Well, we're partly there. We've managed a letter from some parents, and we're having a meeting. I'm trying to prepare for the meeting now, hence this thread. It really is a matter of picking battles, though. *sigh*

Sorry, wrong word choice. REQUIRE uniform pants for girls. They're not giving them to them. They're requiring that the girls purchase specific uniform pants, but the boys don't have to. These pants are, at best, double the cost of what I normally buy for my kids (boys or girls).

What would you say to a school that decided to give uniform pants to the girls, but not the boys?

A 7 year old simply can't be THAT "far behind" unless there are significant developmental delays. I mean, really, its SEVEN. Testing for schools around here is always scheduled in advance. I would, at the least, ask for a re-test and question why they would even do that in the first place!

Yep. That would do it. Followed by fittings and reorders, 'cause you know that even with measurements, not everything comes out right. And this would have to be done well in advance of school. And with checks and reorders during the school to account for growing children. The school would essentially be controlling the child's wardrobe! (Yuck!) And that really underscores what the focus, is doesn't it?

Y'all are bringing great comments and thoughts here! Yeah, it's about modesty, but that's a can of worms I can't deal with right now. Right now, I'm just looking for a dress code that's objective, enforceable, and fair. I don't care if their standards on modesty are different than mine, just as long as it's applied across the board.

I agree that too much time is spend worrying about clothing choices, but for this particular school, they're making progress (from the dark ages...20 years ago!). So, yeah, modesty is the school's concern. But for the parents, the concern is an enforceable dress code that (1) does not delve into pettiness because even the teachers can't agree on what is "too tight", and (2) doesn't outrageously target the girls and ignore the boys. Nearly all the parents have no problem with a requirement that excludes leggings or skin tight clothing. They have no problems with the "loose-fitting" pants. They do have problems with the application and enforcement of these rules because there are no objective standards and it is being unfairly applied. Breaking out the ruler may be "icky" to some, but it's better than a widely subjective view. Uniform pants are not off the table...as long as both girls and boys are required to wear uniform pants. I like the idea of minimum inseams.

Only to a degree. You can buy uniform pants that still fit skin tight (not acceptable for this school) and skirts/shorts that are too short (again, not acceptable). If a school has some kids that are wearing pants where they looked like they're "poured into" them, and the school wants to avoid that, I don't see how having a uniform solves that problem.

Not for your home school, LOL, but for a private school. The dress code should equally applies to girls and boys. How would you implement this? How do you objectively identify what is allowed vs not allowed? Simply saying that clothes should be modest and that pants/slacks should not too tight and skirts/shorts should not be too short is wayyyy to subjective and depends on individual interpretation! How do you make an objective dress code and enforce it? The skirts/shorts would not be much of an issue, from what I can see. Simple measurements. So many inches above the knee or below fingertips or something like that. It might be harder for some students to find clothes that adhere to the standards, but at least it's objective. But how do you objectively identify pants/slacks that are too tight? And who should enforce the dress code? All teachers? Is it okay for a male teacher to call out a girl for violating the dress code? Is it okay for a female teacher to call out a boy for violating the dress code? (FTR, this is not about modesty. It is about setting standards that can be objectively upheld with minimal personal bias affecting what is allowed/not allowed.)

Another vote for yes!

For my 7th grader this year, his schooling is almost exclusively through our co-op. (I LOVE my co-op!) However, the pre-algebra class that I signed him up for might not make. I may have to teach him myself (not a good option with everything else I've got going on) or there's a slight possibility that dh could teach him. But I'm wondering if he completed Khan Academy pre-algebra, would he be prepared to go into a more traditional Algebra 1 curriculum next year? I really like Khan Academy, it is the only video-based material that I've good results with... but I've only used it as supplemental, not primary. Anyone used Khan Academy as their primary math curriculum? Yay or nay?

Here's an article that I found very interesting: The Myth Of The Good Cop I think he brings out some very good points and really underscores how the problem of police aggression is more than just "bad apples."

But isn't that what the guy in Minnesota did? And he still got shot!

Tragedies like these actually encourage more gun ownership, IMO. To many people, they indicate that police cannot be trusted, so therefore, you can't depend on them. You have to be willing to protect yourself. Couple this with perceived "gun grabbing" actions by politicians, and many people respond with an attitude of "OMG! They really ARE trying to oppress us! I'd better get me a gun so I can protect myself and my family before I don't have the chance!" The entire justice and legal system is screwed up, but one place to start would be to properly train police to police (and not act like soldiers in enemy territory) and establish proper checks and balances to weed out and prevent "bad apples."

Do not assume this. Logically, yes, but the justice system does not work like that. I'm sorry. It really stinks that things work like this, and maybe your situation will be resolved quicker and cheaper, but be prepared for this to drag on for months and for him to have spend money to keep from having a DUI on his record.

Probably need a lawyer. Short story: my sis was arrested for DUI, and she hadn't been drinking. I've seen the dash cam video from the police. There was no reason at. all. to stop her. She was a single female driving alone (to home) around 2a.m. The cop was on a power trip. That is the only thing I can think of that justified his actions. There was no reason to charge her for DUI. None. She eventually did get out of it, but it cost her tons of $$ because of all the court and lawyer costs. After I watched the dash cam and went to court with her, I lost all trust in the justice system. Forget about innocent until proven guilty. It's all about how much money they can get people to pay.

I would be flattered if someone admired a plant in my yard and asked for a start. I would happily give it to them, no matter whether they were a stranger or a friend. On the other hand, I would be way too self-conscious and awkward to ever ask a stranger for one. MAYBE an acquaintance, depending on how/how long I knew them.

For my dd's birthday this year, we did a fandom mash-up scavenger hunt. They had to collect the items to use to make their crafts. We did a total of five crafts (which may have been a bit much...it was chaotic and we only ended up with four girls!). Each craft was for a different fandom. We have a large, wooded backyard, so I raked paths through the trees and turned it into "Fandom Forest." They had to follow the clues to find the items....The only open area became the Quidditch field (to find the ball to make a snitch)....The tree house became Mount Olympus to find something for a Percy Jackson craft....and so on. Not sure that's what you're looking for, but maybe it gives you some ideas.

Yes, I deal with that, too. I use an air purifier or fan for white noise, too, but again, earbuds is what I use mostly, with some music I like, depending on what mood I'm in. I also downloaded an app for rain sounds onto my phone. Love that for soothing sounds! There are all kinds of apps for calming sounds: rain, waterfall, ocean, forest...you name it!.

Sounds like normal life to me, too. And it can be h3ll. But, like you, it's my life and my kids, and I'm not trading it for something else! So this is what I've found over the years that works for me (six kids, btw). Sending them to their rooms to play or read. Using television/devices as babysitters. I have no guilt at. all. telling them to play games on their Kindles or watch a show so I can have some down time. Sending them to their rooms to read or play is something I do daily, but it's not as captivating as screens, so if I'm desperate (which happens A LOT) I tell them to go to their rooms, and I allow them to take their Kindles with them. Wireless bluetooth earbuds so I can tune them out (somewhat, LOL). Sending them o.u.t.s.i.d.e. Long, hot baths at the end of the day while letting dh take care of things. Occasional times out for just me. I go to an event twice monthly that I do not take anyone (no kids, no dh) with me. It is very helpful in allowing me to recharge. I stopped feeling guilty for doing things for myself. It is necessary for my health to have times alone and times to recharge. It is necessary for my family for me to focus on me. HTH

We always use aluminum foil with our panini press. I honestly don't even know if the plates are removable or not, cause I've never even tried. We use ours for quesadillas as well as sandwiches. The quesadillas get messy, but it's so easy to just swap out the foil in the middle of a batch. It makes it so much easier to cook and clean up.

Let me just add this: the Chromebooks are amazingly sturdy! I've never had a laptop be able to handle this kind of treatment! It's goes back to it being more like a tablet...it doesn't have all the extra parts that laptops or desktops have. Since it's built and operates more like a tablet, it is more portable and less sensitive to movement. The kids have an old desktop to do their reports and schoolwork on, but when that desktop dies, they will get a Chromebook to use for school. (This one is mine! They can't have it! :tongue_smilie: ) One other catch: make sure that you can set your printer up wirelessly to Google print. If you can't, there's ways around it, but it just makes life so much easier!

I second the Chromebook. I have an acer that was less than $200 when I bought it. It's nothing fancy, not a touchscreen. BUT it's been amazing. It runs much faster than any laptop I've had. I don't have to worry about viruses, etc. My dd even spilled water on it, and after drying it out, it's still working! The catches: It's a glorified tablet w/ a keyboard. Everything runs off apps, so you can't just download a program onto it. For kids, shouldn't be a problem. For me, it's not a problem. I can manage a blog, type reports, make charts....everything I need to do, I can do on my Chromebook through Google Docs, Sheets and Slides or other apps or web-based programs. Just keep this in mind if you need it to run or install a specific program.

Personally, I don't think it's the amount of minimum wage that's the problem. It's corporations that don't care about their employees, only their shareholders and the "royalty" at the top of the chain. It's shown in how they treat their employees, not it what they say. They offer minimum wage entry, with "competitive wages" and "regular raises." However, the competitive wages means that the person with a BA in accounting will never be hired to handle the accounting for a business that literally moves thousands of dollars per day. Instead, they hire a high school graduate with no experience and so they can pay minimum wage. Their regular raises consist of .05/hr per 6 months. They do not train their entry-level employees. They expect them to learn on the job...which is not necessarily bad, but when the person, who is dependable and hard working, makes a single mistake, they are fired....because that's the rules. The management of the actual store has to fight their own company to keep this person employed. The entry-level person who quickly works their way up gets NO compensation. None. The bagger that moves to cashier is paid the same. That same bagger, who moves into supervisor position, still gets paid the same as she was making as a bagger. But you sure get more responsibilities and headaches! So in three years, the person who worked their way up from part-time to full-time, from entry level to supervisor, will only make $.30/hr more than when they started. IF you can survive six years of ridiculous rules and policies, then your pay does go up (almost double, I believe), but there is still NO security. If you miss-step against one rule, one time, you are out the door and out of luck. It doesn't matter how dependable or hard working or how well you did your job. I've seen this first hand with at least two large corporations. They like to talk about how much they care for their employees and how important they are...but their actions are in direct contrast to that. It is very clear that they ONLY care about their shareholders. Even their customers warrant little concern...again, it is only as far as it pays the paychecks of the royalty. There is much more I could say about the policies of large corporations, but it's just more of the same: They treat their employees like slaves, giving them only what is absolutely required and then boast about how well they treat them. Blech. All that to say that I personally believe that biggest problem is not the amount of minimum wage, but the policies of large corporations. There are a few out there that have more ethical policies and actually DO take care of their employees....but they are the exception, not the rule.

This is good. And Adam has a long history of this exact thing.