I want to share one more observation just to see if anyone can provide feedback. I am noticing that RS is very strong in skills development, but I do not see a whole lot of application to story problems or math puzzles. I thought that there would be more story problems and things of that sort. Do they come later? Are they inserted sporadically? Is the calendar math the main chunk of the real-world application? Though I do not have enough experience to say for my son, I am wondering if there is an age gap that can happen if you begin RS too late with a child (like we are doing, beginning at age 6). Preschoolers can focus and absorb information through their senses while learning, but I think once a child is 6 and older, they want to see how they can use this information. As it gets more advanced, does RS satisfy this need?

Thanks for your description. Based on what everybody has told me, I have decided to get RS A 1st ed, and the Activities for the AL Abacus book. I think that the RS pedagogy is ideal for the younger set, and I have a little one I want to be ready to teach by age 4. I think I can adapt A and B for my 6yo son's learning style, and if I cannot, there are affordable or no-cost choices. One person had told me that RS was for gifted children, and I didn't believe them. But I can see where that may come from, because RS does seem to demonstrate things in a concrete-to-abstract way and at a rigorous pace, that may take a few cognitive leaps for my child. But if starting at A does not work up to my son liking the program, I am not going to regret having used the program. There is just so much I like about it.

Thanks for the advice. I am not interested in switching programs right now, however.

MEP is a resource I would fall back on if RS was too daunting. But I like the program too much to ditch it when I think it can be tweaked.

I am pretty sure that my problem is twofold: 1.) My son does like worksheet math. and 2.) We do need to master level A before B can be tackled intuitively. I gave A a proper looking over, and it is very rigorous. I can see that the levels are structured developmentally and that it gets more challenging and abstract in B. In placing my son in B I took for granted that he knew his number facts because he could so worksheets in 1-10, and could read instructions (the old placement test just wanted to know these two facts, plus the child's age. Now, the placement test says to begin in A regardless of age if the child did not have formal math in K). But his main strategy until RS had been counting up from 1 or using the hundred board to count up or back. I took down the hundred board when I introduced RS and will only bring it back when we have understood place value. The only problem

Thank your for saying so. I am not sure if getting the new and untested RS2 was a wise move on my part, for this very reason. RS1 built a nice reputation, and there is never a guarantee that the newer one is better. I do not like how instead of being scripted it is written as an abbreviated script of "directives", which is why I have to re-write it as a script in my own voice. That's my number one difficulty with it, besides not knowing the logic behind the sequence.

Hmmm.... I did realize there is a big difference between the two, and that some children coming onto B from A have a difficult time. But I also heard that B reviews alot of what was covered in A. This could be the problem. What A might have presented sequentially is presented as spontaneous review in B, and I am repeating these activities until my son gets them, thereby boring him. I am probably going to have to write to the program creator about this though. Thanks for the insight.

Question on books that make a handy reference for teaching: If you have used either of these books, please share your review of the content with me so I might make up my mind which to get. Which one is more useful in building a phonics program around? We will be incorporating alot of word-building with Unifix phonics cubes and practicing out of emergent and decodable readers, but I want to make sure we are mastering one concept before moving on to the next. Thanks in advance. :laugh:

I have been writing the lesson objectives in my own words from the RS teacher manual. It is really difficult for me to follow at a glance, and I know where my child is in his grasp of the concepts, while they do not. RS shows a concept in more than one way, which I really like. I think that the warm-ups at this level would be better spent in math concepts rather than calendar drill, so I have used Ray's arithmetic oral exercises to build number sense. Also, I have used c-rods to demonstrate the parts-whole concept. Once he saw with the c-rods what it means to have two parts equaling a whole in length, he got what it meant to partition a whole into a set of two within that number. That was a pretty significant leap. He has been complaining about repetition though. I think he is beginning to notice that we are covering the same concepts in a variety of ways. I think that is a positive thing because it means he is getting that the facts are the facts, no matter the way they are presented. I think he is missing the satisfaction of solving problems independently, though. He is really smart, and this is not his first math experience. He already knew how to count to 1000, and add-on by counting from 1 (which is what I wanted to change. Now he can add on by counting from 5, and does not count when he enters quantities on the abacus). But I understand that I am teaching him habits of thinking mathematically, and if I let him solve problems by counting up from 1, he is not really using the strategies being taught. However, I think the abacus is hard for him to enjoy using. I think I will have to let him use the abacus to solve word problems so that he can develop a sense of the beads meaning something. The abacus should serve as a bridge from the concrete to the abstract, not take the place of meaningful concretes. And I think that is where is enthusiasm for it dwindles. Also I think it would help to read to him an age-appropriate living book or history of number systems, so that he understands that these systems developed logically and were not just made up. They are observation-based. Every number has an adding-on pattern that repeats itself. "Seven is five and two" whether its with a ten as 17, or whether its in tens as 70 is 50 and 20. There is nothing cryptic about this whatsoever and I like the approach that RS ultimately takes, but my goodness, it can sometimes feel like the "discovery" of it by the child is making him go through a fog until the good, clear truth is known to him, when my gut tells me to just explain the system to him as the "why" behind the exercises, and teach him how to use it properly. I suppose I will get better at this in time.

Whatever program you use, or if you are following TWTM, just make sure you choose age-appropriate reading and are moving from concrete to abstract. If you follow TWTM, you will be learning about life sciences through the senses in grade 1. I do think that scientific principles should be taught 1.) concretely first, to more and more abstract in the upper grades, and then, 2.) historically and logically, following the way scientific principles of earlier times lead to developments in later history. WTM tries to accomplish this, but in my opinion, you have to treat your scientific history as part of your science program, and follow the sequence of your science objectives, emphasizing history in the context of science and not necessarily bowing to the sequence you are following in your main history. You don't want to feel inflexible in the way you teach your science and history simply for the sake of keeping them paired. You simply review the relevant context in either subject and take advantage of times to integrate the topics at hand. In the early grades I would stick to demonstrations of simple concepts that the ancients could have discovered by means of their senses, trials, and successes. Teaching your children how to make observations from real life would be my priority over book-knowledge. Describing, measuring, comparing, and learning the facts behind those observations, the "why and how" that can be shown through demonstration, is really fascinating for children in the lower elementary grades. You can illuminate these demonstrations with descriptions and vocabulary of the forces and processes at work, but only to the point that you can "show" at least the effect of a process or force without having to make a child accept an abstract idea without evidence.

If you were just curious to try a secondary math program for the sake of comparison, I would second the advice to try a free program like MEP or a vintage program that someone suggested earlier. I have Ray's Primary Arithmetic which I use along with RSB for grade 1. I highly recommend the Oral Exercises for developing a basic number sense of 1 through 10. The oral word problems are good, too. Having a child express a math solution verbally can be really helpful, and Ray's requires this.

You know the concept of "hacking," meaning to make something work better for you by figuring out what makes it tick, and tweaking it just a little bit to your advantage? I am not talking about computing system infiltration, thought that's where the term comes from, but in the universal idea of making a good concept work even better by re-vamping it. Well, I need some advice from experienced RS "hackers." I am using RS2, just so you know, level B with a 6-year-old first-grader. I like the program overall, but there are certain difficulties in its methodology. I think it could be made a lot simpler to teach and to learn. The daily calendar "math" review is completely annoying, so I usually skip over it. I don't think calendar skills help to form conceptual understanding of math, but rather are a real-life application that should be covered once in awhile. I could save it for once per week, perhaps. But a more fundamental flaw in its approach is that it can't seem to decide whether it is spiral or mastery. It certainly jumps around alot, and yet it has a lot of repetition. I think it could be streamlined alot better, so that instead of introducing a new concept after a lot of review, I could just follow a sequence when my child is ready to learn the next higher concept. I don't think review is important if there is a grasp of the concept. It amounts to a muddling of the facts if the child already possesses the skills to think through problems. But overall, we are learning the concept of missing addends and parts-whole diagrams with ease, which would have been a truly daunting thing for me to teach without this program. Also, when it comes to place value, I have no anxiety about teaching that concept because I do think that this method covers it very thoroughly. So my main issue is on how to streamline this program to eliminate undesired repetition while strengthening skills proactively, with a stepping-up approach to practice and drill rather than a stepping-down/ review daily approach. I think what I am asking is how do I make this program work for a learner who needs a mastery/ move up approach? Next question: I have heard that RS used to offer only its basal program which prepared the student for the Geometric Approach. The Classic program, as I think it was called, included Activities for the AL Abacus book and worksheets, and the Math Card Games book, and I am not sure what else it entailed. Has anybody used the old, "Classic" RS program, which was basal and lacked all the extra activities and calendar lessons (and hence is not offered as a complete math curriculum)? Thanks in advance. I know alot of people use RS and hopefully can relate to what I am saying about wanting it to be more streamlined.

I also would peek at BSFU. I really like how it is discussion-based and demonstration based. Ie. no worksheets, no messy experiments involving hard-to-find items, just real-world examples to observe and discussion of vocabulary and principles. BSFU also has recommended reading lists at the end of each unit. It does not isolate science education by field of science but shows you how to move from the most simple to the more complex concepts in all areas of science, with flexibility that lets you decide when to cover what field (matter, physics, geology, biology, etc), but always moving from simple to complex topics. Keep in mind that BSFU comes in volumes so you may need to get both, since your children's ages are far apart. The author of BSFU also produces a method book called Nebel's Elementary Education which covers grades K-6 and is strong in science, according to reviews, but I have never read it. http://www.amazon.com/Nebels-Elementary-Education-Creating-Tapestry/dp/1588208923

Try Khan Academy... they seem to be strong in physics/ engineering type science https://www.khanacademy.org/science/discoveries-projects/discoveries/magnetism/v/discovery-of-magnetism

I am probably at the same stage as you and I am going to be following this topic. I have flirted with AO but never seem to have the willpower to commit to it as a new curriculum. I am hesitant, as much as I want to try it. I think I am just going through a phase where I am learning about the different types of classical education. We are not a Christian family, and that makes it completely hard. I know most of the riches in these curricula have to do with prayer hours, hymn singing, and Bible study, apologetics in some schools... and there is little I can come up with to replace those areas of great importance. So I am actually discovering that Classical may not be a good fit for me, maybe. But the thing is, I do believe in raising a child with some religious background so that they can make informed decisions about their personal faith when they are older. And so I go back and forth.... some days I just want to dive right into the Bible with my child and see what happens, other days I feel I just want to buy a completely secular box curriculum and go. Have I gotten off the topic of CM? Sorry :blush: CM, like other Classical educators, emphasized knowledge of God as the goal of education, as well as, I am sure, a love of king and country in her time. So, some of the things that drew me in were the beauty of the literature, but some of the literature would be less valuable to me as a secular and American educator, and I wouldn't be getting the full dose of whatever the benefit. But I do think there is great value in the idea of nature study for a family of mixed ages, for out-of-doors time, and masterly inactivity after any work completed for the day, of family handicrafts for kids who like that, and of choosing living books over other kinds of literature for family reading time.

If you have used CLAA or know someone who has, how is it overall? I know its Catholic and Latin-centered. What are its other limitations if any? Thank you.

I wish I could get Nancy Larson Science 1 without feeling like I *had* to use all of it.

At age 6 1/2, my son has about a year of phonics instruction behind him. He can read Bob Books independently, and he has just begun to scan books and read headings, so that has been encouraging. He can normally read orally if he relies partly on memory. Read aloud time is really enjoyable, but scarce, because I have a baby and because my son likes to play and build rather than sit still. I wish I had more one-on-one time with him.

I am wondering what all works in your reading programs. I am interested in an "ecclectic" approach to reading instruction from anyone who has had to bend the rules or blend approaches to get a custom fit for their child. My child is very mechanically inclined; he likes to take things apart and build them up again. It is no wonder that he seems to enjoy the few Charlotte Mason-inspired reading lessons that we have added to our study, which involve matching a mix-up of words, building word families, and sequencing words in dictated order. We have been moving toward "whole-parts-whole" as I like to think of it, as opposed to "parts-whole" phonics we were used to. I think he would really enjoy word study and an added whole-parts emphasis. What would you recommend? My ideas were to study words that have a Latin root, and words that are cognate with French or German. I want him to understand reading as an inherently interesting, "take apart, put back-together" opportunity to study words and their meanings as well as their phonetic construction. He needs to be turned on to the wide world of language, because his phonics background only brought him part of the way to reading independently. I am hoping that as we continue to review and work on those skills in the context of a more "eclectic" approach, they will stick and he will use them. Please try to refrain from criticizing my departure from strictly phonics! I am trying to create something enriching to get my son on the path to loving reading, not trying to re-invent the wheel or deem phonics a failure for my son, which it certainly isn't/wasn't/won't be. PS, if you would like to tell me about your experience with Nancy Larson Science curriculum, I would also be happy to hear about that instead. I have heard that the way lessons are done are to encourage reading, as the child has to follow along what is being read aloud.

I had purchased programs that I didn't like at first, and have found myself pulling them out for variety's sake. For example, I got stuck with c-rods that I couldn't return, but in recent math lessons I have pulled them out, and now that my son seems to enjoy them, I am contemplating getting him a Miquon book so that he can use them more. In homeschooling I think a lot of parents choose a curriculum they like to each, only to discover that their children may like a different perspective.

Last winter, my then 5yo son loved to play "Easter egg hunt" with his toy cars. He would ask me to either hide them or look for them after he had hidden them. I learned to use these requests for play as an opportunity to get him to do some of his work, so I would tell him I would hide the cars if he did his handwriting and didn't watch me, etc. Or I would offer to make him a paper airplane for every assignment he completed, then we would enjoy indoor gym throwing hem around the house. "Scribbling," a la Charlie and Lola (British cartoon, cutesy and delightful), was another activity I would sometimes do instead of handwriting. We would scribble and hold our pencils or markers any way we liked, but eventually I noticed he would use the correct hold without being asked, when we scribbled. Then I would bring out the handwriting again. As he gets older (now 6), I agonize over what curricula to use for him. He really is a close kid: He keeps his thoughts private. He is logical, assertive, passionate. I sometimes feel that he is so bright and am terrified that I will somehow "mess up" his education. That and the discipline issues keep me from loving our routine, but I have to work through it, or, find a great school somewhere, anywhere, right? And I remind myself that many families are home-educating all sorts of ways, and I am sure I can find my way. But we have to remember that our kids love us and want to please us, truly. We also have to show pleasure in what we do as far as their education. Adopt a positive attitude about your teaching duties. "Fake it before you make it," if need be. But truly reflect on what you are about to teach, and keep it simple, and start talking about it at breakfast or sometime prior to bringing out the work. Say, "I really look forward to teaching you today." That's it. If she complains, say, "You know its my job to teach you at home. And I like to teach you because you are so smart." etc. "It's my favorite part of the whole day, when we do our work without fighting," etc. Affirm that the time you spend teaching has inherent value to you, and she will slowly start to understand its her privilege to receive education. I don't believe that more than three large pieces of furniture look good in any one room; I honestly do not think that more than three academic goals can inhabit my brain on any given day. So I try to prioritize. What is that one lesson that your child struggles with but is SO close to an "aha" moment? Do that lesson. What lesson does your child seem to take personal initiative in? Do that one. Which one is just a pleasure for you both (a rare treat)? Finish with that one. Then, if your child is particularly demanding about something, wants you to really drop what you are doing to pay attention to her, bring out one more thing on your list (maybe review from a previous day's work) and do that for ten minutes before indulging her in four rounds of Candy Land, or paper airplane mayhem, or whatever. They want our attention and love; we want their cooperation and respectful attitude. In the early elementary years we cannot measure our success in terms of productivity: Its the process and the routine being formed that will lead to success down the road.

If time is a concern, why not just set a timer and keep lessons to a reasonable limit, same each day? You can pick up where you left off, and if it takes longer to complete a level because of it, that is OKAY! Stretching a level of math over the entire year allows the material to stick over the summer, and it doesn't need to feel rushed, as long as concepts are being learned in each session. And since it looks like you have a young one in AO Y0 I am sure you know that RS is a well-loved program in the AO community, because it gives variety and makes it enjoyable, and can be taught in 20-30 minutes. You do not need to let the lesson stretch for longer if you have other things to teach!

Charlotte Mason and Webster's Speller are two resources I am adding to my tool belt. Thank you.

I find myself reaching for a more relaxed approach to the three R's. I began homeschooling with the attitude that I would adopt a Waldorf-inspired approach, but when I read WTM I got nervous that my son would be illiterate if I did not emphasize reading skills. Now, I believe I am going to relax on the reading skills again, and just do the things that I know will encourage reading. One thing I like to do is point to a sentence or phrase and mispronounce all the vowels. My son will correct me, with a sigh and a chuckle. He knows its a game. I want my reading instruction to look more like a whole-language program, but the phonics will be there. More rhymes and games are necessary, and analysis of a poem or nursery rhyme will be the start of most our lessons. I am adopting a philosophy that places more importance on character and emotional maturation. I do not believe that everything has to be taught in the early years in order to solidify, but I do think that the early years are an ideal time to enjoy learning together, before the child's own interests overcome the parent's ability to teach (as is already beginning to happen to us with piano!).

I have an eclectic education and not a whole lot of career experience. The passion you sense comes from my excitement to learn things I always yearned to learn when I was younger. I am learning so much as I go. I want homeschool to feel like whole-family enrichment. My vision comes from my awareness that I did not have to be a good student to be good at something like a career, or motherhood, but that education is itself a desirable pursuit. This totally clashed with the culture I grew up in and was schooled in, which put huge emphasis on college prep, and it turned me off. With this as my background, to unschool my kids was my original vision, so that they would love learning and be good at their jobs someday, too. Then I read The Well Trained Mind and realized that adults could teach their kids soooo much more than they had learned in their school days, timeless and important, scholarly skills, while still reaping the benefits of having the kids home where they see how the "real world" works. This is all very rosy and of course I wanted to dive right into a new, more structured schooling style. And then I got to know this group and realized what a huge world it was and how many ways I could go with educating my children under the "classical" umbrella. To me, classical means learning for the sake of self-enrichment, even though I notice that many in this group are very keen on college prep and academically competitive. That isn't me. I am going through a phase where I am starting to want to tailor my approach to what I believe will help us most.