For those of you who have used Rod and Staff Arithmetic for the long term, I could use some insight. My son has used Rod and Staff Arithmetic beginning with their grade 1 book, and is just now completing their grade 7 book. I'm deciding what to do with him for next year. He's very bright (probably gifted) and has scored at the 99th percentile on his standardized for years, with a recent math grade equivalency of 13+. He's fantastic with higher level thinking, but at the same time, he tends to make careless mistakes and can get overwhelmed when overloaded. I often refer to him as my absent-minded professor. :001_smile: I'm wondering if it would be safe to move him into Algebra, or if it would be better for him either to finish Rod and Staff Math 8 or to take a different Pre-Algebra course. If he took Algebra in the fall, he'd hit Calculus in 11th grade, so there's no rush. I would just like him to be appropriately challenged. For a second question, I would love any Algebra recommendations that fit well with Rod and Staff. I love the way Rod and Staff presents new material and the way concepts are explained in such a clear manner. I'm a former math teacher, so I'm fine with a curriculum that requires parent involvement. I don't like Saxon, as the math teacher in me just can't get around the jumping around of topics and the wordiness of the explanations. I've considered Foerster, so if anyone has used that, I'd love your feedback. I'm open to other suggestions, as well. Thanks!

I just wanted to throw out that New York allows you to do a narrative, instead of standardized testing, each year for grades 1-3, and every other year for grades 4-8, so you always have the option of just doing a narrative this year and not submitting the scores. I also wanted to add that I've given the CAT-E (from Seton) to my children in past years and when I received the scores, the composite score was given right on the results page, in the lower right section and was labeled "composite score." I did the paper version, so perhaps the online is different, but maybe you could call and ask Seton. The 25th overall percentile you mentioned doesn't seem right. Even if he got a 0 in the math portion, unless he did poorly in all areas, he still should have been over the 33rd percentile.

At the 4th and 5th grade levels, tests are not timed. Beginning in 6th grade, there are speed tests (included in the quiz booklets) that are timed, but the chapter tests and regular quizzes still don't have a set time limit.

I'm not Mennonite, but I still love their Bible curriculum. We've been using it for seven years and find it sticks quite closely with the Bible. Some of their nonresistant doctrine is interjected, but nothing overbearing. I'm excited about (and amazed with) all the Biblical knowledge my children have acquired through their years of using the curriculum. I prefer dialoguing with my son over the curriculum when time permits, but you certainly could easily use it independently if you wish, as it is very well laid out and clearly explained. As far as the rest of their curriculum, I think their English, Spelling, Math, and Science can easily be used by non-Mennonites. Their history curriculum is probably the one most influenced by their Mennonite beliefs, with large sections on non-resistance, and a little on head coverings.

I think he makes some very valid points and ones that aren't just nick-picking. I don't think this is sour grapes; I think he's sharing legitimate problems that would interfere with a student's learning. It makes me want to go snatch up his versions!

My 12yo ds loves the MOH audio and has listened to all three volumes numerous times. I find it fascinating how he frequently shares all kinds of information he's learned from the audios. However, when I asked him if he thought the audios would be appropriate for his 8yo sister, he said he didn't. As I researched, I found I agreed with him. As a family, we've striven to preserve our children's innocence and let them enjoy their childhood, without being weighed down by "heavy" subjects. As they get older, as with my son, then we're more comfortable exposing them to topics such as Nero, martyrs, Joan of Arc, etc. Once they're ready, I feel MOH does a great job presenting the topics, and in an engaging way.

Since we've messaged back and forth about HOD, I thought I'd mention that we've used R&S Spelling for six years now and are very impressed with it. I like how thorough it is and how my son is able to use it independently. I also like how it goes beyond spelling to teach other integrated areas. We have sometimes used it in conjunction with HOD's dictation, as I feel each provides something valuable, but different. (BTW, HOD uses a different dictation program than Spelling Wisdom. HOD's dictation passages are found in the back of each guide, from Bigger on up, and come from a book published in the early 1900's, containing passages written expressively for the purpose of dictation. In contrast, Spelling Wisdom, put out by Simply Charlotte Mason, uses real literature, quotes, poems, etc. for their dictation passages.)

I would agree that Bigger is teacher-intensive, but for me, that was a plus, as I really enjoyed the 1:1 with my son and enjoyed learning along with him; however, if you preferred it to be less teacher-intensive and your daughter is advanced, you can have her read the history and science books on her own, which would increase the independence. Thinking back, we read the history together, but I did have my son read the science independently. For the notebooking, I would get him started, but then he would finish on his own. HTH

We used and loved Bigger Hearts. I didn't find it to be overly crafty. There's only one box, one time a week, that has an "artistic expression" assisgnment and, to be honest, it could be skipped if it doesn't interest your daughter. There are both history and science notebooking assignments, but they didn't seem "crafty" to me. If you're thinking you'll want to use HOD in the next year or two, and if HOD "speaks to you," I'd recommend going ahead with Bigger Hearts. We felt Bigger was a good fit for our bright, third grade son, so I think your daughter would be appropriately challenged as a second grader. (We did up the English and Math to higher levels, but they're not really tied into the guide.)

The books give instructions for how to draw the pictures, but the child does their work on a separate sheet of paper. Although it's not necessary, you could purchase a separate workbook, which is just a book with alternating blank and lined pages. My daughter just likes to use plain white paper to draw the pictures. Here's the link for the workbook: http://www.christianbook.com/my-draw-write-now-workbook/marie-hablitzel/9780963930705/pd/930702?event=ESRCG Here's the link for the Draw Right Now books: http://www.christianbook.com/draw-write-now-unboxed/9781928961222/pd/961220?event=ESRCN Click "Excerpt" to see sample pages.

I think there are many approaches for solving the problem, all of which help the student to manipulate numbers and have a greater understanding of place value. I especially like how Rod and Staff Math teaches the traditional algorithm, but also teaches mental arithmetic. In the case of doing 256-148 without paper, they teach the student to do 256 -100, giving 156; then 156-40, giving 116, then 116-8 (thinking of the triplet 16-8-8), giving 108. If it were a problem such as 211-148, they would do 211-100, giving 111; then 111-40 (thinking of the triplet 11-7-4), giving 71; then 71-8 (thinking of the triplet 11-8-3) giving 63.

I'm glad I could help! :001_smile:

I understand what you're asking, as I struggled with those feelings, myself, when I chose to use R&S. To give a little background, I started doing Apologia with my son when he was in first grade. He's always been extremely bright, but even with that, it seemed it was too much for someone that young. I set it aside, thinking I'd return in later grades. By then, we had been doing R&S Science for some time, with success. When I tried to incorporate Apologia, I found it just took too long for us, with everything else I was doing, and I was much less consistent with implementing it. When I've stuck with R&S, science gets done. I figure a science that gets done is better than a "complete immersion" science that only haphazardly gets done. :001_smile: Truth be told, R&S hasn't held him back. I don't put tons of weight on standardized testing, but FWIW, my son has always scored at the 99%ile in science, so I do know he's learning well with R&S Science. I, personally, like how R&S covers many different areas throughout the year. Although that limits the immersion he receives, it allows him to have a well-rounded science education, ehanced according to his interest. One of the aspects I especially like about R&S is how it gives me the opporturnity to supplement without feeling stressed. Because the lessons are shorter and easier to implement, we have room for adding in a lot of living books. I use all of Heart of Dakota's science book recommendations, as well as many others I've added to our library through the years. Because I use the living books as a supplement, I don't feel the pressure to complete them according to a set time-table. When we have more time, we supplement more; when time is a factor, we stick closer to the text. Down the road, I might end up having him read the Apologia books on his own, not as a complete curriculum, but to add to what he's already learned with R&S. We visit science museums and our local planetarium when time permits. We've also given our son Thames & Kosmos science sets as gifts, letting him putter on his own. My son loves science, so he frequently spends his spare time reading science books or experimenting. (This is a child who jumped for joy when he received a science encyclopedia for a gift! :001_smile:) I hope this helps!

This is our fifth year using R&S English, so I have a pretty good feel for the program. :001_smile: Contrary to what you are seeing in the sample pages, the program is very well thought out, extremely organized, and quite clear. I find it very easy to read and teach from the books and we have yet to encounter a topic that hasn't been thoroughly explained. There is abundant review, which might explain some of the disjointed feel you experienced. When you do one lesson after the other, it makes a lot more sense, and it does fit together well. I'll admit that I don't use the lesson presented in the teacher's manual, as it just duplicates what is in the student text. When we do R&S English, we start with the oral/written review in the teacher's manual, which is a great review and helps solidify topics. Then we read the student text together, usually with my son reading it to me. After that, we do the oral drill in the student text together. We finish off by my son doing the written practice from the book. (Oh, and since I'm an overachiever, I also have my son do the worksheets that accompany the program. They're not necessary, and some would call them overkill, but I like the extra practice they provide my son.) Addendum: Diagramming starts gently in grade 3.

In my state, the 33rd percentile is the cut-off, but that is the composite score. So, a child can have a very low percentile in one area, but if his composite score is over the 33rd percentile, there's not a problem. If that's how your state works, I wouldn't worry at all. Unless a child has a learning disability or a parent is completely neglecting homeschooling, I would think it near impossible for a child to score that low.

I own all of the Apologia Young Explorer's books, but find R&S much easier to implement. I definitely would describe it as a "get-it-done" curriculum. We've been using R&S Science for years and my science-loving son and I thoroughly enjoy the curriculum. I'm amazed, myself, at all have learned from doing it with him. We also love reading living books and find it very easy to add them into to R&S Science. For example, we recently covered a lesson on the nervous system. My son then read Seymour Simon's "The Brain" on his own and we discussed how it connected to what he had just learned in R&S.

If I were in your shoes, I would work hard at establishing a more consistent nap schedule. I've read that a 30-minute nap really doesn't "count" for a child, in that it doesn't allow him to go through the proper sleep cycle to get the rest he needs. That might be part of why he's so fussy and demanding attention. I found "The No Cry Sleep Solution" very helpful in this regard. As far as what my daughter played with at our feet, I had a bunch of different kind of toddler toys that I kept away until needed, so they were "new" and more exciting when I needed her to play by herself. I had blocks, stuffed animals, stacking toys, a Melissa and Doug bead maze, board books, puzzles with big knobs, Puzzle Patch easy puzzles, Geomag Baby, Wedgits (not the choke hazard size), Mega Blocks, Haba Wooden baby toys, etc. I was also remembering that I utilized eating times to do a bunch of read alouds, as well. Nothing like a full mouth and tummy to keep a little one happy and quiet. :001_smile: My little one is now 7, but to this day, I still read aloud to my children at breakfast, lunch, & snacktime. Such fond memories! Lastly, I want to encourage you that it won't always be so difficult. Eleven months old is a demanding age, but as your son gets a bit older, I think you'll be pleasantly amazed at how much easier it gets.

One suggestion. When my daughter was 11-months old, I did all of my 1:1 homeschooling with my son when she took her nap. We were able to accomplish a large amount of time during that hour and a half, since we weren't being disturbed. Then, any independent work could be done while she was awake and I was available to supervise her. I would also often read to my son while she played at our feet.

I really like the "Math in a Flash" cards. They have the complete set for each operation, including the zero facts. Here's a link for the addition ones: http://www.rainbowresource.com/product/sku/026350/92d31b2faf950bb8c863f17a

"Shh! We're Writing the Constitution" by Jean Fritz

It's interesting how two people can come away from something with completely different impressions. I've always viewed R&S as the opposite of cluttered and crammed. When I hear those adjectives, I immediately think of the lesson portion of Saxon. The explanations are good, but they're too long-winded for me. If I were a student, I would dread the page after page of verbage I had to wade through each day, before starting the lesson. With R&S, the explanations are short, sweet, and simple, yet very effective. I love the layout and clarity of the information and find it to be presented in a neat, orderly fashion. I think it's wonderful how we, as homeschoolers, can taylor the curriculum to match our teaching style and our children's learning style. :001_smile:

My youngest just finished R&S Math 1. The oral part took us about 15 minutes and the written part took her about 10 minutes. I'm late to this discussion, but I'll add that we adore R&S Math. My oldest just finished the 6th grade book and has used R&S from the 1st grade book on up. R&S has provided him an excellent foundation in math. The way R&S teaches is incredibly well organized and easy to understand. The quote by Ellie, from a friend reviewing the program, is spot on. I'm continually impressed by the way R&S presents material. Yes, there is a lot of work, a lot of repetition, and a lot of review, but in my opinion, that is what has led my son to do so well and to be rock solid on his math skills. Now that we're getting to harder material, it is a breeze for him, because of the wonderul preparation he's received.

The CAT/5 test has been discontinued and has been replaced with the CAT/6 Terranova exam. Since the K and 1st grade CAT/5 exams were written in by the students, those exams have now been used up. The older grades use a separate answer sheet, so that's why they're still available. I checked numerous testing sites, in hope one of them might have the CAT/5 1st grade test in stock, but to no avail. :sad: Here's some sites which I found helpful, regarding the CAT/5 situation: http://vahomeschoolers.org/2014/04/changes-in-standardized-testing-options-for-2014/ http://www.pesdirect.com/Products/CAT5_FAQ.html

I have the 2008 version of 2C. Pages 5 through 45 are manuscript review. Pages 46 through 143 teach cursive, with a few "manuscript maintenance" pages interspersed. From what I've reviewed, the newer version appears simliar. You can order either from their website.

Very, very well said!