What curriculum did you avoid for as long as possible, but you now love?

[FloridaLisa]

I really like Rod and Staff English. We've used Shurley almost from the get-go of our homeschooling -- 12 years ago. I finally picked up R & S last year and used it with my middle schooler. I love that it's open and go, thorough, has excellent explanations and ample exercises for practice. I think I'll still use Shurley 3, 5 and 7 in the early years, and continue to switch to R & S in the middle school years.

 

So what curriculum are you enjoying after avoiding it for some time? :bigear:

 

Lisa

[cathmom]

Math-U-See.

 

I never looked at it because I hate, loathe, and detest the name! But then I desperately needed a new math curriculum, started looking at it, and I really like it. But if I had a million dollars, I would pay Steve Demme to CHANGE THAT STUPID NAME!!!!!

[tuesdayschild]

FLL :tongue_smilie:

[Brenda in MA]

Disregarded it for years due to the cost of the TWSS videos and the reviews suggesting that it produces "formulaic writing".

 

However, I finally gave it a try because I was desperate for something that would get my son over the "hump" of writing very simple sentences with boring vocabulary. After several years of using the history-based lessons, I really love the program, and my son's writing has improved dramatically. Even though he complains about the check-lists, they've taken me out of the equation, which has been very good.

 

This year, we'll venture into more "free-form" and essay writing for high school. I'm interested to see if he'll keep most of the style things that he learned from IEW.

 

Brenda

Edited August 29, 2010 by Brenda in MA

[TMarie]

Spelling Power

[Zee]

Disregarded it for years due to the cost of the TWSS videos and the reviews suggesting that it produces "formulaic writing".

:iagree:

 

We're using the SICC-B currently and I love it. I finally gave up on the dream of what I wish we could do with writing and instead are actually doing it. I'm planning on sticking with IEW the rest of the way. It's getting done and ds is improving - a win-win.

 

BTW-for those that haven't heard, the stylistic requirements are only meant to be required for the first three years you use the program. After that you can relax the requirements and let the child find their own voice. That wasn't the impression I had of the program for years. I understand now that the requirements are like training wheels and not meant to stay on the bike forever.

[lllll]

..

[BeckyFL]

I finally purchased the entire set of Spelling Wisdom last year and after a year of use, I am in love with it!

[Punks in Ontario]

CLE. I thought it would be boring and too workbooky. The guys don't beg to do LA, but they do it well and without complaining.

[FloridaLisa]

Yes, IEW would probably be another on my list. We only used it because our co-op was using it. But, lo and behold, I really liked it! I wouldn't use it every year, but it was great for our very busy year with a newborn b/c I could pop in the DVDs, let Pudewa do the teaching, inspire the kids to write, and then just re-work their pieces with my dc. I completely see why IEW helps so many families and how it can be used successfully.

 

Lisa

[Tree House Academy]

Rod and Staff English!

[Hunter's Moon]

Math-U-See.

 

I never looked at it because I hate, loathe, and detest the name! But then I desperately needed a new math curriculum, started looking at it, and I really like it. But if I had a million dollars, I would pay Steve Demme to CHANGE THAT STUPID NAME!!!!!

 

Haha, I hate the name too. I am using it now but while researching math, I would always skip over it on the Google pages. I don't like when people put "u" instead of "you" so I just assumed I wouldn't like it.

 

Next time, I'll remember to be more open with my options :)

[StephanieZ]

I avoided SWO for several years, but love, love, love it. It does the job, is so simple, so quick, almost no mom-time, and WORKS for all 3 dc. Totally painless.

[HollyDay]

Saxon. Hated the dry, dull, traditional approach. Love it now. It works

[Laura in CA]

Math-U-See.

 

I never looked at it because I hate, loathe, and detest the name!

 

Just a funny aside ... there is a boy in our homeschool circle whose name is Matthew See. We have a lot of fun with that :001_smile:

Edited August 30, 2010 by Laura in CA

[Blue Hen]

:iagree:

[Alphabetika]

Saxon. Hated the dry, dull, traditional approach. Love it now. It works

 

:iagree: I refused to use Saxon math when we started HSing our oldest because she had used it in school and hated it. So I was all over the map with her and math and she never understood math until last year when she took it as an outside class. Also last year, middle dd (with whom I'd also never used Saxon) asked to use it after seeing it at a friend's house. It's perfect for her. WIsh I'd used it with the oldest, too.

[ereks mom]

I was a devoted BJU math user until EK hit a wall with BJU Algebra 1. I agonized over the decision to switch, but finally made the leap last year. EK did GREAT with TT Algebra 1 and is now doing TT Geometry & TT Algebra 2. A few days ago, I actually overheard her telling a friend that she likes math. This from my least mathy kid--yes, the one who cried tears of frustration every day when she was doing BJU Algebra 1!

[SnMomof7]

A Beka's readers. For some reason I was CONVINCED my daughter would just jump right into reading 'real' books. Ahem, how homeschooling teaches us that we don't know it all :). She really needed step by step progression, and books that she could read ALL the words of without getting frustrated :). I love that they are phonetically leveled and not based on lists of sight words!

[Excelsior! Academy]

:iagree:

Spelling Power

[Donna A.]

:iagree: I refused to use Saxon math when we started HSing our oldest because she had used it in school and hated it. So I was all over the map with her and math and she never understood math until last year when she took it as an outside class. Also last year, middle dd (with whom I'd also never used Saxon) asked to use it after seeing it at a friend's house. It's perfect for her. WIsh I'd used it with the oldest, too.

 

I could've almost written this post, except I don't have the "school" to blame for our avoidance of Saxon, but my own self. I avoided it for a long time because as a brand new homeschooler, I was on the "only hands-on math" and "bad Saxon textbook" bandwagon. Consequently, we spent waayyyy too long trying many other things, and my dd is finally settling into Saxon for high school. I've got my other two in Saxon as well, and we're staying there for the long haul. I wish I would've given in sooner. I think my dd would've had a lot less math confusion, and I feel horrible for the years that I feel were wasted because of it. She needed something much more straightforward than all the "new math" and "conceptual thinking" type programs.

[southcarolinamom]

We started off using BJUP materials, but my heart with more in line with Sonlight's philosophy. Due to time constraints and finances, we couldn't use Sonlight for the first 8 years of homeschooling.

 

This is now the third year of Sonlight - we love it!

[EKS]

Well, I avoided WTM because I thought it was Christian.

 

And I avoided MCT for over a year because I couldn't figure out how to implement it.

[plansrme]

Math-U-See.

 

I never looked at it because I hate, loathe, and detest the name! But then I desperately needed a new math curriculum, started looking at it, and I really like it. But if I had a million dollars, I would pay Steve Demme to CHANGE THAT STUPID NAME!!!!!

 

Yeah, this, except that I haven't gotten over the name yet. The name is why I have never seriously considered it. I find it offensive that a curriculum would name itself using text-speak.

 

To answer the actual question, though, Rod & Staff. I used to see all those people crowding around their table at the homeschool convention and think they must just all be religious weirdos. Though I am a Christian, I spent 10 years in a bad Christian school, and for that reason I will not ever consider Abeka or BJU. But, I finally softened my stance on Rod & Staff (their not being fundamentalist Baptists was a big plus) and now wouldn't dream of homeschooling without their English series.

 

Terri

[FloridaLisa]

Just a funny aside ... there is a boy in our homeschool circle whose name is Matthew See. We have a lot of fun with that :001_smile:

 

:lol: Too funny!

 

Lisa

[Kim in Appalachia]

I'm not using it this year, because my oldest is taking classes at the local college, but I ended up loving their stuff. I never thought I would. I always had a thing against BJ because of the history of the University, and because I was sure I would find the text substandard and full of all that drives me nuts in fundamental Christian stuff (and I am a conservative Christian). But desperation in 9th grade led me to using the DVDs and I was so happy with it. I found the books very good, and not too overly pushy (there is the familiar biases, but not as bad as I have seen in other texts, or as bad as I thought). My dd loved it, and I think it helped her with school in general. My oldest has always needed a more textbook approach and I avoided it because I didn't like it. But it worked out very well and I will use their materials again.

[Paintedlady]

I avoided Barton Reading & Spelling for years b/c of cost and hoping something cheaper (AAS) might help. I finally came to realize I needed something more and took the plunge with Barton. It's been wonderful and has been so helpful for my dyslexic dd.

[Guest TheBugsMom]

How about no curriculum.

I had heard of homeschoolers just using books and no real curricula for certain subjects and thought they were way out in the corn field. Now I am engaged in just that...a lack of bought curricula and in it's place I am using all the books I have wanted to get to but couldn't because my day was ruled by someone else's schedule.

 

We are winging it for history and now science and Bible.

[Brindee]

Yeah, this, except that I haven't gotten over the name yet. The name is why I have never seriously considered it. I find it offensive that a curriculum would name itself using text-speak.

Just for the record, MUS was around LONG before texting was! So maybe you should take offense at texting for copying MUS!!! :001_smile:

 

 

My answer would be R&S English also. Not because of any prejudice toward them, I was just trying what others told me was good (A Beka mainly). Well, they did not work, and my middle child was really struggling with grammar/language. When we started R&S it just clicked for him and he ended up doing very well with grammar!!!

[Brindee]

 

Just a funny aside ... there is a boy in our homeschool circle whose name is Matthew See. We have a lot of fun with that :001_smile:

:lol: That's funny! Does Matthew See use Math-U-See? :lol:

[jewellsmommy]

When I was preparing for K, I looked at SL, FIAR, and TOG at a curriculum fair. After a few minutes trying to look at TOG I immediately dismissed it as absolutely crazy! I went with SL for K and then 1st. Halfway through core 1, I was waffling and found myself looking at WP (was set to switch to this) and then I came across TOG again and tried to consider it but dismissed it as frustrating. No, I just could not wrap my mind around it. At the end of her 1st grade school yr. I, yet again, found myself looking at it. I was slightly less disgusted as I began to get the concept. By mid summer I was willing to try it. I now love it! I had know idea it was everything I wanted and was right there all along :lol:. Last yr was our first yr with it and as we are entering our 2nd yr, I can't believe I walked away so many times. Dd adores it and begs to do it first every day!

Edited September 1, 2010 by jewellsmommy

[shanvan]

After a few minutes trying to look at TOG I immediately dismissed it as absolutely crazy!

 

Then, when I couldn't even figure out the website I was completely convinced there was no way I would want to use it. I also thought the idea of scripted discussions were too cookie cutter for us. I suppose I didn't stop to think that every family makes the discussion what they want it to be.

 

I was basically creating my own TOG and not knowing when to stop. I know people will think this is weird, but TOG actually helps me set limits on just how far to explore our topics.

 

Shannon

[LauraQ]

I hated the idea of how Saxon worked, and was as unimpressed as I could be with advertisements of higher standardized test scores. The cost was initially prohibitive and later it was merely ridiculous. We've tried many math programs with varrying degrees of success, and one that we actually loved in the early years (Singapore Early Bird through about 5B is excellent IMO). We really loved LOF for Fractions & Decimals and Percents but Algebra wasn't working for dd, and supplementing with Jacobs wasn't helping. I finally gave in since I just wanted dd to get through it and I no longer cared if she could be a math wiz--I just wanted her to get it, get it done, and get enough math done to get into college! Phwew! 10 lessons in and dd loves it, I love it, and I'm so glad I did it. She is more successful, more careful about simple mistakes, and more confident than she has EVER been with math before!! Ever! (Yes, we bought the DIVE CD because I cannot consistently teach EVERY day since I work 2 12-hour shifts every week)

 

IEW seemed nice, but it also was waaaayyy too expensive. Now that I work, we had enough money to give it a try. Even though my kids haven't used it in over 4 months, they still use what they learned for other subjects such as Omnibus for short answers and summas and for outlining/notetaking.

[Stacy in NJ]

I'm not using either of these at the high school level, but both have been a big hit in the logic stage.

 

My oldest was naturally mathy and used Singapore and then Foerster's Algebra and now a TPS class. My youngest has struggle with math since birth. :001_smile: Teaching Textbooks has been a real blessing to him. He's used the 5th grade book and will soon start the 6th grade book.

 

History Odyssey is sooooo easy to use - open and go history. The reading, outlining, simple writing assignments, research projects are relevant, interesting, and fun.

 

These two are now on my list of favorites along with SOTW and AG.

[chalkboard]

Rod and Staff Math and CLE English and Reading.

 

I found out less is more.

 

Susan

[PollyOR]

Rod & Staff. I bought a used copy of English 6 years ago and it looked as dry as toast. With required testing looming, I tried English 4 and loved it. Over the past 5-6 years we have went on to add in math and eventually science and history too. It has worked especially well for my 12yodd.

 

Recently my dad (retired plumber/pipe fitter/welder) wanted to brush up on pre-algebra, so I gave him our R&S 8 books. Every time we discuss math, he praises Rod & Staff and tells me what wonderful math books I have. :)

[SBP]

Saxon. Hated the dry, dull, traditional approach. Love it now. It works

 

Yup. We used Saxon 1 for Kindergarten (mostly because that was what the local classical school was doing, and I was a new homeschooler who wasn't ready to trust her own instincts) and it was just WAY too much math, too many worksheets, etc., for an ADHD 5 year old. I blamed Saxon (much easier than blaming myself) and swore I'd never use it again. We switched to RightStart and loved that, but then ran out of RightStart at about the 4th grade and did an absolutely useless year of BJU before I got over myself and switched to Saxon. I desperately wish, for my DD's sake, especially, that I had put her in Saxon 5/4 right after RightStart. It's one of my biggest regrets in 7 years of homeschooling.