Using phrases like "since the beginning of time" and "throughout history" to refer to a specifically Christian definition of marriage (monogamous, till death) is extremely ethnocentric. There have been many MANY different definitions of marriage "throughout history." If you (and others who are taking this point of view) believe that the Christian definition of marriage is the only acceptable one — and in most cases what's being spoken of is a particular denomination's rules and restrictions on marriage/divorce/remarriage — then you are saying that your denomination's beliefs should apply to everyone else. And if they don't share those beliefs, then obviously they "don't know what marriage IS," or they don't take their marriages seriously, or they would just bail the minute things were no longer "entertaining." Trying to pass off a very specific religious belief as if all humans have agreed with it "throughout history," "since the beginning of time" — and therefore it's just common sense and not a religious belief — is either disingenuous or uninformed. Jackie

I agree with that — but I also think that some things truly can't be fixed and the spouses in those marriages have the right to end it and move on with their lives. I don't see the point in forcing two people to spend their lives in abject misery because they made a promise (assuming they even did promise "till death do us part") at a time when they could not have foreseen what the future would bring. I don't think that ruining two people's lives benefits the children, and I don't think it benefits "society." Jackie

In countries where women are forbidden to vote or drive or even show their faces in public, I'm sure that many see changes in that direction as sure signs that society is "going downhill." I'm sure there were people who saw the emancipation of slaves as a sign that society was going downhill. Ditto voting rights for women and blacks. Do you think that people in those generations believed society was going "downhill" because it was true? Jackie

I'm not sure how it's "blatantly obvious" that the phrase "since the beginning of time" only refers to a few hundred years of "traditional American" culture. Jackie

"... until we decide that the marriage is irretrievably broken and that we can no longer continue as man and wife." Preferably a mutual decision, but if one spouse decides the marriage is irretrievably broken and refuses to work on it, then unfortunately it is irretrievably broken. The way you phrase it — "where the spouse has an out" — makes it sound as if marriage is some sort of prison or trap, and spouses will bolt the first chance they get if they're given some loophole or "out." You make it sound as if anyone who doesn't promise "till death do us part" will just bail at the first opportunity, and I don't think most marriages are like that at all, regardless of what the vows say. Jackie

:iagree: I don't understand why someone would WANT to remain married to a spouse who didn't love or care about them. But my marriage IS all about me and my DH; that's why it's up to us to decide what we want from it. Why would anyone else think that my marriage should be all about THEM and what THEY think we should do/want/vow? :confused: Jackie

Really? You believe that all people, in every culture, in every part of the world, since "the beginning of time," have defined marriage exactly the way you do? And you might want to pick up an Anthropology 101 textbook sometime... Jackie

My parents divorced when I was a kid and I was glad they did. They were miserable and I was tired of listening to the fights. They are both much much happier with their 2nd spouses. I don't doubt for one minute that they did the right thing. Not everyone gets married in a church. Not all religions forbid divorce. If people in civil unions were given the same rights as married people, I'd be absolutely fine with that. In fact, I think it would solve a lot of problems to completely separate the religious component of marriage from the legal status of civil unions. If you want the legal rights, you have a civil ceremony; if you want the union blessed in a religious service, do that, too. It would even allow for people to be married "in the eyes of God" while remaining outside of a civil union where that is financially beneficial. Jackie

That may be what YOUR marriage "is" and what YOUR vows included, but it is not a "fact" of what marriage "is." Why would you assume that's what everyone else's vows said, and what their marriages are? I was not married in a church and my vows did not say "till death do us part." I would never want to be trapped in a miserable, loveless marriage, and neither would DH. Our marriage is strong and healthy, and I certainly didn't get married expecting to divorce, but I do believe that divorce is preferable to two people spending the rest of their lives miserable and hating each other. Jackie

He was not "stuffed" in a group home, he was placed there at the recommendation of his doctors: Do you think she should have kept him at home, with small children, despite violent behavior? Do you think you know better than his doctors what is best for him? :confused: Jackie

Can you guys post the Priority Codes and Coupon Codes that you have? They send different codes to different people; the most recent ones I have are just the "normal" 70% off selected courses. How "monster" is the monster sale??? :bigear: Jackie

The breadth vs depth question, started by Swimmermom3

The "Exploring..." book is basically the same text and illustrations as the original book, with a few extras thrown in; I believe it's targeted primarily at CC bio-for-nonmajors courses. The "Doing Science" and "Tools of Science" blurbs are just little inserts based on news stories or recent research; no labs. There are also little yellow boxes with questions to answer interspersed throughout; again, these don't seem to add much IMHO, other than to make the book look a little more text-ish. There is also a website associated with this book, which has some links and activities (click on Student Resources) as well as additional sample pages (where you can see examples of the "Doing Science" blurbs and the questions). It doesn't seem very well-maintained, as lots of links are broken. Both versions of the book primarily focus on cellular/genetics/evolution, and there's not much on ecology/botany/zoology/human anatomy. The "Exploring" version doesn't add anything in that regard, compared to the original. Jackie

Well, she died in 1985, so anything newer than that wasn't written/revised by her. When people speak of the "old" editions, I believe they're generally referring to the 60s-mid-70's editions. I have 1965 editions. There have been threads here discussing the differences between the various editions, if you click the "dolciani" tag, it should pull up some of them. ETA: Some useful info in this thread. Jackie

Lukeion for Latin, Greek, Classical Literature, and some history Online G3 for LLLOTR, Lightning Lit, and Hakim's US History Strategicum for challenging integrated math classes & competition prep Jackie

It would be too difficult to multi-quote all the things I'd like to respond to, so I'll just throw out a list of stuff in random order: I second or third the Freed book (Right-Brained Children in a Left-Brained World), as well as the Eides' Dyslexic Advantage, if you haven't already read it. I think it's even worth having your nephew read The Dyslexic Advantage (or at least read passages aloud to him), because it can really shift a student's self-image from being "disabled" to being uniquely "abled" and talented. Spelling... The way Freed suggests teaching spelling is, IMHO, the most effective method I've seen for the VSLs I know (including DS). My experience with dictation has been the opposite of Elizabeth's; DS was in a PS program that relied on dictation for spelling, and DS finished the year in exactly the same place he started it — several grade levels behind. He made zero progress. The Freed method has been much more effective for him. Writing... I would not use IEW with a 2e/VSL kid. You mentioned "breaking it down into smaller chunks," which is often the exact opposite of what whole-to-part learners need. The smaller the chunks, the more fragmented and random it will seem. Also, the process of outlining can seem completely counter-intuitive to VSLs; I second a PP's suggestion of Inspiration or Scrivenor, or some other type of graphic organizer — even if you just teach him how to do it with colored pencils and paper. You mentioned that he really enjoyed NaNoWriMo; have you considered OYAN for him? It will cover a lot of literary analysis in the process (and in a wholistic, hands-on way), as well as teaching writing. For the grammar component, I'd try something like Image Grammar, which teaches grammar in the context of good writing. If you want something more workbooky and less teacher-intensive, I'd try Killgallon. Math... I would not use Lial's with an ADD/VSL kid. Even I find the format overwhlemingly busy; it would be a total nightmare for my son. I don't think MUS is a bad idea, but I'd want to accelerate through it as quickly as possible. Do you feel like you could teach him yourself? If you feel comfortable with that, you could probably get him caught up to Prealgebra in a year, just working with colored markers and a white board. Or try Khan Academy; the explanations are pretty clear and visual, and he can move through the program quickly. I'd try Hands-on Equations, too. Logic... Mastermind is great, also chess and general board games. Programming is also great for teaching logic. Since he's very visual and creative and likes video games, you might try something like Virtual World Design & Creation for Teens, which teaches programming in the context of creating a VR world. Science... A terrific add-on for your anatomy class would be the Structure of Man drawing course. The first 20 or so lessons are free; additional modules can be downloaded for a fee. The course teaches you to draw the human figure "from the inside out," starting with the complete skeleton, then adding each muscle, then the skin. Perfect for an artistic VSL. Reading... If he's into Harry Potter, some additional series that appeal to boys this age (and which were big hits with DS) include: the Percy Jackson series (+ the two new series: Red Pyramid & Heroes of Olympus), Fablehaven, The Immortal Secrets of Nicholas Flamel, and Ranger's Apprentice (there are 10 books in this series, so it would keep him busy for a while). Letting DS read series that really pulled him in and made him want to read everywhere/every day (instead of just reading the bare minimum assigned "for school") greatly increased his fluency and vocabulary and turned him from an extremely reluctant reader into an avid one. Jackie

Patty Paper Geometry Zome Tools plus the Zome Geometry book Vi Hart's math-doodling videos Origami kits; here are some cool origami-related websites: Shadowfolds, Wholemovement You can buy books by Bradford Hansen-Smith (his work is on the Wholemovement website) and paper circles for folding here. Khan Academy videos Math Mammoth has "Blue books" on geometry topics Jackie

If I could have a do-over with DS, that is exactly what I would have done. In fact, that's what we did do, until he was 7 and I put him in school. When he started 1st grade, half-way through the school year, he was actually ahead of most of the other kids — and he liked math. He thought he was good at it. By 3rd grade, he was a year behind, he hated math, and thought he was stupid. Like Quark, we never finished a single math curriculum — and we tried a LOT of them. When I recently asked him which, of all the programs we'd tried, he felt had been the most effective, he said "when you explain it to me yourself at the whiteboard." Doh! :svengo: You might think it would be easier for you if he would just do the workbook but, honestly, it will be much easier for you, in the long run, to do it his way. You can spend years trying to get him to follow a curriculum and fill in workbook pages, and then when you finally give up (because he hates math), instead of starting from scratch, you'll have all those years of damage to undo. If I had followed my son's lead and taught him the way he wanted to be taught, then I wouldn't have had to spend the last year trying to overcome his hatred of math. If I'd let him play around with numbers and concepts and shapes and relationships, adding hints and asking questions and following his lead, he would probably be years ahead of where he is now. Many people seem to think that following a child's interest is way more work than just buying curriculum and following the "plan," but my experience has been the opposite. Trying to hammer my little square peg into assorted unsquare holes just resulted in years of tears and arguments and precious little forward progress. Not only was it a lot of work, it was pretty unproductive — and often counter-productive. Following his lead, and keeping him supplied with materials to feed his interests as they arise, has been much less work for me, much more effective for him, and much more enjoyable for us both. And as for "gaps"... how come no one ever talks about the "happiness gap"? Or the "love of learning" gap? IMHO, that's the only gap that really matters in the long run. If kids grow up to be avid readers, interested and curious about the world around them, they can easily fill any "content" gaps they may have. But if that fire's gone out, how much does it really matter if they can recite all the state capitals and chant Latin declensions? Jackie

Oh, I'm so sorry to hear that! Ironically, he specifically added that class because it was suggested by parents — and then no one signed up? That stinks. :( Jackie

Have you asked Dr. Stoyen if the class will be offered again in the summer/fall? I'm not sure what his plans are in terms of which units he will teach when. If he'll let you watch the recorded classes to see if the course will work for you (before you enroll), I would give it a shot. You can skip the first class, it was mostly just introducing everyone and getting the WizIQ system working (we missed the first class and watched the video instead, and... we really didn't miss anything). If your son can understand and follow the 2nd & 3rd classes, then I'd jump right in. The next class is Monday afternoon, though, so you'd want to watch #2 & 3 before then. I think that when you're watching the recording, the class can seem a bit slow, because he waits for kids to figure things out, to type in answers or get the tools and draw on the board; it's definitely not a typical "video math lesson" (e.g. Thinkwell, MUS, Chalkdust, etc.). I remember thinking, through the first hour of class #2, geez this is slow, and yet by the end of the class they had covered an awful lot. And FWIW, DS didn't find the classes slow, because he was trying to take in and process the information. An adult who already knows this stuff might be thinking "get on with it already," but the child who is sitting there trying to understand the definition of an "odd function" [ f(-x)=-f(x) ] and figure out what the graph would look like needs time to think, kwim? Jackie

I don't know what classes were offered in the fall, but the other kids in DS's class have already taken from 2-4 classes with Dr Stoyen. He says that the classes don't really need to be taken in any particular sequence, though, as each course addresses a specific set of related topics, and covers those topics from about a prealgebra level up to precalculus/calculus (or beyond). So in that sense there is no "first class," you can jump in at any point. The Algebra & Elements of Analysis class will cover: *Relations and functions, odd, even, 1-1, onto, partial, total, composition, inverse *Numbers and variables, linear equations, polynomials, exponentials, logarithms *(Relative) primes, factors, (integer, rational, real and complex) roots *Key Theorems: Arithmetic, Algebra, Factor, Remainder, Intermediate Value *Sequences, series, convergence, divergence, limits *Tangents, areas and volumes, introduction to differentiation and integration For example, the first 3 classes have focused on relations & functions. Flipping through the Larson texts that I have, I can see that some of the concepts covered so far are introduced for the first time in Larson's Alg II and even Precalc. The basic philosophy is to present all of the material on a specific topic (or interrelated topics) in a single course, rather than present it a little at a time, year after year, from 6th-12th grades. The scope and sequence is entirely different, so the "levels" of the courses really don't correspond to Prealg, AlgI, etc. The next course that will be taught this Spring is Counting & Probability, and I think Dr. Stoyen said he was thinking of doing Geometry after that. He said that he's in the process of revising the way he groups the "units" and that there will probably be a total of 10-12 units in the complete sequence. Those will go well beyond what is normally taught in the Prealg-Calc sequence, though. I'm sure this approach would be a total nightmare for kids who prefer to have the material presented in smaller chunks, with repetition and review to "cement" the concepts, but other kids (like DS) tend to "lose the plot" if things are presented too slowly and broken into small pieces; they actually understand things much better if they get the theoretical "big picture" all at once. Jackie

Another thing to keep in mind with a VSL (you mentioned trying to adapt a WTM approach to a VSL) is to focus on what the goals of a classical education are, rather than what someone else's program/process/materials look like. It's easy to fall into the trap of thinking that a classical education requires certain curricula, lots of memorization/narration/drill, etc., but that's only one approach — and it's probably the least appropriate for 2e/VSL kids. For example, chess, Mastermind, and other strategy games (where visual/spatial strengths are an advantage) can foster logical and analytical thinking; you don't need a "critical thinking workbook." Socratic questioning and discussions can take the place of worksheets, quizzes, and canned assignments. (I talked a little in this thread about how I use discussions of Teaching Co lectures to work on analytical thinking and pre-writing skills). Instead of reading/memorizing scientific facts and answering chapter review questions, I prefer to let DS figure out for himself how to get the information he wants. E.g., if he asks a question about ants or planarians or black holes, I'll say "How can you find that out?" That might involve books, documentaries, and internet research, or it might involve catching/observing critters, designing experiments, etc. Often that research leads to more questions, which lead to more research and experiments, etc. Also, drawing his notes and observations, rather than writing them, tends to be much more useful to him, since he doesn't think in words. I do agree with the idea that math and foreign language are fundamental ways of "training the mind," but I don't think the language has to be Greek or Latin. My kids happened to choose those, but I'd have been fine with Mandarin or Spanish or whatever; I would rather they learn a language they're really interested and invested in, and I think this is especially important for VSLs, who learn & retain information much better if they're really engaged and motivated. (I also think computer programming is excellent for training the mind and fostering logical/analytical thinking, and yet that's not emphasized at all in most "classical" programs.) Formal grammar is important to an understanding of foreign language, but my experience has been that waiting until DS was ready (& motivated) and then doing it all at once was far more effective that years of drill. Ditto with math — the big picture, presented visually & conceptually, gets an "aha!" that years of slogging and drill would never have achieved. What's important is that your son eventually gets where he needs to be — not which boxes he checks off for each grade level, not which materials he uses, not how many worksheets he fills out. Don't let others (who don't have kids like this) make you doubt yourself or your instincts! Jackie

Things that have worked well for my 2e/dyslexic/VSL: * Teaching Company courses & documentaries for history and science * LOTS of hands-on experiments and activities for science * Mindstorms and Virtual World Design & Creation for Teens for programming * The Structure of Man for drawing and anatomy * letting him choose his foreign language, so that he was really motivated to do the work (he chose Greek) * Lukeion classes for grammar, history, and Greek (very visually-oriented) * Strategicum math class (fast-moving, very engaging, integrated, whole-to-parts approach) Basically, I looked for the most VSL-friendly programs I could find for the subjects that are not his areas of strength (math, grammar, foreign language), and let the rest be interest-led. He has learned far more from watching Teaching Co courses and documentaries, designing and carrying out his own labs & experiments, and doing his own research in areas he wants to explore more deeply (recent topics have included linguistics, ancient warfare, the Persian empire, and evolutionary biology), than he would have if I tried to force him to slog through a textbook, fill in worksheets, etc. And he's much much happier. Jackie

Unless your DD needs lots of review, she shouldn't have any trouble going from MM6 to Jacobs. MM6 covers most prealgebra topics (including integers & functions), and the beginning of Jacobs is also a review of prealgebra topics, so it should be a smooth transition. My DS used MM4-6, and the beginning of Jacobs was all review for him. (We subsequently switched to a faster-moving online class, but he wouldn't have had any trouble completing Jacobs.) Jackie

Sounds like MUS Algebra might be a good choice for her. There are short video lessons, but the problem sets are in the workbook, which has a very clean, simple layout (plain black type, tons of white space). It's a very gentle prealgebra/intro to algebra, and doesn't get into more difficult topics like quadratics. Jackie