We took a break from our schooling for awhile. We had been doing light work all summer, but just felt that we needed to focus on manners and social skills for awhile. Also, I have been doing this for a year and I just don't feel confident. We decided to sign up DC for piano lessons, and he is such an ideal student in that context. We are awesome parents when it comes to holding him accountable to his practice schedule, and encouraging him, and fostering his respect for his teacher. To me, it made me feel relief that my son was being taught by someone else, and that made me feel guilty! I am really bummed. I just feel down, I have to admit. I am bummed that my 6 yo seems to be doing fine, thriving even, with our lessons on hiatus and the piano lessons going smoothly. I feel guilty too for not towing the line, but at the same time, this break really allowed him to develop a better, should I say, personality. He has been so mature, much more compliant and helpful, more expressive and attuned to detail, when our focus has been off academics. I almost am reluctant to shift back, and not sure how I am going to make the transition.

I really feel that saying the words first by myself, then together with my son, then having him say them by himself, helped in the lessons that required emphasis on fluency. What I mean is, some lessons he could very easily sound out the words because he recognized the pattern immediately. But for trickier lessons, it really helped to do the "repeat after me" and for me to guide him through first before he read it on his own.

You could have her alternate between reading aloud and narrating after she completes a passage. Then let her choose her own free-reads (non-school reads) from what you might consider a little bit below her decoding level, to improve her fluency and her confidence. Show her how to look up unfamiliar words in a dictionary, and encourage her to keep a journal of new words. A thesaurus might help, too. It is nice to have these tools to use, but it is slow to have to look up a word when you are trying to savor a story, so its also good to make sure she is getting things that won't overwhelm her ability to make meaning out of the language. You might look into formal vocabulary lessons. I have not tried it yet, but have heard good things about English from the Roots Up. Children have to comprehend something like 90 percent of the vocabulary in a passage in order to comprehend what they are reading. Though I am only doing a light first-grade year, vocabulary is my main focus. Just vocab and phonics. I do not even require my dc to read aloud to me from his schoolbooks. I let him look at comic books, and I read to him. I am trying to get into the habit of explaining vocabulary as it comes up. I hope I've given you something to work with. : )

I think medication in combination with therapy is important. Medication alone does not "heal" the condition, but true healing comes out of intentional behavior adjustments. Medication helps if your wiring makes it painful or just plain impossible to make those important behavior adjustments. The illness isn't that your brain works differently, its that it can actually cause pain and angst to try to change its patterns. It is important to receive counselling along with medication in order to develop appreciation and non-judgment about her challenging brain-type. But to medicate is still your choice, and I wouldn't say you had to do it unless the evidence pointed to it being a positive in your child's therapy. I do feel that alternative therapies can play a role. So can modifying expectations of your child's performance. Making lessons shorter, teaching to strengths, and using play to motivate your child to learn even if your child seems a little beyond that stage in age, could help. If medication was not something you wanted to consider until your child is a bit older, you could use therapy, and modify your teaching, and continually evaluate until you were sure of the decision.

I have been flirting with going away from WTM and toward Ambleside Online for some of the subjects you mentioned. AO has a lovely booklist for literature, history, and geography. Here is what I gather about AO (I just began using some of it) AO history readings are different than SOTW, much less strictly sequenced, more geographically focused. That may or may not be what you are looking for. Its nature/science books are beautiful works of literature. In the early years much science is accomplished through nature study. Shakespeare and Plutarch, poetry, and living books comprise the literature. They schedule these for you, so you do not have to come up with the list on your own unless you wish to add or substitute! *Keep in mind that AO is a Charlotte Mason curriculum. The booklist could be with any method; it is not CM unless you intentionally implement her methods.

The McGuffey Primer might also be an interesting, free supplement to try: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/14642

My understanding is that the whole language approach teaches vocabulary, phonics, parts of speech, and sight words all in one lesson. I toured my local Montessori school and that is their approach as they explained it to me. For my phonics program I will be adding sight words, but not in the form of flash cards. My goal is to allow my child to read meaningful material (not phonetically controlled Bob Books all the time) and interesting, dynamic sentences (not one flat rhyme all the way across) so I will be writing my own primer where I use my phonics program as a bare minimum and then add lessons to it that I feel are appropriate to our level of vocabulary and interest,

This looks like a good book. ---I just placed a hold on it. What strange luck that my library had it!

The reason I bought TWTM is because I wanted to learn more about the trivium approach to education. I had been reading a book titled The Trivium: The Liberal Arts of Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric by Sister Miriam Joseph, C.S.S, PhD and edited by Marguertie McGlinn (Paul Dry Books, 2002). It's a college-level textbook in the skills of knowledge acquisition (logic) and expression (grammar and rhetoric). Interestingly, the author defines logic as the art that preceded the need for grammar, for ordering ideas comes before giving them expression in language. Mastery of logic and grammar then produces a mind capable of argument, for that individual knows how to discern and defend the right, or correct, from the wrong, or fallacious. This trivium really sounds like it can be accomplished by means other than following the trivium approach to education. "Grammar" being introduced in fourth grade and "logic" being emphasized in the primary grades (through gentle lessons in character and noble ideas in literature, and being asked to give thoughtful responses) does make sense, although it kind of reverses what I internalized in reading the WTM. Please, do not feel that I am trying to drive a wedge between different types of classical approaches. I am just thinking out loud for the sake of wrapping my head around my goals and my methods. ETA: Or it would seem that both logic and grammar are done informally in the primary years, through narrations and lots of reading, then both formal logic and grammar are done in the middle grades. I think that makes things clearer in my mind. Perhaps I'd best stop thinking about the early elementary grades as "grammar" and remind myself that that is just a metaphor.

Hobby Lobby is pretty great for that kind of stuff!

This is very wise. Thanks for sharing.

Viewed that way, it does show that your end-goal can be attained using not just a particular method, because your end goal is more abstract, based on values and "why" rather than methods or "how." Is my goal merely to pass on knowledge? I would like to pass on core knowledge, but that isn't necessarily the measure of success. I would want my child to be a great problem solver, but that isn't the end-in-itself. So I can see what you mean, how I am missing the forest for the trees. I will have to think about this. Thanks for the resource.

To answer my own question, I do think keeping each skill a separate subject with its own period to teach, and its own sequence to be accountable for following, is how I know if something needs to change. I would want to follow a block schedule with A and B days, with skills of priority being done daily, and skills that come next as well as content being done eod. The skills of priority are phonics, math (though we still need a math curriculum), and penmanship. EOD I want to do composition, grammar, Spelling Workout, and (will be starting at some point) History, Art, and Science. I may change this routine so that composition and history are given more priority than science and art, but for now, I know those are not my main focus. In this approach, once phonics is mastered, spelling and then grammar take its place in priority. To me, Classical education is about placing the most priority on the subjects most fundamental to future learning, and that is the main reason I think homeschooling this way could work well for us. On the other hand, there can be alot of enjoyment in focusing on literature and blending subjects through various literary forms. CM does a great job in presenting a literary feast for young minds. The less-stress over individual skills might encourage a child to be more receptive to all learning, and hence develop a better outlook and study ethic. This might be good for children who are natural late-bloomers, although I do think there is a risk of losing a child along the way if they happen to not enjoy the literary feast. I could see us homeschooling in this manner as long as we found a good math program that would follow its own scope and sequence and as long as reading and writing skills were coming along nicely. I think the key to making CM a success is being very thoughtful and committed about choosing the right living books, and drawing your child in through discussion, while keeping skills coming along. Since young children love to be drawn in to a good book, and love to learn when they don't feel pressure, this approach could work for us as well, but it would mean doing less of what we started.

I was prompted into writing this post because I am also at a vulnerable stage in homeschooling, liable to judge our success by outsider terms. I feel I need to identify what those different schools of thought mean to me, so I can move into making my own standard of success. As I have shared, I have the sincere desire to build skills that will lead to strong organizational thinking and study ethic. I know that there is more than one way to get there, but I have not yet fully solidified how I want to get there. I know its more than academics, that it is both heart and mind exposure to ideas, and character-building, that lead to what I want for my kids. There is so, so much out there. I need to take several steps back, I am finding. Do I keep on training my child in reading and writing skills the way we have been, and treat each skill as a distinct subject at this stage? Or do I go a more interdisciplinary route? For example, in a CM approach spelling may be taught as part of phonics instruction or penmanship practice on spelling words. Do I believe children should do work that pushes them out of their comfort zone, making mistakes as part of the process, or should I really make sure that my child is working right on level, and require that he do his work perfectly? How I believe skills should be taught really determines the rest of the whole curricula that I use. So it is no small question to ponder.

I apologize for making a false comparison between two very broadly defined homeschool methods. What really prompted me to post is because it does help to have a sort of "home base" or philosophical predisposition, that allows you to figure out what to teach, when, and how. I am always second-guessing myself, liable to swing into a totally different approach and abandon the progress we have made up to this point, if I do not gently remind myself what principles I would be giving up if I made a drastic change. Changing approaches can often mean having to start all over, with a different set of expectations for skills development.

What does Classical Education mean to you? To me, its all about skills, skills, skills. We are heading into grade 1, more than halfway through our phonics program, and liking our grammar and composition programs, as well. We are still in search of a math program, and that has been delaying us from getting on to other business like art, history, science, and foreign language. I have been tempted to give all that up and jump into a CM-driven program. I really, really like certain aspects of CM and I did a mad search of my town's used book sellers and my local library to see if I had the resources to begin a new program. From what I understand of the CM approach and the focus on living books, I like. But then, I think: Where's room for logic in the middle grades? Why no Latin? No grammar until grade 4? But we love our grammar lessons! Latin and logic, in particular, are two subjects I am most looking forward to learning with my son. To me, classical education means having your child keep at it until it finally clicks, understanding that natural development will happen, and when it does, the child's mind will know what to do with all that has been carefully taught, because of how it was taught logically. It doesn't delay the instruction until the child's natural inclinations show themselves. Classical education is a scholarly start in education. It might not feel like the most natural way, and it might not click in the beginning, but only by training in persistence can scholarly work start to feel natural. That is how I view it, and that is what keeps me staying the course. Another major plus is that Classical education keeps the child's skills mostly evenly developed, so that if my child must re-enter school, he will likely do so with ease. This is a big plus because we are re-evaluating our homeschool decision year-by-year, and would want our son to be at or above his grade level as it corresponds to private school in our area. So although I love other programs out there, I am constantly trying to remind myself: If it isn't broken, don't fix it. I think I will like my current homeschool much, much more when we finally get a good math program that we actually enjoy, and start to add history and the arts to our routine. I am really looking forward to Latin, so much that I would like to start it this year, too, albeit a little later. BTW, there is a reason that "getting it right" matters so much to me. I did not succeed in college, and I know it was because the basic building blocks of knowledge were undermined at every stage of my education.Though I got good grades, a lasting foundation of scholarly skills was not well-established by the time I reached college. I was bent on getting into college, but once there I really didn't have a clue how to read scholarly work or take organized, clear notes. Outlining skills were taught in HS but at no time before that, so it didn't come easily or efficiently when time came to write a paper. I might have squeaked through had I gotten remedial help, but I was already having such a miserable time. I left the college of my dreams, I enrolled in a less demanding college, and then it was bad, because I discovered that most of my peers were much, much worse off than I had been! The professors were constantly trying to bring down the material to the average student's ability. And all this might have been avoided if we had been "brought up" in academics throughout our lives.

High school was just kind of "bleh." When I started puberty, I also became attention-deficit, and it got worse in college. It was never caught until I was a faltering adult and went to therapy on my own. I have needed therapy to get through every single difficult situation since high school. I believe I may have Asperger's, but I have never actually sought an MD's diagnosis. For me, my high school was as good as it could have been. It was academically rigorous and it was socially diverse. I hung out with the theatre arts kids and musicians, having deep conversations and very rowdy, fun get-togethers any night of the week by senior year. I did enjoy high school and learned how to be more extroverted. But it came with a major change in my academic abilities. I had been a high-achieving introvert in grade school and suddenly I was just "winging it" through and turning more socially extroverted. But I think I had been one of those kids under so much pressure, in grade school, that I just studied hard-- because it was hard for me and I didn't want to fail-- but I never really got ahead. It never really stuck as a habit, and the learning did not inspire me. I would say grade school was a bigger failure than high school. I do not think, due to the differences among high-school age children, that HS prepares students for what it says it prepares them for. That is, not all children who leave high school will be ready for careers and adult life or college. I think the programs that exist in Quebec for an intermediary year or number of years between high school or college are intuitively a good idea, though I do not know if they improve adult outcomes. The biggest fault I see with high school is that it is a big race; it is where you are sorted. You are either going to get a great scholarship and head into adulthood with a really strong start in academics and money, or you are going to take out a large loan to go to a mediocre college. Or you will forego college completely and suffer the consequences. That part of it was what made me glad to leave. I learned nothing about becoming an adult except that I was damned if I couldn't get a scholarship, and damned if I tried to skip college and enter the workforce. I ended up going to college, dropping out, becoming the mom who is interested in homeschooling. But I really regret not having a strong start, feeling like I failed at the one thing my 12 years of education were preparing me for.

_took out post because it contained content from another website_

Thank you, everyone, for all of your wisdom. I have a lot of viable options and ideas now, and I do not feel in a panic anymore. I visited the chiropractor for the first time in ages today and I feel like a new person. I sent some of my math stuff back. I realized that they aren't going to become more valuable sitting on my shelf. I feel so much more confident in the idea of getting back to basics. I will try Ray's without a doubt, and probably use the MEP worksheets for a test run. I cannot believe how expensive some math programs out there are. I have a child who has a short but intense attention span, and who is motivated to get his work done to be done. I just read enough of Miquon to know that I cannot expect him to use it the way it was intended... our lesson period is 10 AM to 1PM, followed by recess, lunch, and quiet time, some art, and that is our whole day. And Montessori methods, like Miquon as it was intended to be used, are/can be time-consuming. If my child ends up liking math, liking it alot, I might treat him to a special program that he can do in his free time. For now, we are trying to keep it simple so he can get out and play.

Hunter, Thank you for these suggestions (above). I can tell that I am more traditional-leaning when it comes to math. I would be happy using two or three curricula if they were reasonably priced, did not require expensive manipulatives, and did not contradict each other. I really want a meaty, narrow, accelerated program, which is intuitive to use and covers the facts without too, too much of a slant to a particular methodology. Most of the programs listed above seem to be under $30, cover more than one level per book, and seem compatible with a traditional approach or a CM-inspired approach. Gut-wise I do not trust the Miquon or Montessori approach because it actually sorta tries to "re-train" a child's natural way of grasping things, using a specialized approach or slant. The manipulatives become the child's thinking, is what it looks like to me. (It seems the same with the AL Abacus and RS, too, although I think that as a supplementary tool an abacus can be a useful thing in the math classroom). I am not opposed to teaching algebra a little bit earlier, or teaching the Japanese names of numerals to promote an understanding of place value. Its just when a manipulative becomes too important, I get a little squeamish about it. But its really the Montessori method, not the manipulatives, that deserve the most skepticism. In theory, I like the idea of treating the child as an autonomous thinker, but that being understood, why then would you put such a great emphasis on leading a child's development through an elaborately acted out play? In my heart I feel that, had I been given hours of early, self-directed play on a daily basis (instead of as a weekly supplement as I was given), and had I been let loose in a math lab of beautiful colors and toys, I would have had fun, it would have beat watching the rods on the overhead projector, for sure. But would I have improved my speed on timed tests, or been able to work out a problem in my head when it was delivered orally? Nope. I believe that daily, one-on-one instruction and drill conducted verbally (orally and visually) with concrete demonstrations until every part of your DC's brain knows how a problem might be fired at him, is what builds good math skill. Letting the child "approach" the problem gives the child the luxury of not having to think with speed and clarity. In real life math, we do not always have the luxury of time, so we need to be sharp. It can still be fun: Do the lesson outdoors, snatch up pebbles or leaves or look at garden flowers and the number of petals. Or use legos and cars to build something, or play shopping with real or pretend money.

This is a great list of resources. I will look into them. btw, alot of business math is a plus in our homeschool. DH and I are always lamenting the fact that we were never taught basic accounting or balance sheet math until college. Thank you!

This is exactly how I feel. You know, I hate sending anything back to Rainbow when I could probably sell it at a discount to my local homeschooling families or gift it to a friend who may be praying for a solution to educating her own child. My DH, however, feels very differently. The crazy thing is math will not be our most expensive subject. That award already goes to piano. And DS has already showed me he is willing and interested in practicing his "stepping up, stepping down, then a skip" to perfection. His lessons begin in September and I am 100 percent confident he is ready and will comply with his practice routine. So, there is a bright spot. Sometimes these "extras" (if you consider them extras) are the best for developing a child's habits and skills. So even though I am skeptical, Miquon might reveal its value in an unexpected way. And if it doesn't, I know a family that would be happy to give it a test run and would give me reasonable compensation if they wanted it. So I need not stress.

My goodness, no. C-rods are innocent in this fiasco. Their inventor probably was just trying to make math a little bit more interesting for the artsy children that didn't like paper and pencil math. And since mr C was a musician I will bet he was one of those people who could see the harmonious patterns of math expressed by the colorful rods. I really just don't like so much... dogma in math program talk. And the expense incurred by trying things. Now, if its a language arts resource, and I don't want to use it, I don't sweat it so much. I am willing to try and risk not liking a l.a. resource. I usually find a use for every l.a. resource, even if its just a really good page. For some reason, it seems math is harder to assimilate. And right now, my life being stressful enough, I NEED IT TO JUST ASSIMILATE. I need something I can open and start teaching, adjusting as I go, if necessary. I had no idea there would be so much nit picking about how to present the c-rods, and how to give the child the right amount of autonomy, etc. I do want a program or mashup of programs, as it looks like I am going to have, that builds aptitude and accelerates a little bit faster than a traditional program like Ray's (that it only goes to 20 may be an issue, but that it provides a strong foundation in mental math is great)... when I was a cashier I worked mainly mentally in the realm of 20, and it provided a good foundation for my math understanding to develop. If I had to identify my approach to larger sums with one on the market, I would say RS matches my mental process and method for calculating large sums. I chose Miquon for a living puzzle type math, and because it looked interesting. I have to admit that my material from MMM and Miquon provide much information and are valuable. The activity cards allow me to plan my own labs, and the Miquon book could allow me to give assignments or direct DC's independent focus on problem solving. I do like the whole idea. I am wrestling with why I don't like the particulars of it so much. I am understanding that if used superficially (like they were in my elementary school) the rods fail to provide any mastery of any fact. I think the moment a child can think: Hey, this rod is usually the "1" rod, but if I say it is the "10" rod, or the "22" rod, what does that make all the other rods?" is the moment the Miquon approach will have been successful, but that could take alot of familiarity with the rods. I am not sending Miquon or the rods back. They will play an important role in our school day, and I think that very gradually they may even develop work ethic and boldness in problem solving in my DC. They offer the nice advantages of Montessori manipulatives without taking up a huge amount of space. So, I think the rods can stay. But something else on my shelf has to go back if I want to get something else our homeschool will inevitably need.

I am suffering financially. I cannot get things in order at home. I am involved in a lawsuit that takes up alot of my attention. I am the plaintiff in a medical malpractice case from two years ago. I no longer cook even though I loved to. I am always tired and my diet is poor. My son acts aggressive. He pretends he is a ninja. He always wants me to take him to the park, and I am usually too tired. My baby is beginning to walk. That's a new challenge. But he is mellow and overall he is good. Dad doesn't do much at bedtime or to alleviate the stress of dealing directly with the kids. I am not inspired to homeschool anymore. I want to give up. All the beauty I saw in it, all the potential, is getting swallowed up by my own sense of failure. I really hate wasting money. But worse I hate using something that just isn't intuitive for me and my child. I want to homeschool in my own way, and not follow a strict protocol. But whenever I try I fail. Sticking to WTM or Ambleside Online seems to be the only way to get it right. Yet, with math, I cannot comprehend what to do to get my son where he needs to be, or to fit it in to a CM-inspired routine. Every time I read something, it seems to contradict what I already learned. This is maddening, and I see no "middle" path to follow. We don't have a lot of money, so my failures are more than just delaying our homeschool life from moving forward. BTW I begged DH to help me decide on a math curricula and he refused to even read the "about" pages on the RS and SPM websites. And in trying to avoid spending the big bucks on a solid, tested program like RS, MiF, or Saxon, I end up racking up a higher bill total with a bunch of little non-essentials, like unit study kits and pattern blocks. If my DH had been able to sit down with me, we might have chosen something or at least put priority tags and time limits on purchases. But he blocked me out. I really hate having to shop for curricula with out his input, even though it is his money. And he says we cannot afford private school, even though he'd prefer to send our DS than to HS him. I am different: I am an idealist about HSing. I want to get a custom fit for our family and our child. So of course he expects me to be efficient, while I want something perfect for us, and yet we don't sit down and talk about it. He refuses to even read one single review. He says he hates math, hated school, and only as an adult in college does he feel confident about his schooling. He said his educators failed him, and he is not qualified to make any evaluation of any type of educational program. I am so distracted that I know I miss dozens of opportunities to teach my child a life lesson, or just sit and read with my child. I want an approach to schooling that is non-stressful! That is the number one most important thing! And we have to love our studies and be challenged by them! They have to be interactive and verbally engaging. I need verbalization and affirmation that he gets it, and Miquon discourages this. RS does not. SPM, I have no idea. It is all just so dogmatic, it makes my stomach turn. It doesn't even matter about the scope and sequence, the content. Each program is highly dogmatic, I am discovering, and that is what I hate.

This is seriously a battle that may result in sending DC to school. Even PS math class is better than another year (when he will be turning from 6 to 7) of no math instruction at all. My conscience will not let me use a program as odd-ball as Miquon. No offense to those who have learned to use it well. I just need to do our ten minutes a day and make sure we do it every day. Miquon, with its lax attitude about a child's work habits and use of time, is not going to get us on track. Not unless I approach it much differently than the creator of Miquon intended, or use it as a supplement. I would only use it if we could get through a book a semester, and follow another program that dovetails well with it, a program that makes sure we stay on track, and, (against the fundamental philosophy of Miquon and Montessori) tells us what to study when. I do not hate the program, I just cannot grasp why I have gotten myself so deep into rod-land. I did not realize what I was buying into I guess, until I opened the package .Ugh. All those cards are going to be so time-consuming to employ. And my CM approach doesn't give alot of time to one particular study session. And thats a good thing because I have a little one year old and we rarely get the luxury of ten minutes, let alone tons of math play time. I understand that to do these labs alone may not be as beneficial as getting peer and teacher feedback and support.