IEW have some writing lessons based on history and other subjects

Material logic does not in my view go further but may be said to go a little deeper, however going deeper in this case relates to definitions of terms, and I am not entirely happy with how it proceeds about it. I will probably look for something in semantics and pragmatics to complement it. To go further in logic, I believe the next natural step would be inductive logic (of which there seem to be a total lack of newer course material). JS Mill's "A system of logic" might be a good place to start.

I would suggest you start with Traditional Logic I if you like what you see on the Memoria Press website. Both Traditional Logic I and II are fairly good, whereas Material Logic unfortunately is a little bit weak and I recall having some reservations about the material in it. Also please be advised that all these texts do use religious statements in the examples as if they were uncontroversial facts instead of subjective beliefs, which for secular students may detract from the text somewhat. Still, we have used them despite this, for us, drawback.

Neither?

Thanks for the responses. Would I be correct to say that SAT II tend to be more important in the admissions process, since doing the SAT II is suggested even if doing AP? That is the AP may not be factored into the admissions process in the same way without the accompanying SAT II scores? DE is unlikely to be an option for us, but I might need to place directly into sophomore if we opt for US (restrictions on financing), how likely are the AP to be helpful in this respect? I realise that that this is likely to be school specific, but would appreciate any input on a general level. (Luckily still a few years away still, even for the eldest).

I let it slide until about 8-10, then I got "How to hold a pencil" The embarrassment of getting a book that tells them how to hold a pencil worked miracles. http://www.amazon.com/How-Hold-Pencil-Simple-Instructions/dp/0984132805

Superstar Student by Great Courses (Videolecture) might be interesting

Just want to hear some opinions about why one should opt for one or the other (or both or neither)?

It is not a disadvantage, to the contrary. Only drawback is that many primary sources might be strange languages such as Latin and Greek (depending on his field naturally). Just a thought, you might want to try to throw some abstract nouns at him and see if he can define, explain, or relate to them. (They are very strange creatures, those abstract nouns, whose relation to reality is dubious, or at least twisted)

Just have to mark this thread for LoriD's post

The ideal "solution" is immersion in the language, but if you can bring him into situations locally where the language is used with others (especially peers) that might be helpful, so may movies, radio (internetbased), etc. In any case, keep using your language even if responses come back in English.

Afterschooling can, and in my case do, include weekends, holidays and vacations.

Ancient history has worked well here, but have nothing to compare with. I think the key is to provide some material about which to do some writing, in order to practice the writing technique without having to think too much about the subject content. One probably could use any non-fiction material, but I find the scaffolding nice to have. Note: We have not used any of the IEW intensive, or other material of IEW, except I just got the Student Resource Notebook as it seem to tie in nicely with the Ancient History

I believe that language study (non-immersion) aids in the understanding of grammar above and beyond what you would achieve by immersion (nil) or (most) study of English grammar alone (little). An understanding of grammar I believe sharpens one's understanding of any language, including English (or whatever is one's "native" language). There might be a reason to why the grammar stage is named as such (as well as why there are the logic and rhetoric stages), however most kids today receive no serious instruction in grammar (or logic or rhetoric) and even so do muddle through. Whether this is an "educational advantage" or not you must evaluate yourself up against what you would have spent that time and money on otherwise. That is the passive (hearing/reading) vocabulary, the active (speaking/writing) vocabulary is more like 5,000/10,000. The wikipedia has an interesting entry on vocabulary that point out that knowing a word isn't either or, but a question of degree. (I find that many, or most, words in a native speakers vocabulary only go to level 4) Never encountered the word. Heard the word, but cannot define it. Recognize the word due to context or tone of voice. Able to use the word and understand the general and/or intended meaning, but cannot clearly explain it. Fluent with the word – its use and definition. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vocabulary

You may be able to retain the Spanish, but it will take some effort and thought. The erosion is what I struggle with, and haven't quite figured out.

I believe exposure to, and indeed study of, a foreign language, is beneficial before they are old enough to go abroad on their own. 1. When they are that old the immersion will take longer anyhow, but some previous knowledge will shorten it 2. Starting from scratch can mean that you end up not getting the immersion experience at all, but end up speaking in English all the time, and thus learn nothing (or very little) 3. Immersion does NOT teach grammar 4. This thread is about language fluency, this need not necessarily be your goal. Working knowledge is often sufficient. See Amira's 5-point scale above. (My understanding of fluency would be a 4.5) My advice would be to pick one (or two) modern languages and do minimum 2/3 years study followed by exchange student experience for 1 year in High School in-country, but with caveat that student must avoid speaking English. I do not believe you can reach fluency (4.5 or better) without immersion, however I think that a 3-4 on above scale can be achieved without immersion.

I am not trying to convince you, I am merely pointing out that I am uncertain about this aspect, especially in younger children. How many young children do you send out on missions? My experience is with full immersion for young children up to age of 14, I have pointed out that adults take longer for a number of reasons. In the latest language and 9 months into it I am a 1 (but have made no serious effort) while the kids are somewhere between a 4 and a 5.

Sorry for misunderstanding your meaning. I cannot of course extrapolate my experience to all others, but my experience is that about 6 months immersion is sufficient for those topics talked about amongst peers, even if naturally they will continue to learn after the 6 months. Indeed I myself continue to learn new words in English to this day. Another aspect is of course that the complexity of thought increases with age, and the facility of learning new languages decreases with same. Thus the time required will increase with age. PS. It is worth noting though that written fluency takes longer than spoken. (One may even remain illiterate in the new language unless steps are taken to learn writing, not only speaking, that language. Literacy in English notwithstanding). Adults I believe to take longer for due to a number of factors. I used no previous study of grammar, or indeed any previous study of the "target" language at all, before they were dropped in at the deep end of the pool. I am a little uncertain about if there are some languages that are more difficult than others, some writing systems undoubtedly are (or at least seem so to me), but the languages themselves I don't know. Maybe there is a linguist on the board that can pitch in on that aspect. It seems to me that one key aspect that influences the timeframe somewhat is the point at which the peers start wanting to learn English, after which the immersion experience starts to become diluted. My key concern is the maintenance of the language post immersion, which I find troublesome and difficult.

Logic, Math and Reading/Writing mainly. To fit it in you need at least a 28h day.

That is correct, immersion will not provide fluency in anything which is not spoken about in the environment. As such you would not expect fluency in a conversation about politics, religion, nuclear physics, hunting, american football, [pick your topic] unless those subjects would form part normal conversation amongst peers in the environment. Then again, go to the UK and check if the locals can maintain a fluent conversation about american football, or try to keep a fluent conversation in the US about the intricacies of cricket. I'd still say both sides of the Atlantic are fluent in English.

1. Yes. Three different languages. Previous study might have been helpful, but I don't really know since we skipped that part. (One language was closely related to already mastered language, the other two not so) 2. 3-14 Lower ages take less time, maybe 2/3 months, and it goes slower as they age. Full immersion does not entail no opportunity to speak other languages (impossible if main language is English and peers have started English study), merely that the new language dominates strongly. Fluency level does not ensure the symmetrical vocabulary, nor that vocabulary be exactly same as a native speaker. It does however provide ability to keep an entirely fluent conversation with peers. It should be noted that fluency will be progressively lost when returning home (or to next culture), unless effort is made for maintenance. (Pickup is faster on nete immersion though)

Full immersion for about 6 months usually does the trick (varies a little with age and natural ability). Bit difficult with Latin and Ancient Greek though.

Very nice and light introduction to Latin Language, but do not expect more payoff than maybe getting some interest in the subject.

Aesop's Fables in Latin http://www.amazon.com/Aesops-Fables-Latin-Ancient-Kingdom/dp/0865166951

Pattern recognition is how concepts are formed in the human mind, and as such it is unavoidable for anyone to have the capability. In a way it seems that he has a much sharper mind than the average, and that this is the problem. Most people are entirely happy about not having a clue as to what the difference between a cat and a dog is (yes, you can tell them apart, but can you tell me exactly what is the essential difference is so that we can have a definition of each which will be valid for all cats and all dogs?). In effect, everyone is sloppy and he is not. Would I try to teach him sloppiness? No!!! I would though try to teach outlining before writing and how to eliminate the fine detail (lower level points) in order to cut down responses to expected size. Best book on outlining, pre-1920, https://archive.org/details/principlesoutli00ballgoog You might also want to get this one: http://www.amazon.com/The-Minto-Pyramid-Principle-Thinking/dp/0960191038 I suspect he might score off the charts on IQ testing, but that is just a hunch.