Thanks; this is very helpful. Is there not even a requirement to let us know they're pulling her out of class if it is Tier II?

OK, thanks. A lot to keep in mind. It seems weird because I don't have any problem with her getting evaluated and getting the speech therapy, just concerned with doing it all without any communication, much less following the legal procedure. As annoying as meeting at each step sometimes was with the others, it's required for a good reason. And sorry for the confusion. It's been awhile since the parent-teacher conference, and there were other things to sign then, so I'm not 100% certain that I didn't sign anything even though I don't think I did. But there was definitely no one else there, and it wasn't any official IEP thing - at the most, it would have been an "agree to observe/screen" (ETA: definitely not to evaluate). I think I remember signing those with my first 2 kids before their first meetings. ETA: I think I remember the process for my older kids being 1. Sign agreement to observe/screen 2. SLP does observation/screening 3. Meeting with everyone, in which I agree to full evaluation 4. SLP does evaluation 5. Meeting with everyone, in which I agree to starting therapy, including specific timing 6. Therapy starts. So I'm saying at most I did step 1, but I don't even think I did that. Definitely didn't do 3 or 5. Then today I find out it looks like they're in step 6 with her.

Thanks. I'll go ahead and discuss with her. I'm just trying to make sure I understand what they're required to do so I can compare it to what they are doing/have done when she tells me. Obviously I can share my personal concerns regardless, but I think knowing what they're legally required to do will give me a better leg to stand on. There wasn't any first meeting. Just a mention at the parent-teacher conference (just me and the teacher), in which I believe I only verbally agreed I'd be fine with starting the process. It's possible I signed an agreement to observe at that time (I don't think I did, though), but definitely have received no written notices or meetings, not even a mention of it since then. I remember with my older ones there were meetings at each step - 2 or 3 before any therapy sessions even started, and papers to sign at each of them saying that I agreed to the next step. And I will definitely work on the timing either way. Thanks again.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. The regular teacher returned after Thanksgiving, so nothing happened (afaik) while the long-term sub was in charge. This is all after the regular teacher returned, but without any additional communication from her, and no IEP meeting or notification or anything. ETA: And I do plan to contact her, but I just want to make sure I understand how it's supposed to be working (legally) before discussing it with her.

My youngest is going to school this year (2nd grade). At our 1st quarter parent-teacher conference, the teacher mentioned that my daughter's speech enunciation seemed slightly behind so we might want to start the process of assessment, etc. I said I was fine with that. I don't remember signing anything, but it's possible I signed one of the "you can observe/screen her" papers. (I don't remember what everything's called, but my older 2 both had IEPs for speech, so I have an idea of the process.) Her teacher went on maternity leave shortly thereafter and I mostly forgot about it. I agree with her unofficial assessment of "seems slightly behind" and am fine either way - waiting and seeing or starting speech therapy. However, today my daughter mentioned she didn't get her math done in class because she was in speech. Upon further questioning, this is her third time going and she is in a group of 4. She has been told she now goes every Thursday, and this started the week before break. I have heard nothing from the teacher since the initial discussion, and certainly not had an IEP meeting or anything. Isn't this illegal? In addition, aren't they supposed to avoid missing important subjects like math? I am planning to write the teacher (nicely) to clarify what' going on, but I want to make sure I have everything straight with regard to what's supposed to happen.

That's about how long our WISC took (3 hours). Not sure what WAIT is, so maybe it took most of the time and/or if he was dragging or needing a lot of breaks they could have both just taken longer than usual. ETA: And did we get unofficial results immediately (after a short break), with official results and a full writeup sent within a week.

When we were buying our first house at age 23, we realized that would be a good time to get life insurance. We didn't have any kids yet (and weren't planning to start super soon), but knew we wanted 2-3. We wanted to maintain coverage at least until they were all through college, which would probably be past the 30 years that's the max you can get term for, at which point a new policy would be much more, even assuming we didn't develop any conditions in the meantime. We also shopped around and were able to get whole life policies for not much more than 30-year term. And I'll have to look up the details, but at some point we can stop making payments and have remaining premiums be paid from the accumulated value so we'll have continued coverage without continued payments (vs most likely - hopefully! - having nothing to show for almost the same amount of pay-in with term), or at any time we could cash it out if needed for a major emergency. So, for our specific circumstances, it was the right choice. (And we were maxing out our retirement funding at the time.) But I agree it's often not, and agree with seeking advice from a financial advisor who won't benefit from your choice.

That's true. Lots of factors probably influence how it goes, and my current 11-year-old is fine with a range of ages (even if she's near either end) but would probably balk being the oldest by a good margin.

I think that depends on the kid. I didn't really have swim lessons until late, and I was super embarrassed to be with the little kids, to the point I didn't really try because I didn't want to try and do worse than the little kids, and so never learned to swim well. I see now it was ridiculous to feel that way, especially considering none of the other participants were anyone I knew or would ever see again, but at the time I was very aware. Maybe there's also a cutoff point. I think I was about twelve when I'm remembering, and it's possible that up to ten or so I wouldn't have cared, at least not as much? (I had had a few sporadic lessons before that, but don't really remember them, so even possible I did have a similar experience younger and didn't care much about the age differences.)

I think the above are all good options, and I wanted to add Big History (https://www.bighistoryproject.com/home) as another option to consider. I also like the idea of focusing on other social studies. Besides economics, there's world religions, geography, government (maybe comparative since he's been doing civics). Or social sciences like anthropology, archaeology, philosophy, political science, psychology, and sociology.

If it feels like the right level and rate of progression for him, I wouldn't worry too much about it. But 2 lessons a day should be fine if he's not struggling (and you could just see how each day goes and sometimes do 1, sometimes 2). You could also accelerate by doing it more days (more days per week and/or continuing it over breaks). For my kids for whom it progressed a bit slow, we just did half of the lessons (by week, so weeks 1, 3, 5, etc.). That seemed to work for them, but they didn't need the level of incremental progression many do. We would also often do 2 "days" on the same day, but so we could do other things on other days, not more than 1 "week" per week.

I would switch now, and start with Book 1. This is basically what we did and it was a good progression.

I was planning to be tactful; thanks. I wouldn't even be considering having my daughter join the team if I didn't think they were generally awesome, rigorous homeschoolers, and as I mentioned we have done a couple things with some of them before successfully. I honestly don't understand the offense at what I said. I never said YEC don't believe in or use science, but - regardless of how rigorous one may be in every other area, including many areas of science - when the Bible conflicts with science, a YEC by definition chooses to believe the literal interpretation of the Bible over science. I'm not going to tell them they shouldn't do that, but when discussing here why it wouldn't work to do STEM activities with them, that is the reason. I'm not assuming the worst about them; I'm just trying to figure out if joining this team would work for us.

That makes sense. I guess my thought was this might be sort of a "known code" for YE beliefs. But if it common to spell it out if that's what they mean, this does seem more like everyone can interpret it themselves. I will; thanks. Definitely protestant based on the rest of the statement, and I was thinking the same thing - I know most protestants are not YE believers, but there is definitely a higher concentration of them in homeschooling. And I don't fully understand the purpose of strictly segregated groups, except to keep kids from hearing others' beliefs, so that was another reason I thought it might be more likely YE. We've done a couple other things with some members of this team without issue, but I don't think it would work to do more regular academic (specifically STEM) things with them if they believe a literal interpretation of the Bible over science.

Thanks for all the quick replies! My daughter has been invited to join an academic team in which all of the current members are members of a homeschool group with a statement of faith that includes that line, and I wasn't sure if that was what it meant. So I guess not necessarily, but somewhat likely that it does mean that - or at least that a number of the members interpret it as that. So I guess I'll have to ask to know for sure. Thanks again.

If a group's statement of faith includes "The Bible is the inspired and infallible Word of God", does that mean that they don't believe in evolution?

Yeah, not sure why they're not on the web site yet (we'd like to see the overall reports, too), but my coordinator emailed me Thursday night with their scores and award levels.

We're still waiting anxiously for our results . . . Glad to hear they're at least on the way. ETA: Just heard from our coordinator - dd11 got honor roll and ds9 got certificate of achievement!

We adopted a family for Christmas. The father had an accident and has lost the use of one arm (not sure if dominant or not) and his wish list includes things to keep him busy while recovering. Any thoughts?

Sorry for the mini-hijack, but thanks to everyone who mentioned gf Rice Krispies alternatives! I just assumed the generics had the same issue; glad to know we have options after all.

I'm not sure since we're not DF, but I don't think it does. That would probably be a good substitute. I just wanted to make sure people knew about the Rice Krispies, because it's easy to assume they are GF. And sad face because we can't make Rice Krispie Treats!

Rice Krispies are not gluten-free; they contain barley malt. They used to make a gluten-free version, but it was discontinued. :(

Great news! Hoping it's a great experience for her.

I would prefer it, but ours at Fry's (Kroger chain) always seem to have something that sets off the "wait for assistance" thing, and the assistant is almost always not paying attention or even wandered off, so it doesn't save time unless the regular lines are very long.

My uncle has a severe seafood allergy, my sister has mild chocolate and mint allergies, and my friend has an MSG allergy (last 2 are not quite 40, though). I agree that it seems like many fewer adults have allergies partly because some are outgrown and partly because adults don't need to make their allergies known as much, but I also do believe that actual prevalence is increasing.