Could you then explain why a myriad of dictionaries include the following definitions (which I've copied word for word) of "myth"? (The dictionaries do also include your definition, but only as one of several definitions.) false belief: a widely held but mistaken belief fictitious person or thing: somebody who or something that is fictitious or nonexistent, but whose existence is widely believed in an unfounded or false notion a person or thing having only an imaginary or unverifiable existence any fictitious story, or unscientific account, theory, belief, etc. any imaginary person or thing spoken of as though existing A fiction or half-truth, especially one that forms part of an ideology a fictitious story, person, or thing ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I guess I don't understand how, as a classical educator, I'm only to follow your given definition and ignore all of the other ones found in each dictionary I checked. I'm wondering what it is about your definition that makes it superior and the only one classical, educated, intelligent people would use? I'm not here for an argument; I'm only looking for clarification.

I should have been clearer in my first post. When I said "no educational value," I meant no value in relation to the subject at hand. For instance, doing word searches of vocabulary words does not increase one's knowledge of the vocabulary. Coloring page after page will not help one to read better. I assumed folks knew what I meant, so I didn't elaborate. I'll be clearer next time. :001_smile:

I read once that schoolwork is considered "busywork" when it does not have educational value, such as doing a word search for vocabulary words or having students color page after page in a reading workbook. I know some classify worksheets as busywork, but I don't agree. I think there is value in worksheets and that they are a great learning tool when used correctly. Especially for younger children, drill and repetition are necessary and shouldn't be confused with busywork. Just my 2 cents. :001_smile:

Another vote for Rod and Staff here. :001_smile:

No workbooks - it's all oral. I started my "just turned 5 year old" on Saxon 1 and even that was basic for him. The only problem was that his fine motor skills were not as developed as his mental skills, so though he easily grasped the material, it took him a long time to do all the writing and drawing.

:iagree: We love it here! I'm extremely pleased with Rod and Staff's program. Very straight forward, yet highly effective. It may seem "dry" on the surface, but DS loves it, including the predictability and the challenge of the speed drills.

I hear what you are saying and understand. I'm all for less paperwork (and I know NY is one of the most stringent states) and I, too, have seen districts ask for unnecessary information that isn't listed in the regulations. What I'm unclear about is how the general statement you give meets the requirement of giving a description of the material covered in each subject listed in the IHIP and either a grade for the child in each subject or a written narrative evaluating the child's progress. Perhaps I am wrong, but I would think if a district went so far as to challenge a parent in court, the district would win. This is not to say many districts would go that far. To be truthful, I've been told by other homeschoolers that a lot of districts don't even read the quarterlies, but instead just check them off as completed and then file them. Anyhow, I won't belabor the point. We have different thoughts on this and that's fine. I just thought I'd respond one more time, to explain why I made my original comment about feeling the form didn't meet the requirements, so you knew my reasoning. Obviously, you've had success using your forms, so its clear that some districts are fine with them.

My statements were not at all meant as a personal criticism, but rather to make the point that for some districts, at least in the area of upstate NY where I live, the forms would not be sufficient. I'm happy it's working for you and others. That's great and I'm happy for you. Unfortunately, not all districts are as "easy-going." I know of several families near me, who reside in districts which thoroughly review paperwork, that have had their materials returned and told they were insufficient. (At the same time, others near me reside in districts who don't even notice if quarterlies are submitted at all, showing the difference among districts.) Again, I'm glad what you are doing is working for you and that your district is satisfied. I'm sure that alleviates a lot of burden for you. My experience is different, but that is to be expected when homeschooling compliance is verified on a district, rather than a state, level.

I have to politely disagree that the statement is all that is required, because the regs. clearly state that the quarterlies must give "a grade or narrative for the child in each subject." I know, for many districts around me, a generic "progressing at a satisfactory level or above in all subject matter" would never fly, in the same way a public school would never get away with sending a report card home that stated, "so and so is progressing at a satisfactory level or above in all subject matter."

I am surprised, too, as it does not meet the requirements listed in the Part 100.10 regulations, specifically "a description of the material covered in each subject listed in the IHIP" and "either a grade for the child in each subject or a written narrative evaluating the child's progress." Having said that, I know districts vary greatly in what they require. I'm from upstate NY and some nearby districts don't even look at anything submitted, whereas others go through things with a fine-toothed comb.

I've considered using R&S history, especially because DS is thriving with the R&S materials we're currently using and does well with a textbook approach, but I heard there was a lot of "anabaptist" doctrine throughout their history textbooks. We agree with many of their beliefs, but not all, including "non-resistance," so I was wondering how well it would work for us to use the textbooks. What are your thoughts after having used them?

We use and absolutely love R&S, plus we've saved a ton of money using their materials. Not only are they already very inexpensive, they also have a 10% off sale each spring, plus a 50% off "seconds" sale each year. We purchased some seconds this year and they were in fine condition. From what I've heard, their shipping is much cheaper than CLE, so that's also a factor to consider.

The Burgess Bird Book for Children is one we've enjoyed a lot. Another is Parables of Nature, by Mrs. Alfred Gatty, which has some stories about birds mixed in with other stories. Seabird by Holling Hollings is a great one, too.

You'll want her to be automatic with her math facts, or you'll find she will really struggle as you progress. If she has to use a number line every time she encounters the facts 13-18, math will become very tedious and time consuming, not to mention a drudgery. She doesn't have to memorize past 18, because after that, it just becomes double digit addition, which uses the facts 2-18.

:001_huh:Am I missing something? I've heard from many sources that Kingfisher is OOP, but I'm seeing it available all over - B&N, Amazon, CBD, etc. Am I looking at the wrong book? (I've been looking at the red Kingfisher History of the World.)

I remember reading a book from Rod and Staff that addressed the concerns with self esteem that stem from retaining a child, but they pointed out that moving a child on when they are not ready affects self esteem just as much. If your daughter is struggling, especially on an ongoing basis, I would think that could be more harmful than keeping her back a grade. Our son was young for his grade and we struggled with the decision to delay first grade, but I'm so glad we made the decision to give him another year. (We did similar to the 4, 4/5, 5 route in that we did K, K/1, 1.) I have a feeling if you give your daughter the extra time, she will thrive. Since both you and your husband feel this is best, I would go with your gut. On another note, I was young for my grade (late October birthday) and thus started college at 17. In retrospect, I would have been much, much better off having started school a year later.

I'm assuming that's what they meant, as well as the sea creatures for 3rd grade multiplication. I've used the duckies, sailboats and blossoms as a combination of visuals/manipulatives, in that some days, I'm the one who moves them and sometimes my son is. I agree, I think the current edition is great and my son loves the activities. Even at age 7, he thinks the lamb, pig & horse are really neat! I will admit, though, that my duckies kept falling off the felt board! :001_huh:

The arithmetic 1-3 is under revision again. The grade 1 is due to be finished this coming spring. When I inquired, I was told it was because teachers found the manipulatives to be "clumsy." I'm going to stick with the current one, only because I already own it, but I'm curious to see the new revised ones.

Working with Numbers is the previous edition, from before the early 1990's, when they revised their math. Working with Arithmetic is the current one. Clarification on TM's - The reason I feel they are necessary is not that the student could not complete the work on their own without the instruction in the TM, but that the TM add so much more to the curriculum. To me, it's like comparing milk. Just using the workbooks/texts would be like giving your child skim milk. Using them in conjunction with the TM would be like giving your child whole milk.:001_smile:

One thing I love about R&S is that I get to work with DS 1:1, while we go through the activities in the TM and then I can set him off on his own and he can independently complete the math worksheets and the phonics or reading workbooks. Occasionally, he'll need a little clarification with the phonics or reading, but for the most part, he can work with very little hand holding. I have used R&S 1st grade math and am currently using 2nd grade math, while finishing up the 1st grade Bible Nurture and Reader series (which covers phonics and reading) and handwriting. Come February, I will also be using 2nd grade spelling, health, science, social studies & English. From what I've already used and from thoroughly previewing what we will be using, I have found the TM's to be essential. (I need to politely disagree with a previous poster who said there was no instruction in the math TM. I found the complete opposite to be true and couldn't imagine doing the program without the TM.) If you call R&S, they will send you sample curriculum booklets for each grade for free. That's what helped solidify my decision to switch to them.

My DD will be 3 in January. She loves when I include her in homeschooling, by working with her on the Kumon's "First Steps" workbooks, A Beka's "Arts & Crafts with Button Bear" for 2 year olds, coloring, etc. I've been considering getting LHTH to do with her, mainly as another opportunity to interact with DD in a learning-type setting, but wonder if I should wait until she's a bit older. I know the guide says ages 2-5, but I guess I'm uncertain about "formal" schooling for so young an age, as I never did anything formal with DS before kindergarten and he learned the alphabet, consonant sounds and counting to 20 simply from playing and us reading to him. Any thoughts from experienced moms? :bigear: P.S. I have "Slow and Steady, Get Me Ready" on my shelf, but it just seems to collect dust. :001_huh: I have good intentions, but because some activities require prep, I've unintentionally procrastinated with using it. I thought LHTH might be more usable, in that I've heard it's more "pick up an go."

The report you linked to made this statement: "Our findings contradict an earlier evaluation conducted by members of "Mathematically Correct" posted at: http://www.mathematicallycorrect.com/books.htm. That evaluation gave high marks to SRA McGraw-Hill: Explorations and Applications. Those high marks are not supported by our findings." There was also a report in the link that rated each program, and in 13 out of 14 areas, Saxon was ranked higher than SRA. I was wondering, then, how the report led you to chose SRA. (I'm not trying to be snarky, I'm truly curious and was wondering if I missed something.)

I used Saxon 1 and half of Saxon 2 with my DS. From my experience, if you aren't going to get a copy of the TM, you'd be better off switching to a different program. Although your child could do the worksheets, he/she would be missing a majority of the program without the activities in the TM.

Is there an expiration date for the coupon?

Please understand I say this gently and with compassion, not judgment. When I read your posts, I see glaring indications that your son would greatly benefit from a professional evaluation and possibly meds. You obviously disagree and I hear what you are saying, but I guess I do not understand how it could be better to go through years of your son struggling with concentration and independent work habits, coupled with your being frustrated and wondering how you'll survive. To me, it looks like unnecessary suffering. Why put your son, or you, through that? He may be able to advance in his studies, but if that happens only with daily struggles on both of your parts, is it worth the conflict? Even if you don't want medication, why not just get a professional evaluation from someone who is an expert in the field, so you know exactly with what you are dealing. Getting the evaluation won't commit you to medications or any other actions; it will just give you information with which to work. Plus, if you have a good evaluator, they will give you numerous strategies to use with your son. I remember some of the evaluations my students had from a local hospital. The parents would get a 1/2" -1" thick packet back, with a thorough description of the child's learning style and (non-medication) intervention strategies.