science program that was well organized and easy to teach and NL is certainly that. It is very systematic in the way that it presents topics. Please be aware that NL is scripted, whereas Sonlight is not. If you hate scripting, NL won't be for you. I'm one that loves the scripting as a guide and I feel free to vary from it when so desired, but I know that scripting is one of those "to each his own" things. Sonlight is literature-based, whereas NL is discussion/activity-based. There are a few living books in NL, but not like Sonlight. The program is not experiment-heavy, but rather uses hands-on exploration. You are kept active, but not with experiments per se. In NL 1, we raised butterflies and ladybugs, etc. In NL 2, we've played with water in its various physical states, played with magnets, will be dissecting an owl pellet, etc. We actually HAVE done some experiments with inclined planes and such in NL 2 and utilized the scientific method, but the program is definitely more exploration-oriented. This is another big difference between NL and Sonlight, as Sonlight has the weekly experiments with its Discover & Do DVDs....some folks seem to really love those. Anyway, my daughters are really enjoying NL and, better yet, are retaining SO MUCH. My eldest is constantly using her new science knowledge and vocabulary in real-life observations. The learning is definitely sticking and my girls are loving science.

Oh, I feel for you! I know that terror!!! If it makes you feel any better, we once lost our youngest daughter (then aged 2) at DISNEY WORLD. On a very crowded day. We walked from one end of Magic Kingdom to another, deciding which ride to go on next. In the middle of the discussion, we looked down and DD's seat was EMPTY. She had helped herself out of the stroller and we had no idea at what point in our walk we had lost her. I always thought I'd be the type to remain calm in that type of situation. But, no. I ran around, screaming like a banshee. Thankfully, the screaming worked and several people pointed me in the direction of a lonely-looking girl. We found her 500 feet away, crouching down and admiring a crack in the sidewalk. Apparently the strap on the Disney stroller broke. :glare:

Is that The Doctor's planet?

Bump :bigear:

Hmmmm - all food for thought. Thanks so far, everyone. This is tough! From what I'm hearing, I'm really tempted to hold onto my Rod & Staff. It is tried, true, and solid. However, you make good points, G5052. I don't want to confuse my girl. And, I do love the idea of help with writing via IEW. I also love the idea of having papers/projects due in a class format. I think accountability to someone else could be a great experience. What to do, what to do. LOL, cdrumm4448! Now I have that mantra in my head......"Adverbs are not your friend. Adverbs are not your friend!" I must say, this is one aspect of IEW I don't like. I recently asked an Essentials tutor if we would get in trouble if we dropped the "ly" word. They said no. And in TWTM, Susan herself gives permission to drop those "ly" words if choosing to use IEW. I feel free from adverbs! :lol: Any other experienced Essential folks want to way in? Thanks!