While they may be great for many, many students, we tried their BJU Spanish I for high school, and my kids hated it. They ended up not learning Spanish, and basically, I wasted a lot of money. It was costly to "lease" the DVD's as well. We only had 13 months in which to use it, before sending it back.

We are really learning a lot from it and enjoying it. The videos of the labs, make them a lot easier to understand. There is also a lot of background information, if you want to learn more about the science behind each of the experiments. If you have any questions, they are very quick to return your calls/emails. We have also done some where we were online while she went through the course. Overall, we have been very pleased. I just wish they would get their Life Science/Biology out.

Thanks! I just ordered, and the priority code listed above gave the discount! :001_smile:

We are using them. It is hard for us to fit them in, though. So far the DVD's have been excellent.

I have 4 boys. 15, 13, and twins that are 11. All have always been homeschooled. Do you keep them on the same curriculum? They use the same material for the most part, but not at the same time for subjects like math. When one is struggling in an area, I will try to find something else that works for them. Do you teach them at the same time or make an effort to do one-on-one? It depends on the subject. In math, they are years apart. One twin just started Algebra today, while the other one is still doing his 5th grade Saxon book. Other subjects they do together. Do they move at the same pace, and if not does one feel like they are "behind" the other? Luckily, the one that is behind academically is the more mellow one. He has a great disposition, and isn't really competitive whereas his twin is even competitive with the older two. Is there a lot of competition? There is more competition between my older two, who are doing the same material for other reasons... One has more learning issues, and the other is pretty quick to catch on to things academically. With the twins there really isn't that much competition. They would tell anyone that they are best friends. I really think both of them would be lost without the other. Many times, the more advanced one, will help the other one with his math. They both seem happy with that arrangement. They love doing a lot of subjects together, though, and I think they both get a LOT out of doing some subjects together. It allows for more discussions, etc. They enjoy working together. It just didn't make any sense for math!

As someone mentioned, Robinson doesn't begin formal math until Saxon 5/4 according to their website. That book is started in 4th grade. So, prior to that, kids would not be spending much time in math other than learning the facts. There are differences in what a 1st grader vs. a 4th grader could do. When my kids were younger, we did Saxon one 3 days a week and Singapore 1 day a week. On the days we did Singapore, they would complete three lessons. It went much faster. People who used Singapore as a full curriculum, generally purchased their other materials; they didn't just use their Primary Mathematis 1A/1B books, but used their supplemental drill books and challenge books.

I don't worry about this kind of thing. I obviously think basic hand washing is important, but my sister who has her doctorate in microbiology convinced me to stop using all the anti-bacterial stuff. A lot of studies are now suggesting that so many more kids are getting asthma because we are over cleaning. Here is a quick article: http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/conditions/04/05/cohen.allergies/index.html but there are many other similar things.

But then, by your definition, no Christian denomination is legalistic are they? I don't know any Christian denomination that thinks a person can merit heaven by just doing "good" things.

There are quite a few transitional forms, though. Just a few years ago they found Tktaalik roseae for example that looks to be the first fish to come on to land. Some, such as Gould, also would explain that evolution isn't just a bunch of small little steps. He argued for the case of punctuated equilibrium where there is branching evolution. Therefore, you wouldn't have all the small changes between species. They have found archaeopteryx, to start them off on the link between dinosaurs and birds. Since then, however, in China they have found other feathered dinosaurs, Sinornithosaurus milleni,and have found fossils showing they have sat on eggs similar to birds, etc. They think one of these could be the cousin of the "missing link" to birds. I have a book that shows the transition from land animals to whales: indophyus, pakicetur, ambulocetus, rodhocetus, dorudon, and Balaena (Baleen whale). Anyway, this topic comes up just as I'm trying to learn more myself since we are doing high school biology next year. I think the problem for some of the debate, is that you can't go to scientists who talk about evolution and understand the creationists argument from them, any more than you can go to a creationist and understand the scientists arguments from them. They both set out to prove the other as a moron and can mis-represent their views. Personally, I am going to teach science with a secular textbook. I don't believe that the earth was created in the last few thousand years. I do believe that God created the world, and that human souls are indeed unique and don't have anything to do with evolution. I don't have any problems reconciling what I teach in science with what I teach in religion using the Bible.

Someone earlier posted a link to a lesson in evolution from Berkeley. They do talk about micro and macro evolution.... http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/_0_0/evoscales_01

That poor child...and parents! I will be saying prayers for all of them.

Going back to the original question, it was asked why do some people care what a bunch of homeschoolers teach... Not getting into what I believe, or what I teach, this would be my guess... I think many are passionate about their field of study. It would be like any of us, when we are well versed on a subject and see something that we feel is blatantly wrong. Let's say a group of homeschoolers were insisting that 4 + 8 = 15. They were writing this in all their books and giving proofs. Most of us would respond in astonishment and wonder what they were doing and tell them they had to "teach it right." Well, to the scientists, that is what they are doing. The bottom line is 98%+ of scientists in the fields that have to do with evolution do believe in evolution though there is debate on how exactly it all happens. They simply don't want their field misrepresented. I think another issue, is that it isn't just a group of homeschoolers. Many people have tried to get creationism taught in the public schools. From the scienctists perspective, it simply isn't science. Answers in Genesis aside, the science community simply doesn't accept in any way shape or form the idea of a 7 day creation. Evolution is simply the accepted scientific model. We can't say that the Christian creation from the Bible should be taught in schools, as they don't use the Bible as their basis of study. Can you imagine what would happen if every group, in the public school system were allowed to have an equal say in the science class. There are people who still insist that the earth is flat. There are people who insist that aliens are living among us and visit regularly. Therefore, in schools, for each subject, really the best prevailing scientific data should be presented. Scientists have refuted most of the science brought on by people who are creationists. I don't have the science background to study either as an authority, so my opinion would be rather limited on this. There is also an issue with colleges. If colleges and professors assume that every homeschooler, which is what is getting implied by some of these articles, is taught creationism and doesn't believe in what they consider "real" science, then it will be harder for homeschoolers, regardless of their education to be accepted into top universities. Anyway, those would be my guesses as to why the people who believe in evolution get so upset with those that want to teach creation.

Tolerance has to work both ways... Many are saying the school is not showing acceptance and tolerance of this child's family. It can just as easily be said that many are not showing tolerance of the Church's teachings. People believe as they will. In this particular case, it was a Catholic school, so their beliefs should be paramount. I really don't know how it was handled. The priest may have told the family in private and it wouldn't have even have been a big deal for the child as most kids don't continue with the same class from preschool on to kindergarten. At least none of them that I know do. Kindergarten usually starts in a new school. Who made this all public? If I wanted to start a school where the beliefs were that only bald people should be allowed to be parents, and that is what I preached in the classroom, then so be it. Those who didn't believe that teaching, probably shouldn't go to the school. It is far better for the children not to go there, than to be in a classroom where the teacher goes on about the beauty of the bald parents' family and says that that is all who should be allowed to live together and raise children. How would the child of other parents feel? I really think the priest could have been looking out for the best interests of the child. He may have known that due to some of the curriculum coming up, that the child would be hurt in some way. Just think of the reactions of the protestors when the child would have been taught in school, that gay couples shouldn't be married let alone raising a child! Would you all be okay with that being taught in the school. Whether you agree with it or not, that is the Catholic teaching, so isn't it best that the child find a more suitable school? Couldn't the child being in that school have caused issues for them? The fact that some Catholic schools don't teach Catholicism is neither here nor there. The fact that some schools might accept various other beliefs is neither here nor there. That particular Archdiocese stated, "Parents living in open discord with Catholic teaching in areas of faith and morals unfortunately choose by their actions to disqualify their children from enrollment." And, yes, I think that can be extended to couples not being married or what have you... It could be extended to anyone outwardly not following the teachings of the church.

I would NEVER consider that!!!!! Of course, I did work for Apple for 10 years! :lol:

I think the school could very well be doing it to try to protect the child. Look at the following scenario. The child is in class when the teacher reads a book about families. They talk about how kids have a mommy and daddy or what have you. Then this child talks about his two moms. What are the teachers supposed to do? If they don't say anything, they have left the impression with the other students that that is okay, when it isn't by the beliefs of the church. If they say something about it not being okay within the church, then they have just told that child that his family is not okay... That would be devastating for the child as well. I think the "best school" isn't just one that might offer the best academics, but it has to be a school where the child isn't going to be hurt by beliefs being so different from his family's that it is bound to cause him confusion. I really think they should have looked into the beliefs of the church etc., prior to enrolling the child. I don't think it has anything to do with "punishing the child," just the opposite in fact. I think it is protecting him from unnecessary hurt.