I think Fred is wonderful -- but as a supplement to a curriculum, NOT as a curriculum itself. It's great for kids who really "get" math and don't need five thousand and twelve repetitions of an algorithm before it becomes second nature. It has very few problems unless you order the supplementary problems book -- and it's not exactly systematic.

There's a really cool graphic novel of The Metamorphosis. http://www.randomhouse.com/crown/metamorphosis/ In some ways, I think it works *better* as a graphic novel than as a novella!!

And it's absolutely no jump at all from talking about Frankenstein to talking about the possibilities of IVF, preimplantation genetic counseling, the ethics of designing your baby -- and the other, troublesome ethics of NOT designing your baby if you have the ability and means to do so. It's a book that's eminently worth reading for anyone interested in going into the biological sciences.

I think it touches a great deal upon science, particularly ethical issues involving the degree to which it is ethically right to create life -- whether in the laboratory or not, really -- and the responsibilities of creator to a creation.

I've heard varying reports about Apologia's rigor, but I haven't had any experience with them. Folks? Is this the case?

I'm not sure how to ask this without offending you or others, but how Christian/religious is the instruction? We are not particularly religious, and to be honest, science is (obviously) one of those sticking-points. We do believe in the validity of evolutionary theory, for instance. I understand not every religiously-affiliated provider will stress a religious worldview -- Scholars Online, for example, is religiously-oriented but doesn't expect uniform adherence to one religious viewpoint or outlook from its students -- but I know much less about TPS. I hope you're not offended by the question, and I appreciate your answer.

It's the Newsweek Challenge and Jay Mathews' Washington Post list. They've changed their methodology a bit, but initially, the calculation of the "best" high schools was this: Take the # of AP exams given by a school to its student body and divide by the number of seniors. The more exams a school had its students take, the higher they rose on the list. Now...all those students could've gotten 1s, of course. This is precisely a problem I've encountered as a PS teacher. Administration packs the AP courses as if they're in a sardine factory. The teacher can't teach at the AP level because the students aren't prepared. The lower-level teachers are resentful of being told this, even if it's true (actually, IME, especially if it's true), and the cycle begins again. If the AP teacher teaches and grades appropriately for the rigor of the material on the test, she'd better have the administration at her back or else there will be a tsunami of parental complaints.

Okay, going a little nuts here. I'm looking for an online course provider like Scholars Online, but for chemistry. (I've loved Scholars Online's lit, but I've heard uneven reviews about the science). Any suggestions??? I'm tearing my hair out here.

Here's where she's getting her intel: http://www.collegeboard.com/html/apcourseaudit/faq.html Click on the link for "Appropriate Grade Levels for AP Courses." Quote: ...the College Board believes that these [9th-10th-grade] students would be better served by academic coursework focusing on the building blocks necessary for later, successful enrollment in college-level courses. Many college admissions officers share this position, feeling that students should not be rushed into AP coursework....AP coursework completed in 9th grade is often not often deemed credible by the higher education community.

I think it works best for kids who are strong and confident enough in math to risk the ego-puncturing that the discovery method can sometimes be. If you have a kid who already feels as if s/he can't do math, AOPS is not likely to help improve the situation.

Yep, Billy Graham...the Charlie Sheen of ...well, nothing.:D

I honestly think that it's more useful to judge by the individual child. More specifically, I think that we can take away different messages and meanings at different ages, but this fact does not make initial readings superficial.

Oh, thank you -- you said this so much more succinctly than I could. I appreciate this answer. I would also like to piggyback on your answer, especially the last sentence. One element that's hard for modern Christians, Jews, or Muslims (or even those who do not practice those faiths but were raised in the modern era) to really "get" at a deep level is this: Classical worship was not about your internal moral layout. In short, it wasn't about your belief in a particular ethical or moral creed so much as it was about giving respect to the gods in the form of prayers and sacrifice. Sin wasn't necessarily about unorthodoxy. It was more about straight-on obedience v. disobedience. The difference, as you can imagine, is huge. If I want my child to do something, I try to appeal to her reason and beliefs because I want her to be motivated from within. In short, I think like a modern monotheist. If all I wanted was her obedience, her feelings or belief about it would be essentially irrelevant. Then, I'd be thinking more like an ancient. That's why the Romans could easily and painlessly adopt worship of Cybele or Isis into their worship without a moral qualm. It's all about obeying the Gods -- whoever they are! Hope that helps.

There is one!!http://www.amazon.com/Dantes-Divine-Comedy-Boxed-Set/dp/0811856577/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1333737720&sr=8-1 I love this version, I admit, and for people who are totally freaked by Dante and find him scary and intimidating (and possibly boring), this is a fabulous place to begin. That said, any Dante purist who reads this will have a brainsplosion. Really, you folks who argue about whether the Mark Musa or the Dorothy Sayers was the best translation, and how to render terza rima in English, and Dante's influence on Eliot and the Modernists...just walk away. Now. Fast. Okay, you other readers who argue more over who's the weirdest-looking guy in LMFAO or whether Kayne will still be relevant in five years...click the link. Go on. In all seriousness, this is NOT a literal translation. It is an adaptation. The authors were very much influenced by the Gustave Dore drawings of the Inferno, but infuse both the illustrations and the text with a modern sensibility. Paolo and Francesca still fly in the middle of the great whirlwind of illicit lovers...but so do Bill and Monica. The great killers of Dante's time still wade through a river of blood...along with Pol Pot, Stalin, and Hitler. The language and illustrations are not always appropriate, particularly the language, so I would definitely advise pre-screening, but what I would say is this: Just as the language in this Commedia is casual and everyday, so too was Dante's Italian dialect. (A work of "serious literature," after all, should have been written in Latin!) Ultimately, I think that for many readers, the experience of reading this version probably comes closest to the experience shared by Dante's original readers. These folks populating the Inferno weren't just Dante's friends and enemies, but well-known members of the Ghibbeline and Guelph factions, high-ranking clergy, and (if memory serves), more than one Pope. They would have been just as memorable and real to Dante's readers as Clinton, Bush I, Bush II, Cheney, Monica Lewinsky, Charles Manson, Dionne Warwick, and a host of other public figures are to us. There's a shorthand there that we can access instantaneously without needing a footnote to explain it -- and Dante's audience experienced his text the same way. In short, it is by no means a perfect work or a perfect translation -- but it is, I think, a fascinating version to read. Good luck.

Any good DVD performances of Oedipus? The one with the masks is...well, useful in a kind of anthropological way, but it's not exactly viewer-friendly.