I'm afraid I can't help much but in light of the limited responses so far I will give my thoughts. We are starting vol I in fall and I bought the lesson plans. I knew that without the lesson plans I would need to do a fair bit of planning but having the lesson plans in hand made me realize how much it would really have been to do it myself. I think it would be doable for one student, especially if you're planning to purchase most of the books, therefore allowing plenty of advance access divvy up chapters. If I was planning to get most of the books from the library and line up more than one level, well, yikes, it would be tough. From your sig it looks like you'd just have one student using it so it may very well suit your needs just fine but be aware that there will be a lot of planning required for you.

We started level 1 in late August and finished in late December. We didnt try readers after level 1 but we did a lot of shared reading of any old book. I would read words that were not yet decodable and he would read words that he had learned to decode. We're on lesson 20 of aar 2 now. After lesson 10 or so a lot of level 1/beginning readers became more accessible. Now, we are starting to move into the next level of readers. He is pretty good in fluency but even in the level 1 readers we sometimes come across a high frequency word that he hasn't learned to decode yet and is phonetically regular. Sometimes I will just tell him the sound of the relevant phonogram and other times he figures it out from context.

We are more cm than wtm but many of the history programs available can be skewed either way. I dont like the cm way of reading so i leave that and i dont like the wtm early focus on grammar or latin so we just bypass that too. I really despise the science in both. Take what you like from the different methods and make them work for your family.

I would go with level 1 aar. I also debated a long time due to how much more expensive it was compared to opgtr but I've found it to be worth its price. The readers are a big part of the price and with opgtr you will need to rummage through your library looking for something that lines up or you will need to purchase something separate, thus incurring additional cost. Regarding the ongoing cost, yes, it will add up, but you can revisit after level 1 or after level 2. I think that by the end of level 2 you would have a very easy time finding appropriate readers at the library. Your dd will also be older, more mature, and possibly have less need for the younger-child-friendly presentation in aar. At that point, perhaps you could switch to opgtr to save some money.

I'm also interested and have the same age gap. I did notice that in the level 2 flow chart, the strands are mostly separate as well as into the very beginning of vol iii so I was thinking it might work to combine any kids in the 3-6 yr range and separate the threads so that you do a and d together for 2 yrs and then b and c together for 2 yrs, rotating kids in as you go. of course that doesn't help much with vol I.

I haven't had any problem with the plastic bubble thing either. Actually ds often balances them on end. I also recommend the small group set because then it gives you a lot more options for expanding their usefulness beyond just the lab sheets.

There is none, that comment was an expression of hope and desire. Here is their history though, if you haven't seen it. http://cstp.myshopify.com/

Thank you for checking Martha. I don't consider that ye either. Knowing that seton science is an option is quite comforting. It sounds like im not the only one frustrated with the lack of easy to use, affordable options.

The belief system of a provider is very important to me if we are talking about something that is written to include those beliefs. I'm sure there are many authors of secular books that don't share my view but that's fine with me since their view isn't included in the material. I prefer things that are either religiously in line with my beliefs or else secular. I might use Protestant materials if there was no other good option and it didn't hugely affect the actual material. For instance, phonics, math, and spelling come to mind as possibilities but history and science would probably be out of the question. I agree with others about bju though, not if it were the only thing on the planet. Quick aside, I had looked at, and then dismissed seton science after I saw that they use the ye apologia materials. I was concerned that their other stuff may have ye leanings as well. Can anyone tell me if the seton-published science has anything ye-ish?

We are in lesson 17 of aar 2 and abou halfway through level 1 we started adding in real books. We do shared reading so ds reads all the words that he has the tools to sound out. I read the remaining words before he has a chance to guess or become frustrated. Learning the long vowels as a result silent. E has made a huge difference in the number of books accessible to him. I think that was introduced around lesson 8 or 9 of level 2. That would be one option for you to continue using aar. I appreciate the reading comp portion in aar 2 but if you're comfortable doing that on your own you may be better off with just teaching the phonograms quickly and moving on to all real books.

Yes, I would love the tm's to be ebooks so I can have them on my iPad for space saving and not have to worry about pages flipping back over!

A parent with no science background *could* teach it but it would require a lot of time investment. The lessons are essentially teaching the parent how to teach the kid. For someone with a strong science background, you can quickly read the lesson to brush up on any specifics; maybe take a few notes to make sure you hit everything. Someone without a strong science background would probably find the reading dense enough that they would need to read and reread, take extensive notes, and then finally teach the lesson. Implementing the "teachable moments" will not be intuitive for the parent lacking in science background. I can see how these moments might be lost if the parent didnt make a considerable effort to include them.

I haven't used it but I'm very interested in it and will probably switch to it at some point. From my research, yes you'll want the workbook. Not sure on the tests. The experiments are included in a separate section and the book will tell you when to do each. You don't need to buy a kit but you will need to gather things from around the house.

I also bought just the cards. You can use "virtue15" for 15% off.

You might want to look at connecting with history. Lesson plans are available for volume I and I believe others are in the works. It would allow you to combine all ages for a classical, catholic, history rotation. http://www.rchistory.com/

Their spring catalog said levels 7 and 8 are due out in 2014 too!

The same is true for aar2 as well, a big draw for me but maybe not for everyone.

We went fairly quickly through aar 1 but are going slower through aar 2. I don't feel that the pace of aar1 was money wasted for us. The biggest thing is having the games and readers already set up for you. If you are perfectly happy pulling together your own games and trying to align readers, then it might not be where you want to put your money. I considered going with something faster moving after we finished level 1 but after figuring how much time it would take me, I decided aar was still a good value for us. Now that we are into it, I can say I'm glad we stuck with aar because it includes some reading comp stuff that wouldn't be included in a strict phonics program and I appreciate having it integrated for me. I did look at loe as well but the foundations was still in beta testing and the essentials was far too integrated with writing for my young reader.

There are only 2 flippers. I think the tm must have a typo or 2 of the flippers were not included in the activity book. I definitely only have 2 and I'm not missing any pages.

If you're torn, why not start with math mammoth? You can buy the whole 1-6 on HSBC for less than you would spend on a yr of Singapore. If you hate it then you're not out much and you have a handy supplement available.

Question1 in FAQ http://www.pandiapress.com/?page_id=25#Question1 Wait, I guess it doesn't say summer, just that release date will be announced when they are within 3 months.

They said copying for use within the family is ok so I made copies and then just toss when I'm done. They often end up mangled anyway.

I personally don't care what the author's religious views are IF they don't directly conflict with the subject matter. There are many Christians and Jews that don't read Genesis literally and don't feel the need to mold science to fit it. I have serious misgivings about using a science curriculum written by someone that is hostile towards mainstream science. There is a whole lot of stuff that must be left out or overlooked and it spans across most fields...geology, astronomy, biology. It's not a simple blurb on evolution that is omitted. It colors every area.

There is review of all the previously taught phonograms as well as beginning and final blends and open and closed syllables. It is a quick review but enough for you to find any gaps. It is covered in the first 2 lessons and the lesson 1 fluency sheet contains lots of the review words from aar1. I think you should go with 2 and use opgtr to address any gaps you find during the review lessons.

Yes, you get 50%