I usually just start the next book, but sometimes, if we finished faster than expected, I use the "extra" time to do the math supplements I always mean to get to but never seem to find time for. But in general I don't match up any of our programs with the school year. Wrt "pushing them along too quickly": on the one side, I've found that we slowed down quite a bit in upper elementary, once we hit serious fractions and multi-digit divisors and other problems that have a lot of moving parts, so to speak. It just takes longer to work the problems, and it has taken dd11 more time to master the concepts and procedures. All that adds up to more time spent on a given level. So moving along fast in the earlier years doesn't mean you'll keep that pace all the way through. But on the other side, there's more to do in math, even arithmetic, than to just speed through a standard program. Finishing up your main program "early" gives you time to go deeper and farther, or to do more playing around with math, or to work on side topics.

Institute for Excellence in Writing. Here's a link to the poetry memorization: http://iew.com/shop/products/linguistic-development-through-poetry-memorization-teachers-manual-cds

This was a timely thread bump for me. I've just been thinking that my quest to learn to enjoy poetry has stalled. I got from "why a poem when prose is so much better?" to appreciating the *sounds* of poetry through nursery rhymes and children's poems. Nursery rhymes and poems for kids were way more accessible and, oh, "obvious" in their use of poetry elements (both sounds and images) than the Very Great Poems I attempted to study in AP English. I had sort of thought you identified rhyme and rhythm through marking up the rhyme scheme and stress pattern - the idea you could just *hear* it through reading it aloud without having to figure out what you were supposed to hear first was a revelation to me. (Also the importance of reading poetry aloud was a new thing.) Nursery rhymes are especially fun because because you can really get a nice sing-song rhythm going, and unlike with "serious" poems, it's totally ok to do that the nursery rhymes :thumbup:. And it really helps in learning to hear what's going on in poetry - plus it's just plain fun ;). And poetry for young kids also has pretty "obvious" images - it's relatively easy to understand. And so much of it is just plain silly, ridiculous fun with words - and the sort of fun that you can appreciate without having to think and re-think, and the sort of fun that's enhanced and not ruined by exaggerating the sounds and images. In addition to nursery rhymes, my kids and I really enjoy Edward Lear and T.S. Eliot's Book of Practical Cats - it's easy to feel the rhythm of the words and it's so fun to say, plus the meaning is fun and not terribly hard to grasp. But I've not managed to move beyond fun kids' poems. Especially I've not been able to appreciate the imagery of poems - still feels like an overly complex circumlocution instead of, you know, just *saying* what you mean ;). I've given myself permission to just read poems aloud and enjoy the rhythm and not bother to try to figure out the meaning (appreciating 50% is better than appreciating 0%), but mostly I just haven't been seeking out poems. But in this thread I read most of the poems people posted, and I did enjoy them :). I really appreciated both of these :).

I love Brave New World - lots of great things to discuss. There is sexual content, though - it's not terribly explicit, but is intentionally disturbing - it's plot-relevant, though (might be worth pre-reading). Turning sex into a meaningless-yet-'healthy' way of having fun is part and parcel of the dystopia - one with disturbingly relevant parallels to how our culture treats sex. I definitely plan on studying it with my kids when they are in high school. Eta: I have not read Walden Two, but reading a description, I can see how they'd complement each other. They are both envisioning the same sort of world, but Walden Two portrays it as a utopia, while Brave New World portrays it as a dystopia.

I'm LCMS (aka Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod). We're theologically conservative, but not fundamentalist. The pp is right that in the 60s/70s era there was something of a fundamentalist borrowing/influence in the LCMS, particularly wrt the inerrancy of Scripture, and in some places that might have held over to today. (Not in any churches I've attended, though.) Interestingly, today the most theologically conservative LCMS churches are actually going to be the ones with the *least* fundamentalist influence. That's because theologically conservative in the LCMS means holding to the Lutheran Confessions, and there are some major, major differences between Lutheran theology and fundamentalism. I mean, *huge*. And so the people/churches who borrowed most from fundamentalism/evangelicalism were the people who were *least* interested in being Lutheran, the least theologically conservative in a Lutheran sense. Even so, most of the borrowing I know of wasn't of the hellfire and brimstone variety. Generally speaking, I'd say a Lutheran Church ought to be a good bet - our theology is very grace-focused, and there's not a history of hell and brimstone style preaching or legalism (our bugaboo is usually trying to avoid falling off the antinomian side of the road). Individual churches do vary, but I think the Lutheran church would be a good one to try. Here's a link to a sermon by a Lutheran pastor that might be helpful for your friend: The Gospel for those broken by the Church. There's video, audio, and a transcript, all free: https://www.1517legacy.com/1517blog/rodrosenbladt/2014/02/the-gospel-for-those-broken-by-the-church

Given that I am not trying to hide my history nor do I care if dh sees my history, nevertheless, to me there's a difference between *dh seeing my history in the course of doing something else, *dh looking up my history in order to find something he has standing permission to find, *dh looking up my history to see what I've been doing (whether he's curious for good reasons or bad, whether he's doing it out of idle interest or very pointed interest). It's just weird and off-putting to me when people deliberately seek out information about you without your involvement. For most things, if a person wants to know, they just ought to *ask*. Also, when it comes to opening computer files (not just seeing the name in a history), some of what I write and store on my computer *is* private. I don't care if dh knows that I am writing in my private journal, but that doesn't mean I want him *reading* my private journal. Not because I'm ashamed of it or because it would be horrible if he saw it, but because it's *private* - stuff I am thinking about or musing about that isn't prettied up for outside consumption. It's not *bad*, but it's not meant for outside eyes, either. But I do understand dh not treating my school assignments with the same assumption of privacy that he would treat my private journal. Still expect him to ask first, although I would understand him not realizing that asking mattered to me in that instance. I'd educate him otherwise, though ;).

That's a little different to me, as I don't consider the websites dh visits to be private the way I consider his actual personally generated content to be private. If an interesting-looking site popped up in the search history, I'd have no qualms about following it. It wouldn't even have to be if I was checking the history in purpose - because there are plenty of sites I get to solely through the search history (because I'm too lazy to bookmark them), so in looking for them, I'd naturally see what other sites had been gone to.

I'd feel a little weird it - something about the looking up my file without asking thing. Which is a bit odd, because if I'd just left a printed version laying around, I wouldn't care if dh picked it up and read it. I mean, I wouldn't write anything for public consumption that I wouldn't want dh to read. Seeing it in a history and then opening it up to read it isn't *that* far off seeing it laying around the house and reading it. But idk, I guess there's something about actually opening up my file without asking that seems a little invasive. Even though a school assignment isn't anything private. Idk, my feelings are complicated here, and maybe a little non-sensical, idk. I would have no problem with dh reading my assignment, but I'd feel weird about him reading it without asking. I'd have no problem with him poking around my computer files, but I want him to ask first. I guess I see my computer files as *mine*, and while there's the presumption that I'd allow dh to see whatever if he wanted to, I also have the presumption that he'd *ask* first, even though the answer's an almost guaranteed yes - I wouldn't say no without a particular reason. Fwiw, asking first matters to me, even though it's mostly just pro forma, since we both expect that the default answer would be yes.

Here's the thread: http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/632510-wwyd-if-your-spouse-wants-to-bicycle-from-buffalo-to-albany-in-december-update-post-185/page-4?do=findComment&comment=7366268 There's an update on post 185.

Also, my experience is that addictive coping techniques can take on a life of their own - that even when the reason for seeking out those things goes away, the habit of excessively seeking out the coping method can still remain. Especially when the chosen form of self-medication is addictive in its own right. Then you've got two problems: the original problem, and the addictive self-medicating.

Fwiw, fiction reading (which has been an addiction of sorts for me) is still my main means of relaxation. I haven't tried to find something to *replace* it - rather, I've focused on defining the appropriate place in the day for relaxation, to keep relaxation reading from taking over every free minute (and not-free minute) of the day. And I've tried to make sure I have enough good non-relaxation things to do to fill my non-relaxation parts of the day. Which is to say, all those good things like exercise and non-Minecraft hobbies and such - maybe don't treat them as a *replacement* for Minecraft, but as *additions*. Figure out what sorts of things might lessen or reverse the brain changes associated with excess screen use, and *add* one or two to his life. Don't expect it to replace Minecraft in his life as a source of joy, but instead treat it as a part of a well-rounded life. Hopefully those things have some intrinsic value they add to life, so they are worthwhile in themselves, as well as worthwhile in counteracting the side effects of excessive tech use. Even if he never loves them as much as Minecraft, he can still enjoy them as part of life. I like the forms of exercise I do, even though, no, they don't bring me as much joy as reading and probably never will. It's why I still read. But I do better at life, and at keeping relaxation reading in its proper spot, when I also exercise. You might be right you've let the genie out of the bottle wrt tech use, and Minecraft is always going to be his favorite thing ever, but I do think it's possible to carve out spots for the other things of life, and build up the habits of a well-rounded life in those spots. And to keep carving out more Minecraft-free areas until all the necessary parts of life have a spot. And eventually to learn to keep Minecraft for leisure time, and keep leisure time to a particular part of the day, instead of Minecraft/leisure time taking up every spare (and not-spare) minute. That last one might require going cold turkey, but then at least you've have already built up most of the habits of a well-rounded life, so he'd have quite a few alternate coping skills available. Eta: it may be that literally no step of the process in building up a non-Minecraft life is possible for him so long as he is still using Minecraft - that a cold turkey detox is necessary in order to get anywhere. Certainly a cold turkey detox combined with impatient treatment where every part of the day is structured would provide good things to fill the hole left by the lack of mine craft. But if you aren't ready for cold turkey, then I think it's worth trying to carve out non-Minecraft spots and fill them with good things that will hopefully provide a foundation for carving out some more non-Minecraft spots and filling them with more good things, until either the problem is solved or you hit a wall that you can't get past.

In my early 20s, I did trigger a major, years-long depression when I (voluntarily) gave up for Lent what turned out to be my chief means of self-medicating (escapist fiction reading). I had this pie-in-the-sky idea that I'd magically replace it with the good things that I'd always meant to do but never somehow got around to because I was too busy with my addictive reading (things like Bible reading and exercise and not procrastinating on my schoolwork). What actually happened was that I gave up my main means of dealing with life (not that it was a great way of dealing, but it turns out it *was* a way of dealing), with no coping skills but sheer blind optimism to replace it with. Naturally, I gravitated to a worse way of dealing (mindless TV watching, and not alcohol, thank God - since that was the semester I turned 21, I could have developed a much worse addiction than the escapist fiction reading one I was attempted to give up). The mindless TV watching wasn't sufficient to occupy me, and I fell hard. Giving up my main means of dealing with life without anything to replace it was, in retrospect, a very bad plan. However, it wasn't like my life was going all that well beforehand - I was only *just* managing to get the bare minimum responsibilities done - the reading was increasingly taking over my life as it was. It needed to be dealt with - it's just that cold-turkey with nothing concrete to replace it with was not a very good way of dealing with it. What I hadn't realized at the time was that my addictive reading habit was a form of self-medication (giving my mind something to focus on) as well as the main obstacle in my getting the tasks of life done. When I gave it up for Lent, I thought I was giving up my main obstacle to doing what I needed to do, but it turns out I was also giving up my main source of mental stimulation. Yes, in theory I could have replaced it with other, higher-quality sources of mental stimulation - which was my goal in giving it up in the first place - but in practice all my habits were oriented around seeking out the *easiest* form of mental stimulation that did the job. And when I removed the reading, I - true to my habits - defaulted to an even *easier* (and lower-quality) form of mental stimulation (TV), only it wasn't sufficient to the task. Anyway, all that to say that I *don't* think allowing more and more Minecraft is the answer - having unlimited reading access didn't do me any favors but just allowed reading to crowd out even more of life. I do think it's extremely hard to form new, good habits without first creating a space free of the old, bad habits. But at the same time, it takes a lot more than the mere *absence* of a bad habit to develop good habits. You have to *use* that space - fill it with *good* things, build up *good* habits. Otherwise it's just an empty hole. I'm not surprised he falls and falls fast when he's faced with a giant gaping hole, one that he doesn't have the wherewithal to fill in any way but with Minecraft, when he's deprived on Minecraft. I agree with Carol that it's important to figure out what a good life ought to look like, what things it ought to include, and how Minecraft could fit into that life. Then use those Minecraft-free spaces you carve out to build up the elements of a good, healthy life. Once you can get that virtuous cycle going, then it will start to take on a momentum of its own. But it's hard to begin the cycle :grouphug:. The healthier I get, the less I feel the urge to escape in reading, and the more I can resist the siren call of escapist fiction when giving in would interfere with life. (In fact, feeling the constant tug to read, read, read instead of anything else is an early sign that my mental health is dropping.) When I drop back into a depressive hole (as I unfortunately do semi-regularly, I worry I've permanently damaged my mental health), I climb back out by adding the one or two things that have the biggest bang for the buck, the things that will give me enough energy and health to add other things in. For better or worse, I don't go cold turkey, but I carve out a few spaces, fill them with the very best things, and then use that to bootstrap my way into carving out a few more spaces and adding a few more good things, and so and and so forth, until the virtuous cycle has enough momentum to pull me along into less reading and more other things without my having to climb and claw at it. (Honestly, I rarely get to that point before falling again, but I'm trying. I have a very bad habit of celebrating the start of the virtuous cycle having enough momentum to keep going on its own by quitting doing everything that feeds the virtuous cycle.) For me that's Bible reading, exercise, and sleep - that's where I start. Hugs and prayers. I was and am a very frustrating person when I'm in the middle of falling down the depressive hole and want nothing more than to ignore it by constant addictive reading. I don't want to get better, not if it means having to do something harder and less immediately enjoyable than reading 24/7. I fell and fell hard because of that - lost a lot of my 20s to that - but God and my family didn't give up on me, and here in my 30s I'm climbing out of it.

With #3, I had everything I needed already, so the two things I treated myself to were a portable diaper changing pad with room for diapers and wipes, and a nice ring sling. I already had an ergo - which I love - but I didn't use that till my babies were holding their heads up, and I wanted something to use with a small baby. Plus the sling folded into a diaper bag, which my ergo didn't really do. I got a lot of use out of both of them.

We don't really have a junk *drawer*, per se - some of our drawers are kind of messy, but only the things that live there go into them - they don't collect random junk. What we do have is a shelf of horribleness :lol:. (Actually, we have a couple - one is the full-fledged shelf of horribleness; another, not-quite-as-bad-one is the shelf of semi-horribleness (yes, that is actually what I call it).). I cleaned out the original shelf of horribleness a few years back, and with furniture rearranging (and kids growing older) it was no longer a convenient resting to put whatever, especially whatevers that we didn't want toddlers getting into. But others grew up to take its place ;). (Although looking at the original shelf of horribleness, it's collected quite a few random things, mostly things I put out of the puppy's reach :lol:.)

Ime, when WTMers are offended, they are far more likely to let you know how offended they are than to ignore it out of disgust ;). I always know a controversial thread because of how *many* posts it collects in a short time.

My oldest had problems grasping the concepts behind long division, and the way I taught her was using base ten blocks. (In actuality, I used cuisenaire rods for the 10s and 1s, plus some big fake jewels for hundreds (since we had nothing to serve as hundreds flats)). We worked out each problem step-by-step, first with rods, and then we'd do the same step on paper. First, we'd get out hundreds/tens/ones blocks for the dividend. And then we'd divide up the hundreds into whatever number of equal piles the divisor called for (and record the number in each pile in the quotient), and figure out how many hundreds we used (multiply the number in each pile by the number of piles and write that down under the dividend in prep for subtracting). Then we'd count hundreds left over (subtract to find the number left). Then we'd take the leftover hundreds and exchange them for tens, and add them to the tens pile (bring down the digit in the tens place). Then we'd do it all over again with the tens: divide the tens into equal piles, figure out how many were used, figure out how many left over, and exchange the leftover tens for ones. Then do it all over again with the ones. We did dozens of problems together, with me walking her through each step till she could do it without prompting. Then she did her written work by herself, using rods whenever she wanted. She first did every problem with rods, but after a few days she mostly didn't bother. This video illustrates what we did:

Since it just occurred to me that you can attach small files to your post, I thought I'd try that. Here's the file (albeit differently named) that SWB linked in that post. WWS scope and sequence.pdf WWS scope and sequence.pdf

I've only used Singapore, and I do like it, but I agree with the above - if Singapore's never worked for you thus far, I wouldn't pick it unless you had a decent idea what went wrong and a concrete, doable plan for how to fix it. If nothing changes, then nothing changes, kwim? ITU defaulting to teaching math in the way you yourself were taught. I think it's the natural default for most people unless they have a strong reason to learn a new way. On subjects I'm weak in, I'm pretty motivated to learn a new way (or else the subject is just going to be dropped entirely, which has definitely happened, too). But it's hard, and I at least don't have the time or energy to do that for *every* subject. SM happens to match how I naturally think (albeit not how I was taught), which is the only reason it works for me, because I'm good at math and so I'm not really interested in learning a whole new way to think of math when my current way works perfectly well. It sounds like you are caught between feeling like the math approach you know works perfectly well, and the fear that "perfectly well" for a math-talented kid is an entirely different beast from perfectly well for everyone else. IME, the two main things SM offers that many other contemporary math programs don't is: 1) a different way of looking at numbers and how to work with them (that's where the vaunted "conceptual" label comes from), as well as a different way of approaching word problems, and 2) more difficult problems, that require students to apply their basic arithmetic skills in deeper and more complex ways. WRT the "conceptual" aspect, I agree with pp that a solid traditional program, taught by a teacher who understands what they are teaching, is solid enough for *any* kid, no matter how mathy. WRT the more difficult problems aspect, I do think this is a great strength of SM. SM's problems go beyond anything I was asked to do in elementary (especially the Intensive Practice (IP) problems); my kids breeze through the SM workbook, but IP requires so much more of them. I absolutely think that kids who work through something like IP are building greater skills than kids who never have a chance to work through something like that. However, I don't think that SM is the *only* program that offers those sorts of "stretching" problems. (In Anthony Esolen's "Ten Ways to Destroy the Imagination of Your Child", he has an example of an arithmetic math puzzle kind of problem in the upper levels of Ray's Arithmetic (or a program like it). It opened my eyes to how you don't need to get to algebra in order to do interesting things.) Also, you can add in selected SM books as supplements without needing to use SM as your primary program. The FAN Math Process Skills in Problem Solving books are great as a self-contained intro to SM-style problem solving. And you could certainly add in the IP books - no instruction, but a great variety and depth of problems. And even if you don't add anything at all to R&S or some other traditional program, you'll still be building a base of solid arithmetic skills and understanding, which is the needed foundation for *everyone*, mathy or otherwise. Mathy kids often don't need as much *time* to build that foundation, so they have the time to go deeper (and not just faster), but all is not lost if they don't have a chance to go deeper in their first decade of life ;).

I've got it - if you want to PM me your email, I'll send it to you.

Family of 5 here. Your food seems comparable to us - we are $900/mo for 5, with one GF kiddo. But everything else is a lot higher than we spend. Gifts-wise: $80/mo. For Christmas we budget $50/person ($250), $100 for dh's family, $50 for my family (less people to buy for in mine), $120 for co-worker gifts, and and extra $30 for misc. So $600 for Christmas gifts. Then it's $50/person for birthday gifts and mother's/father's day ($350). Rounding up for misc, that's $1000 for gifts each year, so about $80 or so per month. We only do Christmas gifts for extended family. Household is $50/mo. No one uses make-up or expensive toiletries, and I cut everyone's hair. Homeschooling is $50/mo, plus about $10/mo in Amazon points. We could not pay for outside classes, and I buy nearly everything used, but it's enough to get most any book-based curricula I want. School-related office supplies come out of this budget (about $100/yr). This doesn't count dance lessons (paid by my mom) or piano lessons (paid by us). Piano is another $72/mo, and might go up to $144/mo (adding in a second kid); dance is $160/mo for all three. I don't consider dance/piano to be hs expenses, but extracurriculars - outside-school stuff I'd do no matter what schooling option we used. Clothes: $50/mo. We are really blessed here, in that people pass down clothes to my kids, and my mom buys them clothes for Christmas/birthday/Easter, including Christmas/Easter outfits. The kids have more clothes than they know what to do with, without us having to spend anything. Shoes-wise, we get our winter boots second-hand, but I pay for good sandals and closed-toe shoes for the kids - that's probably $300/year ($40 for sandals, $60 for sneakers). I rarely need to replace my shoes - I have good ones, but they've lasted me a decade or more. Dh is probably $100/yr on shoes (one new pair a year). I rarely buy clothes for myself - get them for Christmas from my mom, as does dh. He picks up a few things during a year - probably $100. So we are $500-600/yr, so about $50/mo on clothes.

Wrt places only having one or two ISPs and net neutrality: My understanding is that we've always had de facto net neutrality, until the recent law passed, yes? And my experience has been that back in the day, there were a *lot* of little ISPs, but between the mid-90s and now, that has changed, and now there are (per my dh) only about six major ISPs. And wrt effect net neutrality debates, the ISP powers-that-be were largely in favor of *repealing* net neutrality, yes? And the arguments in favor of keeping net neutrality were that it would provide some degree of protection for us little-guy-consumers from the whims of the ISP powers-that-be, yes? Namely, that net neutrality means that ISPs aren't allowed to privilege or hamper access to anything on the net; also, the providers/maintainers of the Internet infrastructure cannot privilege or hamper access to anyone who wants to use them. And part of the monopoly issue is that the major ISPs are also the major providers/maintainers of the Internet infrastructure, yes? I do see that having net neutrality didn't *prevent* the monopolies. But one issue I have with the "repeal net neutrality to encourage competition" argument is that, as I understand it, the monopolies are in *favor* of repealing net neutrality. Why would they be in favor of something that would *hurt* their monopoly? Also, I don't really understand how repealing net neutrality is supposed to *help* encourage effective competition? What barrier to entry is lowered by repealing net neutrality? Idk, sometimes it feels to me like the keep and repeal net neutrality sides are talking about completely different things - I haven't been able to get any sense of a unified big picture. I don't feel like I understand the trade-offs between keep and repeal, because I can't figure out how the keep arguments fit into the universe described by the repeal advocates, nor how the repeal arguments fit into the universe described by the keep advocates. It's like two totally different aspects of reality and I can't figure out how to put them together. It's really been frustrating me.

This has been an interesting thread. I read about bullet journals several years ago; they were intriguing, but seemed like too much for me to keep up with - I'd spend all my time setting it up and then get overwhelmed with my own organization scheme and abandon it. I've kept a non-bullet journal for the past few years - very bare-bones - I just date and title each page. I start at the beginning of the notebook and go from there - so everything's in chronological order by default. I find things by remembering roughly what time of year I wrote them down. It's less a planning/task journal and more of a reading journal - I mostly use it to take notes and reflect on my reading, and for general musings and ideas. But I carry it with me everywhere and also use it to take more mundane notes - it functions as my everything journal. I keep my pen in the notebook at the next blank page - so I always have it, plus the pen functions as a bookmark. It bends the cover of the journal, but I just use 50 cent comp books, and they get banged up just from going everywhere with me anyway. But this thread has inspired me to add an index to my next journal - I think that would be really useful. And maybe a future log and a books read log. When I started this thread, I thought there was no crossover between my reading journal and a bullet journal, but now I see how I could incorporate a few bullet journal ideas into what I already do that would be helpful.

My dd11 just started pointed pen calligraphy, which are the nibs used for copperplate and Spencerian cursive (she's using a dip pen). From what I read, beginners don't want too flexible of a nib, because when you are sorting out how much pressure to use, you want a nib that won't bend too easily, or you're likely to bend it too much. I got her a Nikko G nib to start with, and she was able to get decent results as a complete beginner. Eta: my dh uses fountain pens, and he likes the pilot varsity pens. (My lefty was able to write with them as well.) They don't work for copperplate and other cursive styles that have a contrast between thick downstrokes and thin upstrokes, though - when I tried it, I just got one line width, no matter the pressure I used. There are special calligraphy fountain pens, with flex nibs - idk if those would work as well as a dip pen or not.

Number equity and "perceived value" equity, over money equity. We do three gifts for each kid, and like a pp, I juggle what gets wrapped together or separately to end up with three gifts. This year my youngest is getting three things, each wrapped separately. My middle is getting three groups of things (each group is made up of related things and are wrapped together), and my oldest is getting two groups and a single. I start with the same amount of money budgeted for each kid, but if I score a great deal for one, and don't need the extra money for that one's other presents, I put the extra wherever it would be helpful. This year I was able to get some wow-factor gifts for my middle for a great deal - honestly, the non-deal price is well over budget - so she is simultaneously getting the most "money value" presents and having the least actual money spent on her.

I think of both spelling and grammar as subjects that can be stopped (as their own discrete subjects) once sufficiently mastered. I define "sufficiently mastered" as they've learned what they need to know in order to successfully apply those skills in their other subjects. For spelling, it would mean being able to correctly spell the 1,000-2,000 most common words in their writing, and having the tools to be able to analyze and learn the spelling of less common words (being able to break words into sounds and syllables and morphographs, knowing the most common spellings for sounds, knowing how to spell common morphographs and the spelling rules for combining them). Enough spelling that they have the tools needed to successfully work through whatever spelling problems they may still have or might encounter in life. With grammar, we're planning to do intensive Latin, so grammar-wise my focus is enough English grammar to be able to do Latin - parts of speech and basic syntax - basically to have mastered FFL4. I didn't accomplish that with dd11, so we're cobbling together some just-in-time English grammar as it's needed in Latin (which I suppose is what I'd be doing for more advanced grammar anyway, but it would have been nice to start Latin with basic grammar mastered). Minus Latin, my grammar goal would be to have mastered grammar sufficiently to be able to analyze others' writing and the student's own writing - use grammar knowledge to figure out what people are saying and how they are saying it, and to figure out how to improve the clarity of the student's own writing. So probably through Grammar for the Well-Trained Mind. IOW, subjects that are used in other, more advanced studies - like spelling, grammar (and arithmetic) - I figure I can drop them as their own separate subjects once they're learned well enough that the student knows and can do all that those advanced studies will require. Then using those skills in those other, more advanced studies is sufficient practice. (I have no real geography plan, outside of enough geography to aid in history and current events and general life skills like navigating via map. But unlike spelling/grammar, I don't have a great idea of what that comprises. Right now I've been basically unschooling geography - I keep maps on the wall, and atlases, and pull them out as situations call for. It's worked great on my oldest, but not so well so far on my middle. Might need something more formal/intentional. But I suppose I'm treating geography as similar to spelling, etc - enough to be able to use the knowledge in other things. Once they've mastered what those other things require, that's probably enough "formal" geography. Except I'm not even teaching the "formal geography" formally right now, and I have no concrete sense of how much is enough - suppose there will be a lot of just-in-time geography teaching where I find holes, especially with oldest.)