http://logicofenglish.com/images/PDF_files/sample_chapters/Handwriting/ROH_Cursive_Book_2014.DV1.sample.pdf

If you want a cursive that you can use after completing HWOT manuscript, a cursive that is close to ZB is Rhythm of Handwriting by Logic of English. You can get the download for just $8 and the license is reproducible for the whole family. The program is for any level pre-K to adult. You should take a look: https://store.logicofenglish.com/handwriting/handwriting-digital

I don't like the ZB workbook style. I think it is too distracting with all those cartoons. Its hard to find something similar sans the cartoons. Some teacher supply stores sell posters, for under $3, that have both the Manuscript and the Cursive Zaner-Bloser, with all the strokes numbered and arrows lightly drawn along each capital and lowercase letter. Or, you could get a workbook and tear out the handy back cover reference which shows you the whole alphabet, and use it year after year. I love ZB font but I don't see much value in the workbook if it is just the strokes I want to teach from it. If you teach the strokes on the board and created your own copywork that might suffice. Its not an open and go solution, but it was what worked for us. I also found that some Crayola products have a similar font to ZB, using continuous strokes that are numbered in exactly the same way, if you needed tracing. The dry erase workbook for manuscript, which was woodland animal themed for preK-K, doesn't seem to be available any longer, and isn't the age you are looking for, but you might check out what new dry erase stuff they offer. I also noticed that some curricula such as Modern Curricula Press Spelling use a cursive style that looks a lot like ZB.

I am sorry to lob this one at you guys on just an ordinary Saturday night, but here goes. I want to structure my homeschool in a way that makes sense, in a way that is good for all of us here at home. I threw in the word "classical" because that's what I think of when the approach is a teacher who draws from a cultural treasure chest and structures lessons in a way that makes an increasing amount of knowledge available to the student, and to do it without an over-reliance on memorizing, rote work, busy work, external reward, or, "making it fun." That, whatever else it may be to everybody else, is my ideal of "classical." Charlotte Mason has been a good general resource for me. But, I am interested in specific subject resources. I am interested in "living books" for grown-ups and college students who want to absorb a subject well enough to teach it. To anyone. Because I am becoming more convinced that the key to doing this well is to be educated myself, to have in my mind the omega to my pupil's alpha. If you know exactly what I mean, please share your thoughts. I am convinced that it is much better to take a subject at the highest level, study it as a teacher, and modify it and spread it sequentially over the course of the scholar's years of schooling so that he is reading the same book that you began with by a certain age and moving above and beyond you, too, on his own power. This is one reason I like some of Charlotte Mason's methods, and the reading of classics at the earliest age possible; however, I find that her methods for teaching some skills like language arts and math need some top-down structuring and it would help if I had some resources that would allow me to competently do that. Also, I need some modern perspectives on classical subjects so that we can learn them objectively, with the benefit of hindsight, which is not always doable when you are reading primary sources and vintage sources without those oh-so-handy annotations. At this phase, when my oldest is just 6/ grade 1, I believe it is more important, and budget-wise, to invest in living books and study materials that are just as valuable in any grade (or, you know, that are just plain nice to have as a family), than it is to buy expensive curricula that has it all laid out for me yet might get shelved, and maybe doesn't even take us the whole way if we were to use it faithfully. Many curricula simply go *poof* and vanish at a certain grade level. I am considering buying textbooks at the highest level they go, so I can say, "Okay, is this where we want to be in x years? Then better do this." I am getting The Writing Road to Reading to read pretty soon, but I think that is just a one-year booster. I have ruled out Logic of English Foundations due to price. I regret getting the whole Right Start levels A and B because of what I was talking about: I don't like not having a long-range target for every subject. And I like a mastery development rather than a lot of repetition between levels of a program. I like to retain the ability to test out a level or omit a unit that has been mastered through other means already. But like I said, I am more interested in something for the teacher to study than in curricula for a certain grade level. Does this post belong on the self-education board?

Have you looked at Ruth Heller's World of Language series? They are a similar idea; a living book approach to early grammar. I am planning to use those and Grammar Land.

When I got out of highschool, I entered the University of Toronto. I only made it through a single year there. I found I was unprepared for a scholarly path. And I was the only one I knew of in my dormitory that had taken out student loans (PRIVATE student loans co-signed by my two full-time working parents in the states!!) When I attended U of T, Canadians had a pretty reasonable tuition, merit-based and citizenship-based priority admission, citizenship-based access to merit scholarships (I, as a U.S. citizen, could not even apply for one), and a relatively smooth transition after convocation if they planned to stay in Canada. On the other hand, their hospitality to international students was unparalleled to anything I have seen since. They had special programs and social opportunities for international students, including seminars on how to get a work visa upon convocation, childcare and family support services included with the price of fees. Comprehensive health care coverage through Ontario was, for me, a mere $500 for the school year. Their international tuition was very reasonable, even though it was about 10,000 more per year than what Canadians paid when I went there. My family never planned to be able to afford college tuition, so they didn't make plans to, and we entered the student loan mill all too willingly; but in Canada, it was expected that between taxes allocated to education that everyone pays, merit-only awards, reasonable tuition levels that a family can be expected to pay out of pocket, and a few grants given exclusively to needy scholars on a quota basis, almost everyone who really wants an education at the top level could have one. All that, and the high academic rigor that turns away the faint of heart, makes it possible to keep spaces available for those who are able and motivated to pursue it. In Canada, the national government allocates educational resources to the provinces in a top-down fashion while setting the bar for each provincial satellite's education department, ensuring that access is universal and standards are replicated throughout the nation. Despite this, the universities develop unique characters and reputations more or less organically, based on local customs and long-standing traditions. It is much different than the U.S., whose educational system is polarized (like everything else), internally competitive, and ridiculously expensive for what you can expect to come out with. It is possible in the U.S. to pay high tuition for classes that are so easy that you can be expected to know nothing but a handful of career best-practices upon graduation. While the U.S. boasts some of the most prestigious universities in the world, we also have some of the absolute worst that cater to corporate niches and yet siphon federal money through aggressive admissions practices. Worse still, our society has turned the celebrated virtue of going to university into a necessity: Because higher education pretends to be universal, it becomes remedial. What needs to be learned to gain admission is taught; everything else is learned when you get there. Most of my Toronto friends received their education and went into the workforce. Many exited university debt-free and went to work in public administration or public education. Some worked in the media with their humanities degrees, and a few even dropped out before completion (debt-free and always welcome to come back), in order to pursue areas of work that relied on technical skill. A friend of mine, a dual citizen of Canada and the U.S. from an Illinois Mennonite background, ended his degree in political sciences to obtain employment at a building company in the city of Toronto. He had learned carpentry through his church's global mission service, which he pursued in his year off between high school and university. Several friends of mine halted their U of T education to pursue careers in the performing or visual arts. Again, they are always allowed back. Even I, if I could pay out of pocket for my whole family to live in Toronto, would not be barred from resuming my degree exactly where I had left off. (Perhaps as an empty-nester, if I have savings, I will). U of T is probably one of the most competitive schools in Canada, which is why so many people dropped off and either entered vocations directly, or through some of the many subsidized vocational programs set up in Canada (which they call "college" as opposed to the scholarship path of "university." We States-ians seem to equate the two). Some people I knew went back to their hometown school, Guelph or Waterloo, which were less urban and less competitive. U of T is an urban school in a global city, where many students actually DO face very high stakes, and that can be an eye-opener to some people who are there without a clear-cut ambition. But for the most part, the rigor was enjoyed by those suited to it, and the fact that even I had a shot at it, that I could still go back if I wanted, means it was not a strictly determined track--my high school transcript and application showed my potential; the rigor I could either meet or eschew. While I attended U of T, a 27-year-old mother in one of my classes told me she was working on her degree in history while her children were in school. This wasn't like a University of Phoenix propaganda ad, where this would be her "second chance" at getting a good job and showing her kids the American dream. This was her leisure time away from her kids being spent in the rigor of learning something as complex and abstract as history. That door was open to her at that stage in her life based on her good standing as a citizen, and her educational merit that has no expiration date. It makes me wonder what the hell is wrong with the country I come from, why its all about money, expediency, and accolades here rather than creating a broadly educated public that engages in the life of the nation. This big rant comes from the bottom of my heart. Sorry its so long-winded. Its been more than 10 years since I left my friends in Toronto and now I am itching to go back and see how they are doing in their careers.

I agree that its important to give ourselves more resources upfront and narrow it down to a commitment after some trial. After all, that is the inductive way of doing it! Cheap are Developmental Math, R&S, Miquon, and MEP (free). SPM has free placement tests that show its style, and there are books that give you an education in the method before you commit (Why Before How.... off the top of my head). If I could un-do my mega-purchase of Right Start Math, I would get the cheaper books like the arithmetic kit's Activities for the AL Abacus, or the Math Card Games book only to review the format, before deciding to commit to that program. If you take OhElizabeth's advice and you hate some of the 6, and they are unmarked, you could possibly return them.

Thanks for sharing your experiences with these programs. This looks like a good example of blending two different programs whose content happen to coincide. That isn't easy to do, but I imagine with experience it becomes more clear. For early elementary, I am wondering if people tend to choose programs in math and science from the same publisher, such as SPM/MPAH, or Saxon and Nancy Larson Science, because they would have the same general method and might self-reinforce.

I have tears in my eyes from reading this because you have pinpointed my feelings about my current situation. I have hopped from unschooling to classical to CM... I have been swayed in drastically different directions philosophically. I know how it feels to see your child's future at stake. I am really not enjoying these formative years like I thought I would, either. I want my child to outshine his peers and get good money from colleges when he applies, years from now but at the forefront of my mind today. I want him to be highly employable as an adult. I want my child to value work not because it is inherently enjoyable, but because he is capable of both doing it and enjoying it if he is willing. I do not have any religious or political motives for homeschooling, and I am measuring my successes only as far as they seem to support those said goals. If I could hire tutors for him, I would in a heartbeat. I am already planning to have him study piano all the way through to college, and possibly add violin next year. He does best in those subjects that he likes, can practice freely, and has an outside tutor for. He benefits from tutoring at his age. And he is not some gifted pianist, he just had the right teacher and the right interest. My job, as his mom, isn't to give him the best curriculum out there or the most fun school experience, I am learning. It is to get him to take to his work so that harder work isn't some obstacle before him later down the road. And to teach him that interesting things may develop in our minds about our work; it isn't always plain enjoyment but requires appreciation, and that requires knowledge, and practice. Of course, I would still try to find reasonably good curricula, but it shouldn't be an obsession. TWTM lends itself nicely to efficient and targeted education. It is not joy-filled like AO or other CM-inspired products, but it can be enjoyed even if its just the sense of getting it done together, mom and child. TWTM top-recommended products target skills that can be developed incrementally, such as writing, spelling, grammar, and sense of historical progression. Its no wonder TWTM strongly recommends Saxon math which seems to follow the same idea: small steps toward higher thinking. Critics of TWTM, or of the trivium model, say that it underestimates young children's ability to gain conceptual knowledge if the trivium "grammar stage" is taken too literally. Critics say skills and facts ought to develop in the mind along with rather than distinctly before conceptual understanding, whilst the trivium places skills and memorized content ahead of connections and discussions occurring properly in the logic stage; but the curriculum in TWTM, if used intelligently, will not hold this supposed flaw. AO has its virtues, too: That it takes only a brief part of the day to formally educate a very young child and emphasizes a certain type of immersion that can be summed up in the quote, "Education is an atmosphere, a discipline, a life," by Charlotte Mason. It is rigorous on the literary front and encompasses primary source material for the study of humanities. AO offers a lot of nice material for free but there is also alot of work to be done by the teacher. Some people say that the teacher must model the kind of thinking and attitude toward learning, demonstrate proper language use, and model the kind of character expected of the student, that it is "caught rather than taught" as someone once quipped in the AO forum. Unschoolers may both love and hate this idea because it gives them credit for modelling good learning and behavior, but it also may seem to try to make the whole family culture fit someone else's ideal. RightStart Math has been specifically endorsed by certain members of the AO community, and I can see how it fits the model of natural, role-model centered, workbook-less learning. The mostly oral and hands-on format of RightStart, plus the activities and games that can morph into playtime math, make it easy to have a math-y culture and immersion at home. However, this approach, RightStart or the whole-learning approach, is not for everyone. I don't know how this turned into a review of methodology, but I hope it helps you consider that its easy to slip with one step, or skip, into a new direction without making sure there is firm ground. It happens to me often. But the key ingredient to a child's education is the constant support and love that she finds in her family, who reward her good work and give her reprieve if work is overwhelming her from time to time. The most successful schooled students typically have that type of support from within their homes, and I am sure if you lay that good foundation, it will be easier on your daughter either way she goes. It takes tremendous discipline to homeschool effectively, and it sounds like you are having success with your teenagers. Well done for getting thus far, and I do hope it gets better!

I found this one-year intensive: http://www.rainbowresource.com/proddtl.php?id=012157 Jensen's Grammar, Vocabulary, Punctuation, and Format Writing are sold in separate but affordable sets for the upper-elementary through college level. I was looking for something like this, covering basics of grammar through advanced-level knowledge.

I need something to teach myself so that I can guide the way. I am teaching elementary school children at home. I took AP English courses in highschool and would like something that extends and cements what I already know about grammar, so I can teach it to my kids. I don't really like kids grammar workbooks and I would prefer to self-teach before I need to choose a grammar for the kids, or make one myself.

It might be that she never had the chance to see the concept whilst memorizing at the same time. I was so good at memorizing when I was a girl, that I passed as knowing my math facts and still counted on my fingers in high school, just because I never felt sure of myself. It wasn't until I was an adult that I worked on it and eventually felt I had mastery of concepts and facts at the same time. I would require more of both.

Also known as quicksilver? I had forgotten that term, lol.

I wanted to try using Grube's but I wasn't sure about using all four operations symbols in writing, in the first year, nor if the first year was intended to be first grade/ age six or some later point of entry. I feel like I have to agree with the Right Start premise that it is much more natural to add and multiply in the larger numbers than it is to subtract and divide even the smaller numbers. I was thinking a vintage children's geometry I have might be better, along with living books and RightStart Original Program (activities and games books).

I am loving How to Teach Reading. I have so much I can bring into my little boy's grade 1-2 experience and this text is giving me an idea of how to arrange it to make sense.

You gave me an exhaustive list at one point but now I am only asking about vintage

What are your top math recommendations, Hunter? I am looking at grade 1-3

Thank YOU!!

I am looking for something vintage or free that includes very simple physics and/or chemistry. The nature study handbook is mostly life and earth science stuff. I love the Comstock book because it is based on answering questions from observation of physical phenomena and features. I am only sorry that I cannot keep a hen and her chicks in my basement for observation, as Comstock suggests for the first bird study! But I love the close-up look at the feathers to show how they are designed to be insulating and repellent... fascinating stuff. I have many other nature study guides that are newer, too. I need something a little different.... I am hoping to find something for indoors this winter, such as simple machines or kitchen-table chemistry. A vintage or free resource to guide my journey is all that I need. The main criteria is it has to be observational, not so much that it needs to be chock full of formal experiments, but to have clever ways to demonstrate basic principles, that create living proof to the child. Anything on building or engineering with concrete demonstrations would also be nice. Thanks in advance!

I would use pre-school to try different products. I love the Yellow is the Sun book and abacus from RightStart, as well as Tasha Tudor's 1 is One and Anno's Counting Book. I would use the RS number naming system and if I could use Montessori golden beads, I would teach place value that way. I would provide a sandbox and measuring cups and from time to time a water-play area with different plastic containers to fill and measure (I would consider purchasing Lentil Science or something if I didn't want to make from scratch). I would do calendar time every day. I would use Learning Resources foam magnetic letters that are color-coded for vowels and consonants along with a phonics primer to build CVC words. I would buy all the Bob Books and the Emergent Reader Series from Flyleaf Press. I would use, as I have in the past, Crayola's Write and Wipe book of manuscript letters. I would begin Pianimals music program at home or with a tutor. I would make sure to have plenty of all sorts of arts supplies and paper to scribble on, as well as clay, to work on strengthening those hands for later writing. I would have safety scissors and magazines on hand to let my child practice cutting. This is pre-school. From here I would gradually formalize the approach to each subject, based on my child's readiness. I would formalize math first, because getting used to a math program is a battle I would prefer not to drag into the primary grades (like I am experiencing right now). I would concentrate on bringing up my child's literacy skills through K-1st, with literature-based phonics, oral composition (ie teacher prompts child to discuss what has been read), and copywork (in that order... readiness matters). I would choose my own copywork from something my child reads independently, rather than a read-aloud... because there are some very beautiful sentences even in the simplest children's books, and I believe a child should understand how to read something before they are put to practice in writing it down. And begin a formal spelling program in 1st-2nd, employing some dictation exercises that are also self-selected or selected by the child's interest and knowledge of the subject the passage is talking about. I would begin systematic science and history in earnest in the 2nd grade, doing more writing across subjects after reading, understanding, and discussing a topic.

This looks like the book of my childhood dreams.

I can see why many people value Saxon for giving kids their bearings. Some kids do not have time to find the meaning of the formulas, and they may fall below grade level trying to. Some bloom differently, and need to grasp the big meaning of math gradually and on their own, or maybe never, if that is not their interest. Although I must say I agree that math is wonderful if it can be taught as such. I invested in RightStart, and I don't regret it. Saxon might be useful if I ever think my child needs a literal, directed approach to cement concepts into practice. But with RightStart, I have to provide exposure in the form of games and discussions where I confront my son with word problems in arithmetic concepts. This is fun because I like to be creative, but I have thought about getting the Saxon kit as a back-up. I am thinking right now that two math programs would be overkill.

Strong script for the parent, lots of practice problems, and a sense of accomplishment for the math-shy student seem to be its main virtues. Its criticism seems to be in the way it negatively compares to SPM, of which I have no experience. So what is it about Saxon that might be considered negative? Is it too didactic? Is it just not conceptually strong? Too much busywork? Is it the spiral approach that drives people mad? I would love to hear from people who have experience with it. I am baffled at the mix of praise and resentment for this one curriculum.

I think math is beautiful if it is taught in a way that makes it possible to comprehend it with certainty. There is nothing worse than having to solve problems with "rules" that give you no sense of the truth of why they are correct. Then you have no idea why you got the problem wrong when you get it back a week later and see the red pen. And by that time you have carried your confusion over to the next concept. With luck, one concept taught exceptionally well might strike you and show you the clear way forward, and also help you correct your past misconceptions. That is the beauty of math. But it would be better if the way to understanding were kept clear the whole way, through good teaching.

You've got me interested in Spalding, since I have a child who loves to do copywork and is still learning to read. What is the target age and duration of the Spalding program?