This year I had a 5th grader, 3rd grader, and 12th grader. My 12th grader was almost completely independent. My 3rd and 5th grader usually started school around 9, and finished anywhere from 12-7PM. Usually Mondays were lighter days, so we could go to the library and each lunch with my mother. Those were the days they sometimes finished by 12, though we sometimes still had to bring work to do in the library. My schedule/plan for time for 4th/6th: Bible reading & oral narration (we usually do this together, though we may switch to reading alone): ~20-30 min Bible memory: 10-15 min Singapore Primary Math: 20-30min (some days take longer, and a few take less) Intensive Practice or Challenging Word Problems: 20 min (sometimes takes less) Math facts drill: 10-15 min English Reading:20-30 min English Read aloud/Literature: 20-30 min Poetry: 5-20 min (5 minutes most days, when we just read a poem. 20 minutes once a week, to use an MCT poetry book) Vocabulary: 20 min, 4x week English grammar: 20-30 min English writing: 20-30 min (written narration, outline, etc.) Dictation or Copywork (for spelling): 20 min Spanish reading: 20 min Spanish read aloud: 20 min Spanish writing or grammar: 20 min Science: 20-30 min History: 20-30 min Music and Art: (composer, folk song, hymn, Spanish song, artist, drawing) ~45 min Lunch: 20-30 min All of this comes out to around 6 hrs per day. I have tried to shorten it, but the only things I could really cut (music and art) are things they love. They truly need all the reinforcement in math and English, and Spanish is a priority for family reasons. I wish we had more time for science, though, since my daughter especially likes science.

We supplement it with field guides.

My 6th grader will be doing earth and space science next year. I have a very limited budget this year, so after considering a lot of options I finally decided to use the DK Eyewitness Earth and Eyewitness Universe for spine books, and fill in with library books for the rest (making sure to include the ________ for Every Kid books by Janice van Cleave for experiments and models).

The bolded part above is the whole problem I have with elementary US history. I want a single, large volume to use over several years. I need it to be well written. I would like to to be as unbiased as possible, especially in the early years. (For high school it is easier to choose a spine from one point of view and supplemental books from others. Elementary students are not always ready to spend that much time on history.) I also need it to be inexpensive (under $35 total). TCOO meets most of the criteria--it is a single volume covering US history, well written, and inexpensive. However, it has to be read aloud and edited/verbally reworded--sometimes to the point of adding whole "paragraphs" of discussion--for almost every chapter. I wanted something my children could read on their own at least sometimes. Since the book I actually want doesn't seem to exist, I have ended up postponing serious US history until middle school/high school. We cover US history through conversation as things come up, as well as occasional library books and PBS videos. I ended up doing the same thing with my older two, for the same reason. They still ended up with a very good knowledge of US history.

I don't really know why. I have also noticed that AO postpones dictation and written narrations until 10yo or older. CM, however, mentions using dictation with 8yos. She also suggests that 8yos write the first couple of sentences of their narrations sometimes, while doing the rest orally. Maybe the AO developers overlooked these sections of vol. 1? I tend to use a mixture of what CM herself recommended and what I think my children need (even if she didn't recommend it), rather than using AO guidelines for language arts. So, we start grammar around 2nd grade, and add dictation as soon as they are comfortable enough with writing and reading. We start written narrations of a few sentences around 3rd grade, and move to full written narrations as they are able. All of this is actually in accordance with CM's writings. I have noticed that my older boys needed more instruction in outlining and in formatting formal essays/term papers, so I plan to add more of that with my younger two--even though CM did not find it necessary for her students, who were living in a different time and had different needs. Since my children have never really liked the elementary history books, anyway, this just makes one more thing I adapt from AO. [This is the reason I only read/post on the AmbleRamble yahoo group--that group allows and expects discussions of modifying AO, while the standard AO yahoo group only allows discussion of the actual materials on the booklists.]

Apparently Steve Demme needs to be more clear. I don't get his newsletter because we only used MUS elementary for one year (I went back to Singapore/Miquon), but I have read his website several times, and I also read all the materials we used. Based on this, plus reading many different homeschooling publications over the past 18 years (I started reading about homeschooling when my oldest was an infant), I am familiar with the mindset behind what he was saying. While I have definitely read articles/books that do have the philosophy of "trust the children" to know how much to learn, when, and how, (and the philosophy that any pace is just fine, or that homeschooling automatically means children will learn well whether parents do much or not),that is not the philosophy of Mr. Demme. He truly does encourage parents to work with their children consistently to help them learn what they need to learn.

My teen boys (17yo and 18yo) like this group. I'm not into music much, and what I like tends to be older (hymns, folk songs, some 40's, some Elvis, and some Beatles). I think my 9yo and 10yo like Radiohead, too.

All 4 of mine were born at a hospital, the first two with OBs, the second two with nurse/midwives (our state only legally allows nurse-midwives, and only in hospital). All 4 went well. I had no medication with any of them. I was allowed to walk around with only periodic monitoring for the first and 3rd. For the second and fourth, I was required to keep a monitor on and was given less freedom of movement. For the second, it was because an ultrasound the hospital gave (because they didn't believe me when I said I was in labor--apparently I didn't "look" like I was in enough pain) showed that he was in distress, and would die if not born soon. For the fourth, it was because his heart rate slowed and almost stopped with every contraction. So, continuous monitoring was justified in both cases. I was treated with respect with all 4. All of them were exclusively breastfed, and the hospital did not try to give any of them a bottle. I was allowed to keep all of them with me almost all the time, and I went home within 1-2 days with all of them, with no complications. The only somewhat aggravating thing was what I mentioned with my second--when I went in, the staff didn't believe I was really in labor, based solely on how much pain I appeared to be in. (I tend not to cry/scream/make faces when in labor, because it actually makes it harder for me to tolerate the pain.) They said they would just do an ultrasound and send me home, since I was scheduled for a check-up that day, anyway, and they could just cancel that appointment. Based on the results of the ultrasound, they checked me in, but they still didn't believe I was in labor. They were trying to push me to have an induced labor, and thought I didn't realize how serious the need for my son to be born was. In reality, I knew I was already in labor, and induction was unnecessary. (My water broke while I was in my room, but when no nurse was present. They thought I was mistaken in that, also.) Finally, my mother convinced them to check me for dilation. At that point, they realized I was close to delivery, and agreed to just monitor to see if induction was needed if labor stalled. He was born just a couple of hours later. That is the only "problem" I ever had with any of my babies (except the youngest taking more hours to be born than all 3 of the others put together, but that was not anything the hospital could do anything about). Overall, all my experiences were positive.

Second Hezekiah and First Assumptions are not real Bible books. That was meant as a gentle reminder that there is no "Commandment from on High" that math skills/concepts have to be taught at a particular age to any particular child.

To prevent the long break between NT study times, we read from the OT 3-4 school days a week, and from the NT 1-2 school days a week. (My children are all old enough to read on their own, so they read whatever Bible chapters they want on the weekends.)

Just so you know, MUS teaches addition and subtraction together the first year, and does teach that they are inverses of each other, though the main focus that year is mastering single digit addition/subtraction facts and concepts, as well as the yearly focus on place value and its meaning. The second year extends the knowledge of place value, addition, and subtraction with a focus on multi-digit addition and subtraction. (Of these, I have only used Beta, which my daughter hated because she got sick of multi-digit addition and subtraction and wanted more variety of topics. That is why we switched after using that one year.) I haven't used the third and fourth years (as mentioned above), but I have looked at the samples online. The 3rd year covers multiplication, and does show that it is repeated addition. While division is not taught that year, problems such as ____ x 4 = 32 are covered, preparing the way for division. The division book (the next year) reinforces division as the opposite of multiplication, and does present division problems in fraction form thus introducing fractions as a form of division. My oldest used the fraction and decimal/percent levels as remedial work before pre-algebra. They also concentrate on the relations between the operations. So, while MUS has a strange scope and sequence, it DOES address the meaning of and relations between operations. I think the article talks about not worrying if a child is behind in math because many parents START MUS with a child who has had difficulty learning math with other approaches. The idea is to reassure a parent that the fact that the child has not learned material at the usual time does not mean that the child will not learn math. There is no reason to despair if your child is learning more slowly than average. The article was not aimed at the kind of parent who would just think "it doesn't matter, then"--it was aimed at the kind of parent who would be reassured, but would redouble efforts to help the child master the material at their own pace.

I don't think it really does matter. I personally believe God created at least the stars and universe several billion years ago, and very likely created the earth several (a smaller several) billion years ago, too. I am willing to accept that evolution may have played a part in His creation, also, though I am closer to a progressive creation believer than a theistic evolution believer. I do believe that Adam, Eve, Noah, etc were real people. I was a young earth believer for 15 years or so--starting when I first researched homeschooling, and first heard the idea. Up until then, I had taken the Bible literally (except where it is clearly meant to be read otherwise), but never even thought to add up the ages in genealogies to figure out how long ago, especially since there are many people whose ages are never mentioned. When I first read young earth literature, I was convinced by it, but I never fully bought into the idea that a Christian could not believe in an older earth without rejecting the Bible as God's infallible word. (After all, God also emphasizes that we humans are very fallible--it is almost certain that none of us is correct in our understanding of every single detail of the Bible.) [i later came to doubt that the young earth explanations for such things as light from distant galaxies were credible, and from there came to believe in an old universe, and then an old earth.] However, many young earth creation believers are convinced that any other understanding of the early chapters of Genesis is a rejection of God's word as an authority in our lives and/or is equivalent to calling God a liar. Since a rejection of God's authority and/or calling him a liar is incompatible with Christianity, that is the root of their opposition to all other interpretations. [Note: I specified that MANY, not ALL young earth believers see things this way. The literature I read often stated this directly.] However, the key point of the story of Creation in Gen. 1-2 is that God is responsible for all that exists, and that He had a purpose in causing it to exist. The precise mechanism and timing that he used to bring that about is not the point.

My oldest (18yo) says he either wants his wife to homeschool his kids or for me to homeschool his kids. My second son (17yo) is uncertain if he will ever have kids, but expects to homeschool them. My daughter (10yo) says she wants me to homeschool her kids but doesn't want to do it herself--however, she is only 10, so that could change. My 9yo has no thoughts of the future yet.

Literature in the elementary grades doesn't go strictly by time period. While some historical fiction and some fiction written in the time period studied for history is included, there are also lots of books just chosen because they are good books to read. In years 7 and up, the literature consists mostly of books written in the time period being studied. For history: Year 1: late Roman period, early middle ages in Britain. Smattering of stories from other time periods Ancient history: Year 6, terms 2-3. Year 12 (no official plan posted yet) Mythology covered in years 2-6 (Wonder Book, Heroes, Age of Fable). Middle Ages: Year 2 & year 7 Renaissance and Reformation: Year 3 & Year 8 Early Modern: Year 4 & Year 9 (basically, ~1600-1800) 19th Century: Year 5, Terms 1-2 & Year 10 Modern Times: Year 5, term 3; Year 6, term 1; & Year 11 (20th Century)

All 4 have been required to study Spanish K-12 (K-11 for my second son), because their father is Guatemalan and we believe they should learn it since it is part of their heritage. They have also learned a smattering of sign language (because I majored in special education of the hearing impaired), German (just because it seemed fun), Chinese (a few words and phrases picked up because my college room-mate was from Taiwan), etc. My second son is studying Biblical Hebrew this year, also, with a focus on reading rather than pronunciation.

I have used AO for the past 4 years. I like the literature at all ages. For levels 6-12, I like the history as well. I use some of the science/nature/history/biography/geography books before 6th grade, but those are more hit and miss. I make only a few changes to the upper years.

This is exactly why I altered our cycle to put Ancients in 12th grade--so much of the content is too much for many 14yos, but just right for 16-18yos. My 16-17yo (turned 17 in late Feb) read HOAW to himself this year, and learned a great deal. He also liked it--which is saying a lot, because he isn't really very fond of history. (I only had time to read the first 6-7 chapters myself, though I hope to finish it next year while my little ones are studying ancients with other books. I did read enough to be aware there was sexual content, but I didn't worry about it for this son at this age.) For the original poster--You have apparently already decided that the material in this book is not suitable for your son at this time (or perhaps ever). You said that you already bought the second book in the series before you realized this. Can you still return it? If not, some suggestions/options: 1. You can resell the book. As you have no doubt seen, many people have no problem with the book. Then you can choose a book that is more suitable for your needs. 2. You can use the book the same way you did the first, reading aloud and omitting sections that are not suitable for your son. 3. You can choose a different book for your son for next year. Then, you could read this book for yourself, and add additional information in discussions where you see fit. 4. (similar to 3). You can choose a different book for your son. Then, you could add suitable chapters or portions of chapters from SWB's Middle Ages book where appropriate.

For my youngest (3rd grade, turned 9 in December): 1 chapter of whatever his reading book is (about 6-10 pages, usually no pictures--Charlotte's Web, Superweasel, A Single Shard) His science assignment (usually 3-5 pages) His history is sometimes read by him, sometimes by me, and sometimes by the two of us taking turns (SOTW, UBWH, occasionally another book added in) I usually have him take turns reading occasional paragraphs of our read aloud (Dr. Dolittle, Chronicles of Narnia, Alice in Wonderland, etc) He takes his turn reading part of our Bible passage All 3 of his older siblings also read a good deal in their free time, including his sister with mild dyslexia. He considers this punishment. (This is my ADHD boy, which probably plays into this.)

Rod and Staff English (grammar) is advanced. Their reading is pretty much on-level (at least in my opinion. I'm not sure what public schools consider grade level to be anymore). If your child is reading Alice in Wonderland, etc, he will easily read R&S 4th grade, and probably even 5th. I don't know about the questions, though. I don't use a reading curriculum. We just use lots of good books. (I have the reader for R&S 5 because my daughter saw the samples on the website when I was looking at the grammar and asked for it. She loved the reader just as a collection of short stories this year.)

These are missionary biographies. I have 4-5. They are uneven in quality, but the basic pattern seems to be: Chapter 1: start right in with an exciting story from the person's life. End with a cliff hanger Chapter 2-?: go back to the person's childhood, and tell the story of their life from their, without resolving the cliffhanger. (This tends to annoy my children, and makes them think of this part of the person's life as "boring" because it leaves them hanging on the issue they had gotten caught up in. For some children, it might sustain their interest.) This is often the weakest section of the book. Later chapters: Finally get back to the original adventure, explaining how they got into the situation. Resolve the cliffhanger. Continue with further events until the death of the person. Some of the books are quite interesting, but the authors seem to have trouble distinguishing between information that fleshes out a character and boring trivia about their life, especially their childhood. Or, maybe those details would be more interesting to another family.

When my youngest was in kindergarten I used a random mix of books from FIAR vol. 1-2, in whatever order I wanted. He did great, and really enjoyed it. (The difficulty level in the first two volumes is about the same, so the order doesn't matter at all. Just put them in whatever order you like.)

The closest I have seen to that is a single book--It Couldn't Just Happen. It focuses on evidence supporting that God created everything, and even makes a point of mentioning both YEC and OEC points of view (in the only chapter mentioning when/how God did it) and pointing out that we really don't know. It covers a variety of science topics, and would be good for one year of science somewhere between 4th-7th grade.

LLATL Blue and Red are totally different from the other levels. Blue and Red are the "learn to read" levels. That is the focus there. For those levels, the teacher book is essential. The other levels teach grammar/writing/spelling/thinking about what you read. There are a couple of activities that are only in the teacher book, but these levels could be done with only the student book. There are samples of all these levels on their website, which should give you a pretty good idea of how they work. Basically, each level (3rd-8th) has about 3-4 book units per year. Unless you skip these, you will need the actual books. (The entire book is read and studied.) Apart from the weeks spent doing book units, each week is built around a specific dictation/copywork passage from a different book. You do not need to read any of these books to do that week's lesson. (You would want to read something on your own for reading that week.) As a disclaimer--I have only actually used LLATL Blue. I have repeatedly gone back to look at the samples for the other levels, and have considered it seriously many times. I have always decided against it, because I do dictation/copywork on my own. I don't need help with that. I do want grammar instruction (and LLATL moves more slowly than I want for that). I also want writing instruction and/or regular writing assignments. LLATL does not give as many writing assignments as I want. Since I would have to add more of both elements I am looking for in the first place, I keep deciding that another program would meet my needs better.

I think the comment that believing in creation doesn't necessarily mean you believe in a young earth was directed to the person who answered your post and was confused, thinking you were looking for a curriculum that taught God created by way of evolution (which actually is yet another creationist variation). The young earth creationists have almost taken over the title "creationist". I have moved gradually from YEC to OEC beliefs over the past year. If you have used Apologia, you have used young earth creation materials. The high school level Apologia doesn't emphasize it heavily, but does teach young earth. The elementary level Apologia does emphasize young earth teaching, as do BJU and ABeka. All 3 present it as the only Christian understanding of creation that exists. (Answers in Genesis does acknowledge the existence of OEC Christians in their adult materials, but only to discuss why these Christians are "wrong" and "compromising the Bible" (in the opinion of the staff of AiG). It is very difficult to find OEC materials. I have seen a high school geology curriculum (online only, but free) and a set of elementary PowerPoint presentations explaining what OEC (progressive creation version) believe about the days of creation. In case you want to look at them: http://www.answersincreation.org/homeschool.htm They are probably more suited to children older than 1st grade, though. I believe most OEC use mostly secular materials. I have always used a mix of YEC and secular materials, and interestingly enough, both my older sons moved on their own to an OEC viewpoint from there (they are also both open to the possibility that God created the universe and world by way of evolution).

They used to complain at first. We have done this for all readings since kindergarten, and they heard me requiring it from their big brothers before that, so they don't complain any more. (I most often use CM style narrations--they tell everything they remember.) My daughter has actually never complained about oral narrations. She will tell more than anyone ever wanted to know about everything. She even does this for books she reads on her own. Her brothers always liked/like to give a short narration of only the important bits, and needed to be drawn out to give other details. For her, I sometimes have to require the WTM "just the main ideas" kind of narration.