Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

Donna A.

Members
  • Content Count

    3,153
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Donna A. last won the day on January 20 2013

Donna A. had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

554 Excellent

About Donna A.

  • Rank
    Empress Bee
  • Birthday 08/03/1963

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female

Contact Methods

  • Biography
    Mom of two homeschooled graduates and a high schooler, and married to my beloved since 1990
  • Location
    Kansas City area
  • Interests
    Reading, research, Bible study, scrapbooking, animals
  • Occupation
    I'm occupied ALL the time!
  1. Yes, I think this is one of the issues with the Alpha Omega Lifepacs, from what I've seen in discussions over the years. Many parents assume it's an independent program and don't really teach from the TMs. Between the two, I would definitely choose CLE over Alpha Omega. But probably neither for Bible or History because I'm not Mennonite (CLE), and I don't care for workbooks in general for those subjects, anyway. But for the 3 R's, I think CLE is excellent (barring the unfinished high school levels).
  2. Yes, overlap specifically about Earth Science and Physical. :)
  3. Thank you, Jetta! This comparison of content between these two specific sciences in answer to the OP was very helpful to me as I plot out how we're going to finish the year, and then move into 9th grade. :) I think we'll spread Earth Science over the two years, while also weaving in some of the Apologia Physical. This means I won't have to buy anything else for science (yay!), because I plan to return to Apologia exclusively for basic biology. And I think for their advanced sciences, I'll have one do Apologia Advanced Bio (HA&P), and the other girl do something else since she said that if she goes to college, she wants to study archaeology. (Which is why she was excited when I bought the BJU Earth Science! :) )
  4. Look, I don't care whether someone uses Apologia, BJU, Abeka, or whatever for high school science. It's a personal preference. But there is absolutely NO evidence that Apologia doesn't include enough for the student to be able to do well on the SAT. NONE. And if the student isn't going into a medical field, they don't need HA&P at the high school level. That is a fact. My point about the wordiness bringing better explanations (obviously) applies to MANY people. I realize that not everyone likes the wodiness, and that's fine. I was just wanted to point out why the style difference works for so many people (it's written specifically for homeschoolers, not classroom science teachers), for the benefit of the OP. And btw, the gal who taught Apologia Bio to my oldest at a classical enrichment school for homeschoolers had been a science teacher in the classroom for many, many years. She wasn't just some uneducated mom who couldn't understand something "harder". Likewise, the gal who taught Advanced Bio to my daughter had also been teaching science for many years, and was (is) herself an Occupational Therapist. Again, not some uneducated mom who didn't understand something "harder". The gal who did the shared teaching with me of all the sciences to our daughters together used to be a nurse. So again, not just some uneducated mom who couldn't understand something "harder". I could keep going about the different training that all the "Apologia moms" I know have had..... (P.S. I'm sorry for sounding so argumentative. But obviously, I resent the implication that Apologia is only good for either teachers or adults who "can't" do something harder. The fact that it was written FOR homeschoolers simply means that *anyone* can teach it, not just classroom science teachers. :( )
  5. As a mom with a college student who's about to graduate, and a high schooler who's about to graduate, and who knows MANY homeschoolers who used Apologia science all the way from General through the advanced courses, I disagree that Apologia is in any way inadequate or insufficient for college testing or college performance or readiness. As a matter of fact, our nursing student friend used her Apologia texts to HELP her with college level science courses, simply because Dr. Wile *explains* things better (in his annoyingly wordy way... and the intro college-level information is there in the Apologia texts.) I'm talking about students who did extremely well on their college testing, with students who are competitive in nature and achieved near-perfect or very high scores on both the SAT and ACT, and who then went through college with 4.0 or high 3.x GPAs. These "Apologia students" that I know -- some personally, and some indirectly through our homeschool circles -- have attended/are attending a variety of schools from community college to public 4-year to private colleges. They have achieved degrees in (or are currently studying) nursing, dentistry, pharmacy, dietary management, engineering (physics, biochemistry, mechanical, and electrical), law enforcement, physiology (for physical therapy), and sales, as well as non-sciency programs including music and art. (No, I'm not exaggerating. If this weren't a public forum, I could *name* each of the students in the specific programs I listed... and yes, I know for a *fact* that they did Apologia science. These are just the ones I KNOW about, but there are at least hundreds, and maybe even thousands more homeschoolers in our area who did Apologia all the way through, and I haven't heard a single complaint about Apologia not being adequate enough for college no matter what their degree program.) Likewise, all the part-time classical schools for homeschoolers here in our large metro area, in one of the wealthiest counties in the country, use Apologia, and so do the homeschool co-ops. (Many of which include classical homeschoolers.) Most of these parents would absolutely NOT be using Apologia if it were insufficient in any way. "Longer" and "harder" doesn't necessarily mean "better". "Style" between the two publishers is definitely a personal preference thing, but to claim that Apologia isn't good enough or thorough enough for excellent SAT and ACT scores, and the scholarships that those scores can bring, simply isn't true. Just because Apologia doesn't go AS in-depth (technically) as BJU doesn't mean it's not "adequate". It just means BJU probably includes a lot more than is necessary. This brings me to my next comment. We are longtime Apologia users. But this year, with my youngest as an 8th grader and two students who are not my own (8th and 5th grades), we're giving BJU Earth Science a try for the 8th graders. We *just* switched, so we've only done one lesson so far, but I'm already seeing how much more advanced BJU is than Apologia. There are two reasons why we switched: -- The wordy writing style in Apologia, which is annoying for these 8th graders who are not strong readers. And, -- My students who are not my own are used to the "classroom textbook" style. (They came out of the public school system.) Since they're learning several subjects in a totally new (to them) and different way this year, I decided to concede on this one. I suspect, though, that I'll be referring to the Apologia texts for explanations along the way. ;) When my middle girl started ACE Chemistry with a friend of hers (whose mother used to be a nurse), the mom and I found out after three weeks in that we were both referring to the Apologia texts for help in order to do the ACE lessons... and ACE is "supposed" to be a lot easier than Apologia! So we just switched to Apologia and did that instead. Apologia Chem has tons more math in it than ACE (which is why we tried ACE), but since Dr. Wile's *explanations* were more understandable, we could work through the math. In fact, my oldest used something *much* simpler for chemistry because she's not mathy at all (none of us in this family are, really), but after seeing that her sister (also not mathy) really COULD do Apologia Chem, she was wishing she had gone ahead and done it, too. So it's a trade-off. Annoying wordiness in this case means good explanations. And remember that Apologia was written specifically FOR homeschoolers, not for science teachers in a classroom. Dr. Wile's texts may be wordy, but the fact that he *explains* both the terms and the science itself in such a way that non-science teachers can UNDERSTAND it make it totally worth it (for many, obviously, but not all). And that's probably also why so many homeschoolers do so well on college testing and performance in science... because they actually *understand* what they've been studying all those years, and are therefore not intimidated by it. :) Since we've just started the BJU, it remains to be seen how the year will actually end up, but I feel pretty certain we'll go back to Apologia for Biology and up. Ultimately it comes down to a style preference.... but it's definitely NOT an issue of Apologia being "less advanced" or inadequate for college prep, as the numerous examples I listed above prove.
  6. Since the Bluedorns don't make too many formal curriculum recommendations, I think that you could choose just about any prepared unit study or curriculum modeled after CM, and it would be close. Not exact, but close, and particularly in the before-10 age range. Especially if you're not keen on the idea of going through the TTT book and making out your own lesson plans or goals based on their descriptions, but would rather just buy curriculum that has a TM and schedule already written out for you. Some prepared curriculums that would fit well with TTT... and again, thinking specifically about the before-10 age range: My Father's World Five in a Row Singapore Math Math-U-See Ruth Beechick's "The Three R's" Charlotte Mason Help (charlottemasonhelp.com) There's not a lot, really, because MOST prepared curriculums for this age range are much more "formal" and academic-focused... or just plain expensive. Spending a lot of money on prepared curriculum is completely unnecessary at this age, IMO. (For example, I preferred the preschool recommendations by My Father's World before they created the new one that they sell now.)
  7. Then I would take a look at Math-U-See. Give her the placement test first, though, and wherever it says to place her, *believe* it. ;) When I gave my dd the placement test for MUS and found her to be borderline between Pre-Alg and whatever's before that, I went ahead and put her in Pre-Alg. But then I found that I had to go back and use the R&S 7th grade book to fill in some gaps as we attempted to move through Pre-Alg... we sort of toggled back and forth for a while. Eventually she could move on and complete Pre-Alg, and it worked out fine. I'm just saying that the MUS placement test for MUS curriculum is pretty accurate.
  8. Here's another link in case anyone's looking: http://da1.redshift.com/~bonajo/SOTWmenu.htm
  9. Here's another link in case anyone's looking: http://da1.redshift.com/~bonajo/SOTWmenu.htm
  10. MOH and SOTW really aren't "alike". SOTW is used in MFW rather than MOH because MFW uses the Bible itself for the biblical content, so MOH would be redundant in that regard. Except that using MOH would be the summary of one author's opinions (as is any spine), whereas by using the Bible as a spine for the biblical content, you're going straight to the source. Plus, the teacher notes in the MFW TMs align with the SOTW assignments, so if you replaced SOTW as a spine, you'd have to tweak the TM itself for all those years, too. It wouldn't be worth it, IMO. You *could* use MOH as a Book Basket option during those years, or weave it into your lesson plans using the schedule on Paula's Archives. But again, it would be redundant to what's already scheduled in MFW... and you'd basically be reinventing the wheel. Are planning to begin MFW with Creation to the Greeks in 5th grade? Why do you not want to use MFW prior to that?
  11. Yes, exactly. I was not "commenting on a show having not watched it". I shared another opinion (not mine... I thought I made that clear up above) and asked for follow up on that, with my mother's opinions and comments in mind. I was curious about what the documentary actually did say.... or not. (I think you may be right, Space station... my mom heard what she already believed.) Thank you, Aggie, for the additional insight. I think I'll look around for the DVD and watch it with my daughter who did research on some of FDR's policies and the Depression for her college history class.
  12. I didn't actually see the documentary myself, so I have no opinion on whether it did or didn't. But the article I posted caught my attention because my mom (who's almost 89) watched it and RAVED about it. She is a *huge* FDR fan. Some of the phrases referenced in that article are exact quotes that I've heard my mother say over and over again through the years. It made me wonder how many people like my mom have just believed and repeated the mantra told through the media all these years (as the article suggests)... that it was, in fact, FDR and his policies that "saved" the country. Since many here seem to agree with my mom about how great the documentary was, and the article I posted confirms that, I would be led to believe that the documentary did NOT make it clear that it was W2W that brought us out of the Depression. (Because my mom would not agree with that statement.) Any thoughts from others on that point? Did the documentary in fact attribute the war to America's "salvation" from the Depression?
  13. Here's another perspective: http://dailysignal.com/2014/09/28/new-deal-end-great-depression/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
×
×
  • Create New...