I'd planned on skipping 6 & 7 but now I think we'll do them, but only pick parts we need to do/review and then do all of 8. I wish we'd never bothered with 2 or 4 so we wouldn't be burned out on it. 3 was a perfect starting point after English for the Thoughtful Child in 2nd grade, and then R&S 3, then 5, has been a perfect progression. All time spent in 2 & 4 felt like a waste.

Just because you have taken all the tests does not mean you have to send all the scores to all colleges you apply to. I would suggest you take all tests you can, and if you score really poorly on one, you can either retake it if you have time, or just don't send those scores to schools.

This is true for Engineering but less so for Biology. Dh did have to take Calculus in college (one class) to get his Bio degree, but it was nicknamed "Cowboy Calculus" because it was SO much easier than what the Engineering majors had to take. It was so easy that dh said it was all review of the Cal he'd taken in high school.

What they use in the Public Schools here are pathetic and not worth his time often. Big books full of lots of pictures, bulleted lists and such, but not enough substance. Instead, check out Singapore's Biology for something that would complement Apologia well (some overlap but also covers MANY topics that are not covered in much depth or at all in Apologia's Bio--more chem eg--and from a secular POV that is matter-of-fact rather than with the more zealous air one finds in textbooks from both sides here in the states). Doing the labs requires a bit of an investment in supplies and some shopping around, but they are doable. I can provide a materials list for you if you'd like.

Many people will share with you the Pros of college-level courses in high school, so I will restrict my post to the Cons. AP and CLEP: A Cautionary Tale Once upon a time, in a boarding school, an ambitious young man took as many AP courses and CLEP tests as he could get his hands on. Then, when he was a college freshman at State U he had *many* of his Core classes already out of the way. So, for his first year of college he enrolled in several sophomore and even junior level courses because he had either received credit for or placed out of the freshman classes. Now, this wasn't his first year away from home (remember, he attended boarding school grades 10-12), but certainly he now had more freedom than he'd had in high school. Still, he kept his partying in check, and buckled down. But even he wasn't prepared for the huge jump in difficulty from high school AP classes to sophomore level math, science and history classes. You see, APs only changed where he started and didn't give him credit so he still had to take *something* to fulfill Core Class requirements only the freshman-level classes weren't an option for him because he'd tested out of them. The first semester he managed to hold on by the skin of his teeth, and was put on academic probation. By the end of the second semester, however, he did so poorly that he was put on suspension. It ended up taking him longer to graduate because of that suspension than it would have if he'd started college with NO college credits but hadn't been suspended. While I can understand some of the justifications for college credits and AP/CLEP courses, *especially* for homeschooled children, I would strongly urge you to have your child take a college course that will NOT place him in a higher-level class he's required to take. No AP class compares to a real college course where the prof doesn't hold your hand and where you do in one semester what you had a whole year to do in high school (and college kids tend to work more hours per week because of their higher expenses). Even community college classes tend (*tend*--no angry replies please!!) to be easier than classes at State U such that when they do jump into higher level classes that first semester, with a full course load and a full time job, they can be quite overwhelmed. I think there are some really good reasons to have your children start college taking only freshman-level courses. If they're very easy, all the better so they'll have more wiggle room to adjust to all the *other* stressors that come with the first year of college!

I think it's dangerous to over-simplify our horrendous health problems in America by saying everything bad is the fault of one thing--sugar. Don't get me wrong, I think sugar is way over-consumed, especially by me ;-) but too much salt, too much fat, often too much protein, and just plain old Too Much Freaking Food can't all be ignored! And that's just the stuff we put IN that's a problem, it doesn't even begin to address the sedentary issue. Look, I see the results of too much food and too little exercise all the time at work. Someone comes in weighing 300 lbs (even more than when they were here last month) and tries to tell me oh yes, they *have* been sticking to their Diabetic diet! Uh-huh. Then what's with the Cheetos and 20 oz Sprite on your lap? I can only educate a little at a time, but people never cease to amaze me with how little they really know about how to eat. One family says they're keeping loved one on low-protein diet prescribed for his liver disease, but they give him double-meat fast food burgers but take off the buns "because we know bread is bad for you" and no one in the family knows how to cook vegetables other than various forms of fried potatoes. Clearly, this guy's problem isn't sugar! I have a dear friend who's morbidly obese. She has actually said to me she doesn't understand why she's so big, she doesn't think she eats that much. But I've seen her put down half a large pizza, a tumbler full of sweet tea, half a dozen buffalo wings and a couple bread sticks in one sitting without batting an eye. She really has no idea. And the sugar in her tea is, honestly, the least of her problems. What worries me about all these anti-carb gurus in all their forms is that people aren't JUST cutting out the white bread--they're giving up all grains (whole or otherwise) and fruits, and not adding in any more vegetables at all. And often they can't even tell a carb from a protein anyway! I'm sick and tired of watching an obese person dig in to a BUCKET of fried chicken and tell me they're cutting down on carbs while they do it. I'm not mad at the person, I'm frustrated that they just don't know any better, and that they've gotten things totally wrong because of some fad diet peddling nutter with a best-selling book. I'm frustrated that what little good nutrition education there is out there is buried amongst dueling fad diet websites touting very unhealthy ways of eating. Many people have NO idea how to eat healthy, and they're killing themselves because of it. There's just not enough labetolol and metformin in the world to overcome these problems, and let me assure you, it's not just about HFCS!

I'm sorry you're so frustrated. When we lived in a bigger city, we joined the local "inclusive" homeschool group instead of the many "Christian" groups. We just couldn't sign a statement of faith that said we'd "asked Jesus into our hearts" and be honest. But we're conservative Christian homeschoolers!! When we joined the inclusive group, there were pagans, atheists, Universalist Unitarians and such, but there were also United Pentecostals and Catholics and other Lutherans like us! And these joined for the same reasons--because though they were Christian, they did not fit into the very narrow definition of "real" Christian as set forth by the exclusive groups. There was one group in town that assured me that we didn't have to sign their SOF to be members, only to be "officers" in the group. I felt like if you didn't ascribe to their SOF then you were relegated to being "second-class members" forever. A friend of mine who WAS a member of that group had 3 kids who wouldn't read Harry Potter--not because MOM objected but because they had heard such horrible things about those "evil books" from other kids/parents in that group. I'm glad we opted for the inclusive group instead. There my kids played happily with Baptists and Pentecostals in dresses and Catholics and Unitarians and Lutherans and even *gasp* Pagans who were both rich and poor, well dressed and shabbily dressed, who either bought new or recycled/freecycled everything. IOW it was more representative of the "real world" for them. Noone tried to convert my children, and my children's faith is strong now, not in the least damaged by having pushed little pagan 4 year olds on swings at park days, or having gone rollerskating with Catholics ;-) There was also a broad range of styles. There were unschoolers, school-at-homers using ABeka or BJU, lit-based using VP or SL, and even classical homeschoolers (before FLL or CC and when only one or two of the SOTW books was finished yet). People shared neat stuff with other moms at park days, but no one bad-mouthed anyone for their religion or their homeschool style! As a Christian, it is deeply concerning to me this division within many homeschool communities between *this kind* of Christian homeschoolers and everyone else. I hate to see it, and would love to see more inclusiveness where homeschooling is concerned.

I do their weekly schedule on Sunday so they are ready to go Monday morning. If I work Sunday then I'm often working on it on Monday morning. So far for the last couple of weeks I've been doing their schedules a week or two ahead of time but still only doing one schedule per week. I can't schedule TOO far ahead or it gets messed up when/if we have to take time off or they have to redo something or need extra help before they can move on. I do NOT get up before my kids. In fact, on Mondays when I've worked the weekend (anywhere from 2-4 12-hour shifts in a row) I often sleep in later than they do. I still expect THEM to get up on time and get started on their schedules. If they don't have a schedule, there are things they can figure out on their own: watch the next lesson on the DIVE CD for math, read another few chapters in a book, work on next Omnibus lesson, do catechism reading (not scheduled by me now), etc. The only getting up first I do is to get out of bed and knock on their doors on my way down the hall so they'll come join me quickly for breakfast and school ;-)

Can you show him you love him by making the dry cleaner runs every week for him??

The best I can do at this time is to read Great Books when I can. Instead of reading ahead what my kids will read, I read *around* those books in areas I'm particularly interested in. This way, hopefully, I have some insight to contribute that they *can't* get from their assigned readings. Also, I'm more motivated to actually read books I'm interested in rather than just books from a list. I alternate these books with other books that are more light reading, and I think this also helps keep me motivated. If I had more time I'd like to think I'd do more than I do now, but I work full time (37.5+ hours per week plus 3 hours of commute time per week) and I also have a great deal of work-related training and learning to do, so I do what I can. When the kids were younger, they needed more of my time & attention each day, but I didn't work. Now that I work, they require less of my time & attention each day, so it's been a trade-off for homeschooling, but I don't have the luxury of much extra time for self-study. Still, I think the very most important thing I can do is to set the example for my children to be a life long learner. So, I don't just read lots of books, I *make time* for reading in my life rather than just wait for time to materialize (it never does that, trust me LOL). I also make sure they *see* me reading for pleasure and information, and I let them know when I'm doing research online and tell them if I discover something interesting. I try to read a variety of books--non-fiction in Science and History mostly, some old literature, and some more contemporary fictional works. I'm partial to sci-fi and fantasy, but I try to branch out and read other fiction works at times. I do not take formal notes on what I read, but I do keep a couple of pencils in my nightstand drawer and in other places I read so that I can underline & scribble marginalia when appropriate.

Memoria Press is Roman so "Christian Worldview" buzzwords should not be a problem. We're using it, not that far in, and have no problem with it. We're confessional Christian, but I can't stand anything that smacks of modern evangelical/fundamentalist "worldview" type stuff.

Yes, we got our encyclopedia set for $75 at the Houston PL library sale a few years ago. Great place to get them!! Here's the newest World Book CD: ($34) http://www.amazon.com/MacKiev-World-Book-Multimedia-Encyclopedia/dp/B003CWQ69M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=software&qid=1301514661&sr=1-1 and the newest Encyc Brittanica CD: ($24) http://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Britannica-Ultimate-Reference-DVD-ROM/dp/1615354336/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=software&qid=1301514773&sr=1-3 A great Atlas for your children's ages: ($21) http://www.amazon.com/Oxford-International-Students-Patrick-Wiegand/dp/0198325797/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1301515709&sr=1-4 And another affordable Atlas that is data-heavy as opposed to map-heavy: ($16) http://www.amazon.com/Student-Atlas-World-Geography-Allen/dp/0073527602/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1301515618&sr=1-5 Historical Atlas: ($33) http://www.amazon.com/Atlas-World-History-Patrick-OBrien/dp/0199746532/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1301516181&sr=8-1 Or a less expensive option: http://www.amazon.com/Hammond-Historical-World-Atlas-Corporation/dp/0843713917/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1301516231&sr=8-6 Science Encyclopedia: ($14 used/new) http://www.amazon.com/Science-Encyclopedia-Revised-Susan-McKeever/dp/0789421909/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1301516360&sr=1-2 (Claims to be for ages 9-12 but I think it's okay for up to maybe 4th or 5th grade only--I own this one, and my 13 year old outgrew it loooong ago) Similar age range, available new directly from Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Kingfisher-Science-Encyclopedia-Charles-Taylor/dp/0753458861/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1301516701&sr=1-4 Another Science Encyclopedia: ($30) http://www.amazon.com/Science-Definitive-Visual-DK-Publishing/dp/0756655706/ref=sr_1_11?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1301516501&sr=1-11 (Claims to be for adults, but I think it's more appropriate for about 6th grade through early high school at best) HTH

Yes, they are expected to read all the books, but we skipped two "secondary" books (more for religious reasons--we have our own catechism materials to substitute) and only did about 1/3-1/2 of 3 more books (one secondary, two primary) in Omnibus I. When dd is done with Omni II I'll tell you how those went. So far she is doing all the books except I think just one Secondary book. They don't have to do all the Sessions--there are several "optional" activities and sessions, and the course, as written, already takes 37-38 full weeks to complete *without* the optional parts. Obviously, doing all sessions in their entirety is not practical for most people. Also, remember that many sessions are meant to be done orally in class, so in a classroom setting one child may answer only one of the oral questions on any given day. I have dd do all the Texas Analysis and Comprehension type questions in writing, and we pick and choose which of the other questions she'll do--some written, some orally. Doing every part of every session in writing would be exhausting! Also, when scheduling, you have to remember that it counts as 3 classes, so most people will only have room in their schedule for 3-4 other classes, including an elective or two, so don't crowd Omnibus out by doing too many other little things. This course is beefy!

We have a complete set of encyclopedias--you can get the CD versions now of World Book for like $40 and they are searchable. We also have a good World Atlas, and a couple of History references (such as a couple of Historical Atlases and The Timetables of World History or even Spielvogel). Usborne books are handy for earlier grades such as 5th-7th, especially if they contain internet links to more information. You could add to this a couple of Science encyclopedias such as from Usborne or Kingfisher at first, and then later you can add more mature references, or ones that are more specialized if your child has a particular interest. My children also are masters of googling ;-) At first, I let them use any resource they find that looks reasonable. As they have gotten older, I've required them to be more picky about the sources they use. I try to encourage them to find an online source whose URL ends in .edu as these are restricted to colleges and universities only, or .gov if they can find something applicable. Other than that, I try to teach them to be discerning about what sorts of sites are likely one person's hobby work (or biased ramblings) and what sorts are published by organizations dedicated to collecting and sharing information about a particular subject, and what sites are maintained by more scholarly periodicals. ANY of these are subject to bias, but some are, in general, more trustworthy than others.

Remember: Stick to the 3 R's. Everything else is gravy. When you have extraordinary life circumstances, you have to give yourself permission to cut back to the bare minimum for a season. Your stay will be only a little bit longer than most summer breaks, so just do the bare minimum, and then you can add the extra subjects back this summer. Reading: Have them read every day. Don't pack books--just visit the local library regularly. See if someone local can get a card for y'all to use to check out books while you're there. IF you have time to read aloud to them, fine, but if you do, see if you can include Grandpa in the read-aloud so that it is time together rather than apart. Writing: Have to study grammar OR write every day. This means you can split it 3 days of grammar and 2 days of writing, or whatever works for you. If even these few things become too much, you can cut back to a little grammar once a week, and one small independent writing assignment per week. Math: Bring their math books and anything you need for math, and do it every day. Math is one of those subjects that's best done often and where long breaks tend to do the most damage. For History and Science, try to fit them in with Reading and Writing. Have them read books on subjects they would have been studying at home, but ones that are available at the local library. Have the research areas of special interest. This might be a good time to have them focus on your state history, or on a particular country's history if they are interested or if you have ancestors from there. Have their writing relate to these readings. But don't worry about working on whatever Hist & Sci programs you have at home. Just work it in when & where you can. I'm sure y'all will need a half-day break now and then, so take those opportunities to go to local museums, historical sites, or to do messy outdoor science projects. Caring for a loved one is an education in and of itself. This experience will mold your children into a particular kind of adult--the kind that is willing to set aside his own life for a time in order to help someone else, someone who is selfless instead of self-centered. Keep reminding yourself about this when/if you stress about not doing enough "school" work. We have had to cut WAY back before to just the bare minimum like I've described above, with SOTW CD's and NO formal science. For a MUCH longer time! What I learned is that my kids weren't "behind" at the end of it all. Instead, they were more responsible, more independent, and had more deeply developed their own particular interests. I couldn't see these benefits right away, but looking back I can. Trust that your children will grow in this experience even if you do NO formal schooling during this time, okay?

We have NEVER wanted to be a part of a coop at any time for any subject. The closest we came was when we were in a HS music group for all ages that I helped out with (there just aren't that many musically skilled parents). I'm fairly strong in teaching history, literature, and language skills, and have studied one language long enough to know better than most how to teach a language. I'm no slacker at most science (though I abhor chemistry) or math, but dh is brilliant in both of these. I can also teach music and art adequately. Many things can be farmed out to things like martial arts or dance classes or summer intensive day camps for arts, sciences, or theater etc. without the need to use a coop. The reality is that many of us do not live near any coops. In states with very easy HS laws, HS groups have a tendency to be less organized, more casual, and more about socialization than academics, and this is just fine with many of us. There are only a couple of HS groups near me, but we're not really active in either one. My children socialize at church, in extra activities (eg dance), and with kids in the neighborhood. I think as kids get older they need us far less to help them be socially active ;-)

Yes. Always. We take generous time off for religious holidays, and also each child gets at least 2-3 days off for their birthday just because. There's no school from about June 1 until at least July 10 and that's our only summer break. We travel a lot, and do so "off season" when other children are in school, which is really nice!! This means we don't have the luxury of taking off 2-3 months in the summer, though, and we don't do spring break *and* Easter week (we're off most of Holy Week), and we don't take off as long for Christmas as the schools (we keep going until my head explodes and declare vacation for the sake of my sanity). It works out well for us, and the kids don't get so burned out.

Yep. I think they can get SO much more out of everything by doing cycles 2 & 3 in grades 7-9 and 10-12 instead of 5-8 and 9-12. There is no reason each level has to last the same amount of time: 4 years. I think there's a huge benefit to either doing the grammar cycle of history in 3-6 or even to do it 1-4 then spend a year or two focusing more on American Hist., or vice-versa. Both of my children are very intelligent, but neither had the maturity or focus for "logic" level work until closer to 7th grade, but both are strong in logic now at end of 7th and end of 9th.

I'd say 15-20 out of 30 would be about right, and not too harsh. Sure you can use this as a teaching opportunity yada yada but bottom line he didn't meet your expectations, and your expectations were not unreasonable for that age. He had LOTS of fluff and filler in that essay, but no specific examples to back it up, no meat and facts. That wouldn't cut it for me, either.

You can start with 5 or 6, and you can simply work through the first book quickly. Go through the lessons together orally, and only have him do in writing only what must be done in writing. Set a timer and work for one hour each day only, and just plow through the material in the first book as quickly as he can go. This way, you can get through at least one perhaps 2 books rather quickly, and then go through 7 & 8 each in one semester or one year. This will also allow you to skip lessons that he really doesn't need to cover (things you know he's mastered already and doesn't need to review).

Someone asked about the DVD's... My kids really didn't like the DVDs, said they found the instructor boring, and asked me to teach FFL rather than have them learn from the DVDs. I personally like the DVDs and find them very helpful to me. Even though the kids don't use them, I don't regret buying them, and I use them to teach me to help me stay one chapter ahead of the kids as we go.

We never take the whole summer off because we like to travel and do so "off season" when other kids are in school. We do take all of June off, and usually at least two other weeks off each summer to travel to see family, but that's it.

Yep. Ds used SL Sci 6 but we skipped that first book you're talking about entirely, and replaced it with a TOPS book he was interested in ;-)

Well, I don't think that's the case for me. I am YEC and dh is OETE. I do NOT think one has to be YEC to be "fully" or "conservative" Christian; likewise, dh does not think one has to be OE anything to be a "real" scientist. Not being dogmatic about YE, I simply prefer a more strait-forward presentation of the facts. I'm the same way about secular textbooks. I abhor dh's Bio text from college because it is dogmatic about evolution to the point that the writing literally comes across sounding like a zealous religious proclamation rather than a rational explanation of how the one can reasonably draw the conclusion of evolution from the facts available at hand. The tone is, IMO, on par with, say, BJU's high school Bio text, but arguing for opposing sides. I don't like that kind of zealotry for *any* theory in my textbooks! You don't see that sort of emotionally-driven pleading for belief about the germ theory of disease anymore--but at one time it was just as heated a debate. Anyway, my point is that I don't think the tone is helpful. Instead, I prefer a text that focuses on learning the theory and skills one needs to be prepared to tackle high school and then college level science, especially for ds who is very science-oriented and may well choose a science career in the future. For him, we use Singapore's Interactive Science for gen. science. He'll still use Apologia's Phys Sci on through Physics and probably an Advanced sci course by them as well. They are also dogmatic, so I supplement them with Singapore texts in the upper grades, but they are less so than the Gen Sci book, so I merely supplement rather than replace. I realize that *all* books contain bias. Sometimes it is more subtle, sometimes it is closer to our own, and sometimes it leans far away from our own views. We can use resources whose biases are similar or dissimilar from our own, as long as we are willing to discuss them and maybe even supplement them, usually. But some books seem to contain a more haughty, dogmatic tone that I do not find useful in what should be a scholarly work, so I forego them, no matter what their leanings. I do not want my children to learn to argue their beliefs and positions in that sort of tone, so I choose instead something more matter-of-fact in its tone instead. It's not enough that a book agree with my opinions--it must help me to teach my children to argue them in an appropriate way as well.

I hate the general science book--too much history of science and scientist bios for my taste (or ds's taste). We dropped it 2 modules in. IMHO it is also quite a bit more dogmatic about the NEC issues than the other books, or at least spends more time on it than the others do. They should be able to handle Phys Sci as long as they are fairly strong in math. I'm thinking they should be in pre-alg or close to ready for it when they do it as there are some tough math parts later in the book.