Oh wow, how cool is that?! I hope it comes to Houston so I can take dd (and think, "There's Molly's Mom's friend! :)) Robin

I googled and apparently this news is about a year old! Where have I been? "provisionally called Phantom of Manhattan" is what I read, it is set in New York, and it opens early 2009

I don't know if it is going to be a movie or the play. Hmmm... didn't think of that before now. I would think the play, but maybe not?

Tina, thanks for the response (I was sorta hoping you'd join in - I knew you'd have something to add!). And thanks very much for the link. Interesting! I have a daughter that is able, but not very willing. To be truthful, she's a bit on the lazy side. Math *can* come easily to her... often it does... but she has to be in a really good mood first :). Well, I guess this is a topic for another thread but that is definitely my biggest obstacle. Not a child who struggles or is behind, but a child who spends more mental energy on getting out of work than what the actual work would have demanded. I've never met a child so content to sit and do absolutely nothing! Thanks again for the encouragement to move forward. Like you said, we can always step back if it's too much. Robin

Probably old news to most of you, but it's the first I've heard! I'm cautiously excited :). See, watching Celebrity Appentice *does* have its benefits! LOL Robin

I agree with this, too... I wish there was serious rep and every day rep. I've just decided to treat the rep like serious rep, and the every day rep situations I either post directly or send a pm. That's the only way I've been able to keep it sorted out in my mind. Robin

What a gem! Thanks for this. Robin

Yeah, it's been harder for me to keep up with, too. I think that's why I'm not finding as many "gems" out there that I used to find on the boards... I agree that it will be abused somehow by someone. I just want to give JEan a rep so badly and I wish there were a way to do so! Robin

I wish I knew that, too. I'm not stingy about my repping, I just don't read every post out there... I'm sure there are many other helplful posts, but the only ones I read are the ones that are directly related to what I'm interested in. I just assume that's what everyone is doing... reading the posts that are most relevant to them, and giving points to the ones that are the most helpful or encouraging. Isn't that the way it's supposed to work? I don't want to water things down just so I can rep someone more often... that would make it less meaningful to me. Robin

It seems that the system keeps up with how many rep points I've given others, and it won't let me give rep to someone again until after I've "spread it around to others" first. Okay, I understand the reason for this. And I'm glad for the safeguard. I don't get involved in the random rep spreading parties that are popularity based, and I only give rep when I read something particularly helpful, wise, useful or encouraging. In other words, I'm really trying to follow the rules and do this thing the right way. Now, for my suggestion... instead of requiring that I give rep to a certain number of other people before I can give it twice to the same person, how about allowing me to give it twice to the same person after a certain amount of time has passed? I am trying to give Jean in Wisc a rep point for her post about teaching writing, but it won't let me because I haven't spread enough rep around since I last gave her a point (which I think was back in January!). I do not know what the magic number of rep points I have to spread around before I can rep Jean again. I guess I could go around and find some people to rep just so that I can get back to Jean again soon, but those are rep points I wouldn't have otherwise awarded, so wouldn't that be defeating the purpose? Anyhow, if you could somehow make the safeguard requirements allow for "elapsed time between rep points" instead of only "amount of rep given since" that would be great! Thanks for your consideration! Robin

Thank you so much, JEan, for keeping us posted on your experience with writing instruction. I am always so motivated and encouraged after reading your posts! You do so much to inspire me! Thank you, thank you! I think I'll look at that book. It sure gets mentioned a lot here... and your endorsement weighs a lot with me! Congratulations on all your success with your children! Robin

Oh, Grace, this is so true... the only thing I have to think about homeschool/academic wise is my one dd, and I think I obsess over it way too much... what I would give to have a younger student to distract me and keep things in balance. Like SWB says, this is such an important, serious, topic... ALL parents struggle with this, no matter how many kids they have or what their circumstances are. I have friends with kids in school who struggle/worry over all sorts of decisions for their kids as well, especially as they approach high school. They meet with the counselors, look at all the course tracks, extra curriculars, etc., trying to make sure the very best is being done for their kids. The point is that we all love our kids and want what's best for them, and we ALL worry about doing the right thing for them. I think this is universal, and not limited to or measurably different between the number of kids you have, or whether or not you homeschool. I think it's just normal. At least I like to think that, because it makes me feel normal! :) ETA: Colleen, I don't know if this has helped you or not... but it has helped me quite a bit. Knowing that it *is* universal, and that I would be going through some sort of worry about choices even if I weren't homeschooling, has been very helpful to me. Obviously, I can't answer your original question, because I do not have any experience with getting motivated for high school... but I do get a lot of reassurance from the fact that we all go through this, and that it feels like the weight of the world is on your shoulders sometimes, and that even if your circumstanes were different (you had fewer kids, you weren't homeschooling) it would still feel like the weight of the world... anyhow, hope it helps you too, somehow. Robin

You know, the more I read of Cothran's articles, the more I am led to believe that he is hostile to the current "critical thinking" movement being held up as formal "logic." That seems to be what gets his goat. He clearly distinguishes between symbolic logic and socratic logic, as he should, and he clearly promotes the value of studying traditional socratic logic, but I haven't been able to discern that he is actually hostial to formal, symbolic logic... I do, however, pick up on a very negative tone when he suggests critical thinking programs (as published and marketed to educators these days) are misguiding when marketed as "logic" programs. That seems to be what he's "hostile" about (might be too strong of a word, though)... with regards to symbolic logic, his beef seems to be that he feels that it is no substititue for traditional logic in the classical trivium - with which no one seems to disagree.

Well, I might be completely off base here, but it is my understanding that in a formal logic syllogism, the propositions are accepted as true for the purpose of the exercise. So, in other words, when you evaluate it, you evaluate it for the process, not the truthfulness of the proposition. He may very well be hositle to symbolic logic. Maybe I'm not clever enough to recognize it. I'm under the impression, though, that he is just trying to make sure that symbolic logic is not mistaken as the logic of the classical trivium. Robin

And here's Cothran's explanation of formal logic (as opposed to material logic, but not informal logic). Cut frm one of Cothran' articles on logic at the MP website. His comment about content and truth makes me think that he is not against symbolic logic for the reason you suggested... what do you think? ******************** The two main branches of logic, one called formal or minor logic, the other material or major logic, are quite distinct and deal with different problems. Material logic is concerned with the content of argumentation. It deals with the truth of the terms and the propositions in an argument. Formal logic is interested in the form or structure of reasoning. The truth of an argument is of only secondary consideration in this branch of logic. Formal logic is concerned with the method of deriving one truth from another. The distinction between these two branches of logic was nicely described by G. K. Chesterton: Logic and truth ... have very little to do with each other. Logic is concerned merely with the fidelity and accuracy with which a certain process is performed, a process which can be performed with any materials, with any assumption. You can be as logical about griffins and basilisks as about sheep and pigs ... Logic, then, is not necessarily an instrument for finding out truth; on the contrary, truth is a necessary instrument for using logic--for using it, that is, for the discovery of further truth ... Briefly, you can only find truth with logic if you have already found truth without it. This last remark of Chesterton's is important. It is not the purpose of formal logic to discover truth. That is the business of everyday observation and, in certain more formal circumstances, empirical science. Logic serves only to lead us from one truth to another. That is why it is best to study formal logic first. In formal logic you study the form of an argument apart from or irrespective of its content, even though some content must be used in order to show the form.

Here's a cut from their article on logic. It is more or less how I've always understood it - that formal logic is the study of the laws of inferences. ******************** Form is central to logic. It complicates exposition that 'formal' in "formal logic" is commonly used in an ambiguous manner. Symbolic language is just one kind of formal logic, and is distinguished from another kind of formal logic, traditional Aristotelian syllogistic logic, which deals solely with categorical propositions. Informal logic is the study of natural language arguments. The study of fallacies is an especially important branch of informal logic. The dialogues of Plato [3] are a major example of informal logic. Formal logic is the study of inference with purely formal content, where that content is made explicit. (An inference possesses a purely formal content if it can be expressed as a particular application of a wholly abstract rule, that is, a rule that is not about any particular thing or property. The first rules of formal logic that have come down to us were written by Aristotle. [4] In many definitions of logic, logical inference and inference with purely formal content are the same. This does not render the notion of informal logic vacuous, because no formal language captures all of the nuance of natural language.) Symbolic logic is the study of symbolic abstractions that capture the formal features of logical inference.[2][5] Symbolic logic is often divided into two branches, propositional logic and predicate logic. Mathematical logic is an extension of symbolic logic into other areas, in particular to the study of model theory, proof theory, set theory, and recursion theory. "Formal logic" is often used as a synonym for symbolic logic, where informal logic is then understood to mean any logical investigation that does not involve symbolic abstraction; it is this sense of 'formal' that is parallel to the received usages coming from "formal languages" or "formal theory". In the broader sense, however, formal logic is old, dating back more than two millennia, while symbolic logic is comparatively new, only about a century old. ******

Thanks, Jean. Yes, that's what I've always heard, too (I think that Jim Nance got that idea started a while back). I probably didn't make myself very clear... I wouldn't actually not do any math at all - we are in Saxon 87 right now, but we are behind schedule due to our move, and I could easily slow things down and take a nice summer break, and spread the rest out over part of next year, supplementing with enrichments. Maybe start Algebra in the Spring of 2009? Or, I could go ahead and plow ahead as originally planned (doing about 25% of the book or more over the summer) and be ready for Algebra in the fall. In which case I'd delay the start of logic for at least a semester, maybe a year. Or, I could finish up as much as we comfortably can, take a summer break, not worry about finishing the book and start in the fall with a bonafide, good quality pre algebra program (but then I'd have to shop for another publisher, I'm afraid...). Dd will only be in 7th grade next year, so I'm not concerned about what track she's on. She takes to math very easily, but I would be surprised if she pursued a math/science path/career.. This is more my trying to decide just how much time and energy next year I want to spend/focus on the sort of thinking and work required to tackle these logical "hurdles" (as Myrtle cleverly calls them! - she's done a good job of convincing me that trying to tackle the same hurdles in two different subjects at the same time might not be ideal). You are right about the basics being down pat... if we just did that next year in math, it would give us some time practicing those hurdles, and she'd still be in Algebra by 8th grade... Like you said, "???" :) Thanks again, Robin

Thanks for reminding me about this. I actually own the book, and had intended to read it this summer wtih dd. We just moved, and I had forgotten about it... packed away somewhere! I'll find it this weekend and we can start looking at it... if it goes very well, and is easy for dd to grasp, I'll know that I don't need to put off TL for another year or so. Good idea... thanks again! Robin

What a helpful post! So much to think about... The reason I'm using Cothran's book is because I want dd to study Aristotelian logic, and I want that because of our emphasis on the use of language ... my end goal is Corbett's Rhetoric book, and it's going to take a series like MP's logic and rhetoric to get us there, I think. I am not at all opposed to learning symbolic logic, I just have goals for the classical study of the syllogism that I don't think symbolic logic will help meet... unless I'm ill informed, that is. I can see wanting to understand both, but for different reasons. Does that make sense, or do you think they would be interchangeable for our purposes? Either way, though, I can see how the exposure to any formal logic (and Cothran would argue that his is a formal logic in the classical sense... as opposed to informal logic) would make algebra easier. You make a very interesting point/case. You always do. :) You're like SWB to me. Everytime you write something, I have to read it 20 times before it all sinks in. I would be interested in knowing about what courses teach the symbolic logic as it teaches the algebra. Is it Gelfand? THanks so much for your reply. I'll let you know what I do, but you've about convinced me to go ahead and start the logic and let the algebra come later. Robin

Thanks so much, Kathleen! I'm looking for resources for my dd, preferrably online courses, after either Latin II or Latin III. I am glad to know that your son transferred into this program at Latin III... I wasn't considering Scholars Online since we weren't using them for years I and II, and I just assumed that would disqualify us from the program. So this is very helpful. Thanks again, Robin

This is what I posted last February. I don't do it on excel, but on graph paper. It could easily be done on excel, but I'm fond of paper and pencil :). I still use this method to track/plan out my year. HTH! ********************************* First, I do this all on graph paper so that my boxes are nice and neat and orderly :o). I have one sheet for the school year, then another sheet for my student's subjects. I'll explain each. ********************************* SCHOOL YEAR SHEET: I set up a chart that works backwards (from the bottom up) from the date that I would like to finish up for the year. There are three columns, with the middle column being very wide (most of the width of the page) and centered between two narrow columns - one at each margin. The center column is titled "Activities/Events." The left column is "Weeks left." The right column is "# Days left." Under the "Weeks left" column, I set up the following rows: I write in the date of the beginning of each week, and to the left of that I write how many weeks are left in my school year (counting that particular week). For example, I want to finish school the week of May 13th, so the last five rows of my chart look like this on the left hand side: 5 4/15 4 4/22 3 4/29 2 5/6 1 5/13 The right hand column (# Days left) is subdivided into two columns labeled "X5" and "X4." In this column I calculate how many school days are left for the year if we were to work either 5 or 4 days a week. So, the last five rows of my chart look like this on the right hand column: 25 , 20 20 , 16 15 , 12 10 , 8 5 , 4 This tells me at any given week how many more lessons I can squeeze in for the rest of the year. This has been very helpful to me in keeping our workload consistent. Next year I will need (and add) a X3 column. This year, X5 and X4 is all I've needed. The middle column (Activities & Events) is where I put scheduled events that I know will interrupt our schedule (we'll miss at least a half day of school or more). In October, we had two weeks with activities back to back. This is what it looked like on my page (I know the columns won't line up properly... use your imagination :o): 27 10/22 Texas Rennaisance Fest. 135 108 26 20/29 West Side Story, Much Ado 130 104 Looking at this, you can see that the week of 10/22, we had 27 weeks of school left, we were scheduled to spend a day at a festival, and there were 135 days left if we worked 5 days a week, and 108 days left if we worked 4 days a week. The next week we had two outings... one to a broadway play and another to a shakespeare play. Both of these were student performances during the day that took up a big part of the school day. Looking at that week, I knew that we would definitely lose a couple of days. Now that I've described that, here's the other half of the system: **************************** STUDENT SUBJECT SHEETS This one is easier to describe. Again, I use graph paper. I draw a "matrix" for each textbook we're using and label it with the text name and number of lessons. It is set up like a hundreds chart. For example, we are using R&S 5th grade English this year. The matrix looks like this: English - R&S 5 - 119 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 I do not fill in every box. I label 1-9 across the top and I label the multiples of 10 at each row. I can clearly see that 78 (for example) is at row 70 and column 9. I draw a border around the whole thing so that there are exactly 119 squares within the border. Each time we do a lesson, we "X" out the square that represents that particular lesson number. That's it. Repeat for each textbook. Right now, we have x'd out 86 math lessons, and there are 165 total. According to my School Year Sheet, as of Monday (week of 2/11) I'll only have 70 school days left if we work 5 days a week. That means I need to double up (or do a lesson on Saturday) ten times to stay on schedule. That's something I can start chipping away at now, and not get caught by surprise later. I also see that Easter is coming up, a day trip to Galveston, a day at the Livestock Show and Rodeo and a day at the opera. Hmmm... there's four more days I'll have to accomodate, so better keep that in mind and try to get ahead by a few lessons. So far, I've been able to fit every subject's matrix on one page, because several of our subjects schedule their lessons by the week. R&S Spelling, for example. There are 34 weekly lessons. I have a matrix set up with 34 boxes. We cross out a box when we complete a lesson (whether it takes three days or a whole week or more). Next year, it might take two pages to cover all our texts but so far one page has held everything. For multiple students, I'd just do one page for each student. This method has been perfect for me because: 1. My state does not require me to keep track of actual days of school. 2. At any given moment I can look at how many lessons are left in every subject and compare them to how many days and weeks are left. I can tell at a glance how far behind or ahead I am... and whether or not I can afford to cut back to 4 days a week on certain subjects. I can tell whether or not I can afford to take on a project that might interrupt a particular school week, or whether or not I have enough time left in the year to take on an enrichment course. Keeps things realistic. 3. It takes very little time to set up at the beginning of the year, and no time to maintain. Just x out a few squares every day (we also x out the each week's date on the school year sheet). Actually, I let dd do this. It gives her such a sense of accomplishment to mark things off! 4. Flexibility. No lesson is tied to a particular day. We can slow down or speed up as needed at any time. 5. It's a great visual! I can look at two pieces of paper and see in an INSTANT how much we've accomplished, how much we have left to do (we're half way finished! yoo hoo!), how far apart our field trips are spaced and when the next one is coming up, whether or not we're behind schedule in some subjects or ahead in others. 6. I can't tell you how motivating it has been for my dd to want to get things done.. she knows we're not done for the year till everything is x'd off. She knows where "the end" is at all times (and that there is an end... something that homeschool students kind of miss out on - the anticipation of the last day of school). FWIW, I don't do this for science and history so far, because I'm not on a "schedule" for them... I do this only for the skill and leveled subjects. History and science are so enjoyable it doesn't matter to us if they spill over into the summer, and it's okay if we have to put them aside completely to get caught up on math. Next year, however, science will be added because we'll be using a formal curriculum with lesson plans. History will be a little bit better planned/organized, but it will still remain delight directed without a set number of lessons. All projects and fun stuff will remain this way in response to whatever we're doing at the time. I think the chronological approach to history and literature sure makes this an easy, enjoyable, laid back yet rewarding way to do these subjects. I don't like to pre-guess everything we might want to do when we get to a certain topic in history, so I try to do that more on the fly, only planning what we're going to do in the immediate future (i.e., tomorrow :o). I never know when our eyes are going to glaze over and when we're going to be especially interested in something, and usually when I try to plan too far in advance it ends up being a waste of time because we're never the mood for what I had planned when we get there :o). Hope this helps someone. Those two pieces of paper are my homeschooling life blood. But it's so simple it's almost ridiculous.

I wrote up how I do this about a year ago... does anyone have a copy or link to that post? I can't figure out how to access the old boards to search them. Mamaowl from the old boards put it all in an excel file which I have a copy of, and can email to you.. but it doesn't describe how to use it. I'll try to keep searching. Let me know if you want me to forward the excel file I do have. Robin

I am trying to decide on next year's workload, and would really appreciate the wise advice/opinions of the experienced moms on this board! My post: ******************* I'm trying to decide on possibly slowing dd down in math a bit and introducing Logic first. Probably Cothran's course. I'm thinking this will make the math all the easier. Or maybe I should put the emphasis on math and spend sometime in Algebra before introducing Cothran? To me, it seems that introducing both at the same time might be a little overwhelming. Dd is 13, will have completed Saxon 87, and first year latin (LITCT). My plans are to use Saxon for Algebra. The other possibility would be to introduce Cothran and do a "rigorous" prealgebra course... one that takes her more in depth on topics she already understands instead of introducing a lot of new material. Does such a course exist (for some reason I'm not thinking Saxon 1/2 would fit this description... any comments on that)? The BJU PreAlgebra would be available to me, but I'm not sure about it, either. Another consideration (to me) is we'll be getting more in depth with music theory next year. Advanced theory, formal logic, algebra, and 2nd year Latin just seems like a LOT to bite off at one time. To me it does. Does it sound reasonable to you? Thanks for any input! Robin

Or would it be better to spend some time with one before introducing the other? I'm trying to decide on possibly slowing dd down in math a bit and introducing Logic first. Probably Cothran's course. I'm thinking this will make the math all the easier. Or maybe I should put the emphasis on math and spend sometime in Algebra before introducing Cothran? To me, it seems that introducing both at the same time might be a little overwhelming. Dd is 13, will have completed Saxon 87, and first year latin (LITCT). My plans are to use Saxon for Algebra. The other possibility would be to introduce Cothran and do a "rigorous" prealgebra course... one that takes her more in depth on topics she already understands instead of introducing a lot of new material. Does such a course exist (for some reason I'm not thinking Saxon 1/2 would fit this description... any comments on that)? The BJU PreAlgebra would be available to me, but I'm not sure about it, either. Another consideration (to me) is we'll be getting more in depth with music theory next year. Advanced theory, formal logic, algebra, and 2nd year Latin just seems like a LOT to bite off at one time. To me it does. Does it sound reasonable to you? Thanks for any input! Robin

I need an "other" category... bunny is the last thing on any of our minds! LOL Seriously, it's still sitting there in the box, and it probably will still be untouched this summer. I found a few pieces of chocolate and candy left over from last year in the basket when I was stuffing it... we are just not candy eaters around here. So why do I waste money on it every year? Who knows... it looks good on Easter morning! LOL The things that do go fast around here are whoppers :). Robin