history: comparing Kingfisher and Usborne

[ChandlerMom]

Can anyone describe how the Usborne and Kingfisher history encyclopedias are the same/different? I know Usborne is cited for Level 1 and Kingfisher Level 2, though they both are listed as for 9-12 yos by their publishers.

 

I'm wondering if I really need both or can get by with just Kingfisher (and SOTW1 and other narratives). Usborne is now out of print so it is a bit pricey. I'd hate to pay more than MSRP on a Used copy of an old edition if I can avoid it. :D

 

My 2nd grader is reading at ~ a 6th grade level (in fluency, comprehension, and abstraction), if that helps. She does have 2 younger sibs, tho, but so far they seem similarly wired.

 

Unnecessary or am I just being cheap? :lol: TIA!

[CarrieF]

Personal preference here, but I have always liked Kingfisher MUCH better than Usborne. (Although, I must be fair and say the newest Usbornes are much better. :)) Kingfisher does seem to be a bit more "mature" (or maybe 'put together' is a better way of phrasing it) and their layouts don't make my eyes want to bug out of my head the way the Usborne sometimes do. :tongue_smilie: You could definitely get by with one, so I would recommend picking the one that you like most visually and academically. They cover the same things, so there is no need for both, IMHO.

[johnandtinagilbert]

Usborne has a lower grammar feel and KF is more upper grammar/logic stage.

 

My current 5th grader (gifted kid) prefers the Usborne b/c the font is larger and she says they say the same thing, it's just simplified in U.

 

I make the middle school use KF :) although she prefers U!

[Once]

The Kingfisher has a time line at the top which I find more useful. The red line moves across the top as the pages move on. Kingfisher does have a more mature feel to it as you read it, but I thought that it was harder to find than the Usbourne one. Go figure.

The pictures are more realistic in the Kingfisher as well.

Edited December 31, 2010 by Once
Random thought.

[anabelneri]

I just looked on Amazon and I think this is the Usborne, though it's been republished since I bought it last year:

http://www.amazon.com/Usborne-Encyclopedia-World-History/dp/0794528333/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpi_1

 

I agree with the others, though, in preferring the Kingfisher. My daughter (also a strong reader) has enjoyed reading through both books (checked out from the library), so I chose to buy the Usborne for the earlier grades and we'll get the Kingfisher another year.

 

:)

[ChandlerMom]

I just looked on Amazon and I think this is the Usborne, though it's been republished since I bought it last year:

http://www.amazon.com/Usborne-Encyclopedia-World-History/dp/0794528333/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpi_1

 

I agree with the others, though, in preferring the Kingfisher. My daughter (also a strong reader) has enjoyed reading through both books (checked out from the library), so I chose to buy the Usborne for the earlier grades and we'll get the Kingfisher another year.

 

:)

 

Actually, WTM specifies this one:

http://www.amazon.com/Usborne-Internet-Linked-Encyclopedia-World-History/dp/0746041683/ref=wl_mb_recs_1_dp

 

The one in your link is a reprint from this year, doesn't have "internet-linked" in the title, and the author is one of the authors from the WTM spec'd book...I don't know how similar or different they would be. Might be nearly the same. My local library doesn't carry either book. :glare:

 

Sounds like we'll be ok starting with the Kingfisher book and seeing how it works. Won't be doing irreparable damage to dd's understanding of history by not starting with Usborne's. :D Thanks to all for your responses!

[Mosaicmind]

Actually, WTM specifies this one:

http://www.amazon.com/Usborne-Internet-Linked-Encyclopedia-World-History/dp/0746041683/ref=wl_mb_recs_1_dp

 

The one in your link is a reprint from this year, doesn't have "internet-linked" in the title, and the author is one of the authors from the WTM spec'd book...I don't know how similar or different they would be. Might be nearly the same. My local library doesn't carry either book. :glare:

 

Sounds like we'll be ok starting with the Kingfisher book and seeing how it works. Won't be doing irreparable damage to dd's understanding of history by not starting with Usborne's. :D Thanks to all for your responses!

 

If you look at the new one it's essentially the same as the one you are referring to that's in the WTM. The new one does have internet links in it---look closely at the front cover and read the description. I have it coming tomorrow from Amazon, I've heard it's better than the older one. I will let you know.

[Hunter]

They cover the same things, so there is no need for both, IMHO.

 

What? We all need both, in EVERY edition. We can never have enough books. If there is one table in the home without even one book on it, and if there are clear paths on the floor between the piles of books, we don't have enough books. And we should immediately put in an order to Amazon. :lol:

 

While you are ordering the Usborne in at least 2 different editions, order an entire set of World Book, and entire set of Britannica and the entire set of Compton, and the entire set of New Book of knowledge...and how about the 20 volume Oxford dictionary. :lol:

 

And then buy at least 5 books on simplifying how you homeschool, that tells you don't need all that stuff :lol:

Edited December 31, 2010 by Hunter

[hsmom]

I prefer the Kingfisher over Usborne also.

[plain jane]

Actually, WTM specifies this one:

http://www.amazon.com/Usborne-Internet-Linked-Encyclopedia-World-History/dp/0746041683/ref=wl_mb_recs_1_dp

 

The one in your link is a reprint from this year, doesn't have "internet-linked" in the title, and the author is one of the authors from the WTM spec'd book...I don't know how similar or different they would be. Might be nearly the same. My local library doesn't carry either book. :glare:

 

Sounds like we'll be ok starting with the Kingfisher book and seeing how it works. Won't be doing irreparable damage to dd's understanding of history by not starting with Usborne's. :D Thanks to all for your responses!

 

You can still buy a hardcover of this same book on RR.

 

The one a PP linked (and ordered) does appear to be the newest edition and is a bit less expensive because you can buy it in the paperback version. :) If you plan to use it for a long time, I'd consider the hardback- Usborne makes a very nice hard bound book.

[blakereese]

You can still buy a hardcover of this same book on RR.

 

The one a PP linked (and ordered) does appear to be the newest edition and is a bit less expensive because you can buy it in the paperback version. :) If you plan to use it for a long time, I'd consider the hardback- Usborne makes a very nice hard bound book.

 

:iagree: I wish I would have bought it in hardback. We only started using this book in Sept, and have many years ahead of us, and I can really see the wear on the paperback. My DS loves this book and reads through it all the time. I may end up trying to get the hardback later on, or maybe I'll get lucky and find it on the sale board.

 

To answer the above question :D I like the Usborne book better. And incidentally, I have heard the new edition is just as good. Do you know someone in your area who sells Usborne books? Maybe they could give some insight.