I have used various ones. I think from the second grade, I have only used the Little House one. I do not remember specifics about that one, but I have liked them overall.

Thanks everyone for your helpful advice! Have any of you done Rod and Staff math with Singapore. They are vastly different and Rod and Staff would drill facts while Singapore would teach concepts. Any thoughts on doing this?

Thanks to everyone for your advice. I feel a little stuck. I like both MM and SM. I think I lean toward SM, but I feel like it does not have enough practice for learning math facts. For example, in the 1st grade book, it looks as if there is only one page devoted to each family for addition. For those of you who have only used SM, how have you grounded your children in their facts while using this program?

Do any of you use both of these together? I am thinking of trying to use them both with a first and a fourth grader. If you use them together, do you try to match up topics? I have used Singapore with my fourth grade son in the past, but felt that it did not have enough practice for him. So, I thought we may use Singapore as the main curriculum, then have him do one to two pages of Math Mammoth a day as a supplement. Any thoughts on this? Would this be overkill?

In which grade level of Horizons and/ or Singapore is adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing fractions introduced?

Thanks to everyone for all your insight! It makes me feel good to know that MM can work as a stand alone program. I like the idea Christina gave about the 5 daily review problems. I think may use MM and do this. Also, would it work to supplement with Life of Fred once a week? In other words, is Life of Fred something that you must do daily or is one time a week sufficient?

Do those of you who use this feel that it is good as a stand alone math program or do you feel that it needs to be supplemented? I am especially wondering if it has enough drill practice and cumulative review practice. In the past, I have used Abeka K and 1. My son did well, but the spiral curriculum drove me crazy. Looking back it may have been that I was trying to follow the Abeka teacher's manual exactly which drove me crazy. For his second and third grade years, we used Singapore. I loved it. He did well in second grade with Singapore, but in third grade he began to hate math. He understood the concepts very well. I think the problem was in not knowing math facts. So, this year we have repeated third grade math using Rod and Staff. He has improved greatly. Now, I am torn about what to use next year for 4th. I like Rod and Staff for its drill and the strong arithmetic foundation it lays, but I worry that it does not teach enough in the way of concepts. I like Saxon for the continual review and that it continues throughout high school. However, he will hate not having a workbook. Also, it does not seem to have alot of practice for new concepts, but maybe that is because they continually revisit topics. I have considered Horizions due to its great reviews and because it has a workbook which is important to ds. Finally, I really like the look of Math Mammoth. I just want to make sure it would lay a good foundation if used alone. Again, my specific concerns are review and drilling facts. I am so torn! Any advice would be appreciated. Also, I would like to do only one math program.

I think it would be great for an interested three year old!

Blessedmom3, Where did you get the notebook sheets and timeline materials? Do they come with Preparing?

Thanks to everyone for your advice! I think I am going to try to simplify things and use Abeka again.

I would love feedback about Abeka phonics in K and 1st. What was your opinion of the program? Did you find a successful way to simplify the program? I used it for my son. I thought it was solid for teaching reading, but I followed the program as written in the teacher's manuel which proved very time consuming. I now have four children and need something simple. I really like Abeka because the readers tie in directly to what child is learning in phonics. Any advice would help greatly.

I am trying to make the same decision that you are. Do I want to use WWE via the text or the workbook? Right now we are using the WWE 2 workbook. My son has loved the literature selections. He is using WWE a level behind and it has been fine. In fact, we have checked out many of the literature selections from the library that are in the workbook, and he has read them. The excerpts are so good that they make you want to read the book. I think that time wise it is probably a toss up. If you write across the curriculum via using the textbook guidelines, you have to use more time with preparation. If you use the workbook, you will use more time with instruction because you will be reading and discussing one more selection in addition to what you are currently reading. Since you already have the workbook for WWE 1 you could always just try it again and see how it goes. Just remember that your child will be learning either way.

For those of you who have used First Form, do you think that starting in grade 6 (without any Latin background) would be a good age to begin First Form? Right now, I think I would rather wait and begin FF in 6th. I just don't want to have son miss something by waiting. I am contemplating should I do Latina Christiana or Latin for Children with him in 4th or just wait until 6 th grade and begin First Form. From what I have read, it seems that most people like the format of FF better than Latina Christiana. Do those of you who have experience teaching Latin, do you think my son would get everything he needs by waiting and starting FF in 6 th grade?

Does anyone have any thoughts on either of these? I am going to a convention this week and wanted to look at these two. Also, has anyone used Latin for Children? What are your thoughts on it and did you go into Latin Alive after Latin for Children?

I am trying to decide between these two Latin curriculums, so any insights about them would be very helpful.