:grouphug:

We're using the old version of CE and the TM is enough. Can't help with others.

Nope. I'm with you.

That may be. You could also post on their forums and ask... but if you did choose to start at Level 1, you might want to only get the teacher book and mainly discuss the rules (key cards), review if there are any topics he doesn't get (with my son it was alphabetization and major syllable division issues). The key cards (rules) aren't explicitly stated in future books, although you should be reviewing them. I imagine that's why the recommendation is to start at Level 1.

No answer but FYI...at the bottom of the page are some definite nswf images...genitalia...

Picture books... Mouse soup. Also, the best house ever. Both books my son adored and I read over and over. I hate Mouse Soup. I wanted the weasel to eat the mouse. We have a family read aloud and try to alternate current works with classics. My husband stays awake through the current books, but he dozed through Alice in Wonderland and Peter Pan.

I think I love you.

:party: Libraries are SO important!

Bet it was one of the Bond movies with Roger Moore & the silver teeth is Jaws. Can't recall which movie it is right now though. We've got a drive in about 40 min away. May need to take a look at what they've got playing....

:iagree: I used SWO in 1st and 2nd grade. My son did fine on the tests each week but retained absolutely NOTHING. His spelling has improved significantly with AAS. He is learning spelling rules. Sometimes he still doesn't apply them... (I'm frustrated with this week's errors, but I'm also thinking he may be hitting a growth spurt since his brain sure isn't here.) AAS is teacher intensive, but 15-20 minutes a day is plenty. Retention is better and the why is stressed. If you do switch, I would recommend starting at Level 1. Move quickly, but I think going in order does give the foundation. Level 7 is coming out at the end of July and it sounds like there may be a discount for buying the set (although that may be really expensive...)

Good for me to know in advance! I see on the TG p66 in background info for teachers, stamen mentioned ("The stamen is the male part of the flower and is made up of the anther and filament.") and on p28 in teacher notes under male part of flower and pistil is mentioned in female part of flower... So they must be expecting in the hw for the teacher to have explained this to the student. Blech. I do appreciate the heads-up.

I'm using the younger books, but I got the fonts from Educational Fontware and would use them for copywork. I imagine you could also do a scan of the pages and print them for your own use of tracing....

:iagree: We are using the newer version. I think the TG is necessary. There is background information that I have my son read. We also do extra readings and additional videos. I find the real challenge is with the HOTS and tests. I definitely do a lot of additional prep work, and I did consider switching programs for 5/6 but ended up buying the next levels because I really like the level of thinking requested of the student. But it is definitely very teacher intensive.

I like the teachers guides for additional reading and website suggestions. The student study guides aren't very useful. You can take a look at some pages on amazon. They also break the chapters into seven units for each book.

You might want to be a bit more specific...like a course description. Solving linear equations. Solving quadratic equations by factoring. Solving rational equations. Exponential rules. Etc. Broad categories, but so it's clear what topics were covered.

I'm planning on completing 5B and then just doing IP and CWP for 6A and B and then moving on to either AoPS prealgebra or algebra.

Here's a link to a number of teacher education books at the Singapore site. The model approach may give some good information and ideas. Basically, using bar models lets students solve word problems that they'd need algebra for. I think starting in level 4, I've seen some problems that I'd solve using a system of equations that my son will solve using bar models. It really gives a neat set up to move to algebra. But it was a strange transition for me.

I asked my mom's opinion. Dad's retired army & mom's done their finances for years & has done a lot of research about it in recent years. HTH... USAA is quite good with their advise I think, though their investments are too expensive. Vanguard's investements are the lowest cost in the industry, though some other companies have some that are also low. (USAA has a couple and Fidelity has some.) Vanguard has some advisors online and phone that you pay for. Or, finding a real person who is fee only Certified Financial Planner would be good (CFP -- many of the other certifications are worthless.) And Fiduciary responsibility is a technical term that any advisor should have to the client. Fee ONLY not fee based also is the way to go, so they not getting commissions or some sort of advantage to sell you particular investments. bogleheads.org is a great site with lots of educational help.

That's wonderful.

I don't see any reason to feel shame about not knowing something if there's an interest in learning. I do wish more people would feel embarrassed about not caring to learn. :glare: I've started working solutions to CWP at level 3 since I want to be able to explain how to do the problems to my son and just the answer in the back isn't enough for me to show where he may have gone awry. It was cool last week that he soved a problem in a different way than I did. :D And some of the problems have stumped me. I think it just means that my son will have a phenomenal math foundation. Yea!

I have the old version. I also have a masters in math education and still need to get help on some of the problems. No mortification here. :D The answers are in the back...old version...but no work. For instance, I had to look up one of the CWP 5 problems last weekend. I'd have solved the problem with a matrix (system of equations). That's not how my son would solve it. I did a google search and found someone had posted the question here earlier, so I got the explanation. I have taught math at the cc for over a decade. Starting at CWP 3, there are some problems that I know my students would have difficulty solving. I love the type of problems in CWP (and IP...although I like CWP for word problems more). To the OP, the Singapore forums do have help, but also check here...or type the problem into google and see what's out there. I've found their method really interesting and think it does a great job of setting up the transition to algebra. It's definitely a different approach!

:iagree: I let my son use a standard calculator on some word problems. He still has to show all work.

I remember thinking that I would never be the sort to say, "I remember when..." but then I was talking with my husband and... I remember when... ...cars were made out of metal (I learned to drive on a 77 Chevy - that sucker was a BOAT) ...you only watched live TV ...if you wanted to rewatch a movie, you had to wait for them to rerelease it ...you'd let the phone ring 8 times before hanging up... and you'd tell everyone to stay off the line if you were waiting for a call ...push button phones were the new phones (ugh...rotary) ...I took typing lessons - not keyboarding... and we started out with manual typewriters. We got lucky and got electric typewriters midway through the course. .... you had to get up to change the channel...and you had to turn the dial. I do still have a record player, so my son has seen that. It really is wild looking back at old movies and seeing how technology in particular has changed. I'm reading a book that was written in the mid-90s and one character told another to "get a beeper and get into the 20th century" for keeping in touch. I'm quite sure my son wouldn't know what a beeper was. Yup... old here.

I hated those dratted dolls. We had them. Barbies presented an "unrealistic expectation for women". The sunshine family didn't have any outfits to change into. Boring! I much preferred the Weebles. We had their pop up camper. My sister had the submarine.

WWW is generally Word Within the Word by MCT (Michael Clay Thompson). There's an abbreviation sticky at the top of most pages I think with an outside link that has a list of most of the abbreviations used here. I've found it very useful. :D