If you use Ambleside Online (or have used it in the past)

[ravinlunachick]

Could you tell me what you liked or disliked about it? Did you follow the schedule exactly or improvise? Did you choose the year that corresponded to your child's grade level? How easy did you find it to add on other elements that you had chosen for your child?

 

Thanks!

[sarahv]

I used Ambleside online last year for my 6yr. We used year 1. We loved it. I followed the schedule, but just left out books that I didn't prefer. I did add some of our own book selections as well.

 

I found AO very easy to follow, as it is basically a reading schedule. I just bought the books and started reading. I did narrations and saw really great improvement in memory and storytelling in my 6 year old. I was very pleased with his progress in that realm.

 

What I didn't like were the history and science selections. I mean, the science selections were ok, but not really what I or my kids really wanted, I think. I mean, I like studying nature, and nature stories, but we like actually delving into chemistry and physics and reading historical biographies of scientists and such. The history was just too old fashioned for me. I spent too much time explaining what a "savage" was and why we don't talk about Indians in that way anymore, and such. It was just too much of a bother in that regard, so we did BF early American history for the rest of the year.

 

I absolutely LOVE the literature selections. we read Pinocchio, Alice in Wonderland, as well as the original Winnie the Pooh, and poems and Aesop's Fables and other of their suggestions. These were all totally wonderful. I also felt that the reading schedule was very easy to work through. Sometimes I would read through everything in one or two days if I had the time. It really is not much reading. (Ok, so I did skip some books, but put in some of our own as well) I felt that the reading was not in the least bit overwhelming.

 

I plan on using AO as a strong book list resource, and will do their reading schedule next year as well, but am going with other resources for history and science. We'll see how it works out. :) I think I'm setting myself up with more read-alouds. ;)

[prairiegirl]

I have used AO for 6 years now. I don't use it for history, though, and I add on to science. I also don't use the schedules. We don't read through the books as slowly as CM would like. We tried for our first year and it drove me around the bend so we go at our own pace.

When we read through the books, my children give me narrations and we use sections from those books for copywork and dictation.

 

I have handled the AO years differently with each child. My oldest did the years that corresponded with her grade and this worked well for her. With my two youngers, though, I have waited a year until we started, so they do Yr. 1 for Gr. 2. My ds is in Gr. 4 and is doing Yr. 3. We have been going slowly through this year so he might not get done this year until he is in Gr. 5. My youngest will be in Gr. 3 next year and will moving on to Yr. 2. I find that with AO, the starting year is different for each child. That is the beauty of AO, imo. You can start Yr. 1 when you are 6 or when you are 9 and it works well regardless of the age.

[nov05mama]

I used Ambleside online last year for my 6yr. We used year 1. We loved it. I followed the schedule, but just left out books that I didn't prefer. I did add some of our own book selections as well.

 

I found AO very easy to follow, as it is basically a reading schedule. I just bought the books and started reading. I did narrations and saw really great improvement in memory and storytelling in my 6 year old. I was very pleased with his progress in that realm.

 

What I didn't like were the history and science selections. I mean, the science selections were ok, but not really what I or my kids really wanted, I think. I mean, I like studying nature, and nature stories, but we like actually delving into chemistry and physics and reading historical biographies of scientists and such. The history was just too old fashioned for me. I spent too much time explaining what a "savage" was and why we don't talk about Indians in that way anymore, and such. It was just too much of a bother in that regard, so we did BF early American history for the rest of the year.

 

I absolutely LOVE the literature selections. we read Pinocchio, Alice in Wonderland, as well as the original Winnie the Pooh, and poems and Aesop's Fables and other of their suggestions. These were all totally wonderful. I also felt that the reading schedule was very easy to work through. Sometimes I would read through everything in one or two days if I had the time. It really is not much reading. (Ok, so I did skip some books, but put in some of our own as well) I felt that the reading was not in the least bit overwhelming.

 

I plan on using AO as a strong book list resource, and will do their reading schedule next year as well, but am going with other resources for history and science. We'll see how it works out. :) I think I'm setting myself up with more read-alouds. ;)

:iagree: I am using it mostly for the literature selections by level. I am loving going back through Winnie-the-Pooh and Aesop's Fables, etc. I remember them from childhood and it's so neat to be reading them to my child (or having him read to me, etc).

I know that I could probably just come up with the lists myself, but I like using the schedule as far as what to read and when...we are just slowly making our way through :)

[ravinlunachick]

Thanks for the input. I am considering using Year 1 for my dd, who will be in second grade by late summer or early fall. As I read over the website, I figured that I would be supplementing the science, and I'd already planned to start using SOTW 1 for history.

[ocelotmom]

We've been doing AO for two years now, starting in 1st. We did start with 1st grade when my son was 6 and officially a first grader according to the local schools. So anyways, I'm familiar with mostly the 1st and 2nd grade schedule.

 

Doing it over again, I might well have decided to give him an extra year before starting. He's a late reader, but catching up quickly now, and I suspect that if we'd waited an extra year, he'd have been capable of doing at least some of the reading himself, both at the 1st and 2nd year level. I suspect we'll have to do year 3.5 if we stick with it (which we may not, at least not closely, as I'm working on something that more closely fits our family's needs).

 

Like: Most of the literature selections seem spot-on. I've been introduced to a lot of wonderful books I' never knew existed. Many of the ones I'm not overly crazy about are a huge hit with DS (Thorton W. Burgess books, Wind in the Willows), even stuff that sounds totally dry and dull that I'm not sure he'll like ends up being great (Our Island Story). Also, the fact that so many of the books are in the public domain and therefore available for free online (including as audiobooks through LibriVox). There's only been a few things DS really hasn't liked (the Shakespeare adaptations, for one).

 

(There is also a lot I like that is related to the CM philosophy, and not AO specifically.)

 

Dislike: Christian focus - we drop the blatantly religious reading, but I have a feeling that will leave us with little remaining in some years. The fact that it doesn't align with the WTM 4 year history rotation (as we're using SOTW for our history). They have parental warnings on material that may be problematic for some kids, but I feel like this is fairly inconsistent and unhelpful. For example, it is mentioned for Otto of the Silver Hand that some kids may be upset that the boy loses his hand... without mentioning all the other, much more graphically portrayed, violence in the book.

 

Iffy about: Science. I go back and forth between thinking that nature study, observation, and other less formal science study is a valuable and perfectly adequate introduction to science, especially in the younger grades, and preferring a more formal curriculum with experiments and so on. I think my kids enjoy experiments and facts more... but I'm not convinced that developing their observational skills isn't more useful in the long run.

 

A lot of the works, being older, are gorgeous but not particularly politically correct. I think they're worthwhile, and I think that sticking only with totally PC books so as to avoid those discussions isn't necessarily beneficial (better that they be aware those attitudes exist, both historically and currently, and be able to recognize and address them). However, as pointed out by the recent threads on the curriculum board about Native American literature... as a person of European-American ancestry raised in an area that is predominantly inhabited by people of similar ancestry, I'm likely not recognizing and addressing the less blatant issues.

[Homemama2]

It seems I either really like the book choices, or can't stand them...nothing in between ;).

My kids on the other hand have never complained about any of them except Parables of Nature (their narrations consisted of: " I don't know what you were talking about." :001_huh:)

 

Looking at my sig you'll see that we don't use AO by itself. While we liked Our Island Story alot, I never felt their history or science were what I was looking for.

 

Pros:

I think these books have stretched my dc's vocabulary far more than anything else we've done. I've also found some books that we loved that I wouldn't have found otherwise.

 

Cons:

I think some of the books are better saved for a year or two. Some of the books were dry (for our family). Also, when I was trying to just use AO, I had dial up internet which never worked and made it pain b/c I had planned to use all the free online books, music and pictures and couldn't get it to work.

 

Now we school w/ a classical/cm mix and I just pick what I like best from AO and add it in as I like.

[momto2blessings]

This is our 2nd yr. (currently Y2 and Y4). I love the literature selections. As others have mentioned, great stories I never would have found---and they do stretch the vocabulary. I would never have dreamed of handing my 8yo Robin Hood in Old English to read---but he loved it so much when I read it to them that he's now reading it himself.

 

The thing that doesn't quite click for me is history. We just couldn't get into the Marshall books and it was confusing for me doing two different time periods of the same book. We are using Truthquest now for history (an AO alternate) and love it.

 

We were already using Apologia for science, so don't do the other suggestions (Apologia is a recommended source). I love the depth and the rigor of AO, but in a flexible format that doesn't take all day. HTH some:) Gina

P.S. We do adapt some things, too--combining some ideas from Simply Charlotte Mason.

[freeindeed]

Could you tell me what you liked or disliked about it? Did you follow the schedule exactly or improvise? Did you choose the year that corresponded to your child's grade level? How easy did you find it to add on other elements that you had chosen for your child?

 

Thanks!

 

I used it this year, but I won't continue with it. I like most of the book choices, but some are--in my opinion--very dry and boring, especially in the upper levels. I consider myself to be an excellent reader, but I couldn't even understand some of the books used in middle and high school.:tongue_smilie: Also, since most of the books are older and out of print, they can be difficult to find. Many are available to read online, but not all of them...so that's a problem.

I did like the schedule, yet flexibility that comes with AO. We could schedule weekly readings in a way that fit us best. Some days we read more, some less, depending on what was going on in our lives that day.

I will continue to use AO's composer, art, and nature study schedules. Those really "clicked" with us. That is one big positive.:)

Another problem I had is that there is no way I can read all the books with my children, especially when they're in different years. Of course they are expected to read many books on their own; however, if I'm not familiar with the book, then I don't know if my child's narration is on target or not. In other words, unless I read all the books myself, then I'm not sure if my children are "getting it" or not. (I've chosen to go with another curriculum for this upcoming school year that will help me in this area.)

I used Year 1 for my ds7 and Year 3 for my dd9. I recommend going at least one year below your child's grade level. The reading in AO is very challenging. My dc enjoyed most of the books we read this year, with the exception of only a few.

Overall, I would give AO a positive review. It just wasn't the right fit for us.

[FO4UR]

I love Charlotte Mason, and ambleside is a good example of CM's curriculum. I say I use it, but I really use it as an example rather than *my* curriculum. I use SOTW for history, and I don't follow the rest of the schedule "as is" either.

 

We enjoy the literature selections!

[Spock]

Could you tell me what you liked or disliked about it? Did you follow the schedule exactly or improvise? Did you choose the year that corresponded to your child's grade level? How easy did you find it to add on other elements that you had chosen for your child?

 

Thanks!

 

I have used AO for the past 4 years.

 

I like the literature at all ages. For levels 6-12, I like the history as well. I use some of the science/nature/history/biography/geography books before 6th grade, but those are more hit and miss. I make only a few changes to the upper years.

[ravinlunachick]

Thanks for your help, everyone. :)

 

We just started homeschooling in February, after a rather disastrous public school year and a half. We've been mostly focused on math, as that was her area of greatest weakness, but dd is a good reader. Unfortunately, her attention span for chapter books is not where I'd like it to be, and I think having a planned literature curriculum will help with that. I know that if we use AO, it will be a more rigorous experience than what we are doing now, so I'll need to use the summer to transition her into it.

[justamouse]

Well, I just started using it this year. I'm not going to call it TWTM Lite, but ...slower. Deeper. And that's not saying that TWTM isn't deep, not at all. AO allows the time and the flexibility to go as deep as you need to.

 

It is *very* hard coming into when kids are older and you really need to back up to say, year 6.5 even if you are starting with a highschooler. The kids that do AO from the get go have been trained to listen to that type of literature, and so the older selections aren't a stretch for them-but even coming from TWTM, I had to back my 10th grader up to 6.5.

 

It *does* take a lot of time, especially in the beginning, but like TWTM, the rewards for you time in reading will be with the younger children when you're just teaching because you've read them all ready. :D

 

There is a large learning curve to it, just like anything else. It's not as simple as it seems and it's as simple as it seems. :D

 

I love the selections. We add to them with recs from TWTM.

[justamouse]

Thanks for your help, everyone. :)

 

We just started homeschooling in February, after a rather disastrous public school year and a half. We've been mostly focused on math, as that was her area of greatest weakness, but dd is a good reader. Unfortunately, her attention span for chapter books is not where I'd like it to be, and I think having a planned literature curriculum will help with that. I know that if we use AO, it will be a more rigorous experience than what we are doing now, so I'll need to use the summer to transition her into it.

 

You're going to be able to work up her attention span and retention with narration. Start that small, right now, with just paragraphs, and ease her into the habit.

[Hebrews3:13]

 

It is *very* hard coming into when kids are older and you really need to back up to say, year 6.5 even if you are starting with a highschooler. The kids that do AO from the get go have been trained to listen to that type of literature, and so the older selections aren't a stretch for them-but even coming from TWTM, I had to back my 10th grader up to 6.5.

 

 

:iagree: I have used pieces of AO on and off with my children for 5 years. Now, my oldest DD did not start out with AO and when I started her with it at sixth grade it was TERRIBLE. She had never experienced that sort of literature and it threw her for a loop and me too. I thought AO was the hardest thing ever.

 

Totally different story with my son who has used AO literature since K-5. His vocabulary is stellar compared to his sisters at that age. His narrations have taken off this year. His spelling without having ever used spelling until last week is excellent. I also cannot get over how far the nature study has taken us. My son adores nature now and is so observant. He brought me an empty chrysalis he had found the other day. My husband said "You have a what?" with a confused look. I had to laugh. We are also WAY too excited this week at my house because we have to have a tree taken down and we plan on counting the rings and talking in depth about the tree.

[Testimony]

It is an excellent academic program if it is done properly. I have veered off the program every other year, but overall I have tried to stay true to the program.

 

I do the art study, composer study, hymn study, and folk songs on different days of the week. So, art on Monday, hymn on Tuesday, etc. My sons read Shakespeare two days a week and Plutarch the other two days. Then, I do literature. My language arts are compiled in the readings. I do copywork, narrations, and dictations from the pieces that they read. I have added grammar and writing throughout the years, but that was because of my classical thinking.

 

I have followed the science and added some of my own. The only reason I did not follow the 6 year cycle was I started off classical with the 4 year cycle. My older son loved Story of the World and did not want to give it up. However, I still incorporated the history books like Trial and Triumph, Our Island Story, and This Country of Ours into the lessons. When my older son grew up, I had him reading all of these books.

 

Once my sons were in about 3rd or 4th grade, I put them at their grade level because they could read the books themselves. This is how I have basically done Ambleside Online for about 5 or 6 years. I started in year 1 and I am doing year 7 now. It really is an outstanding curriculum.

 

Just my experience.

 

Blessing in your homeschooling journey!

 

Sincerely,

Karen

http://www.homeschoolblogger.com/testimony

Edited April 11, 2011 by Testimony
grammar

[Bambam]

I've used AO with two for seven years. My oldest is finishing up Year 7 and my youngest is finishing up Year 4.

 

We have enjoyed the literature selections and most of the free reading selections. I was surprised that Ivanhoe was such a hit with my oldest.

 

We've always used Apologia's Elementary curricula - even back in the old days when the first two books were published under the Science for Jesus label. And we've always supplemented the science.

 

I didn't like the Parables of Nature, so we left that one out.

 

I added in grammar in the form (mostly) of Growing with Grammar. I started AG with my oldest in Year 7.

 

We typically only do two Plutarch's Lives per year instead of the recommended three though. Two seems right for us.

 

That said, I am making some changes for the next year.

 

For my youngest, I'm switching her to SOTW Volume 3. I think the easier reading level will be better for her. For my oldest, I'm switching from the Churchill books to Dorothy Mills books. These are just personal preferences based on my girls.

[Kfamily]

We've been using Ambleside Online, although always adapted, for 5 years or so. I love that AO brings the Charlotte Mason teaching approach to life. In the end, it is really important to read as much of her (CM) books as possible because it is so much more than a booklist. I do think AO has a fabulous booklist but it truly needs an incremental approach to bring around its fullest rewards. I think, as with any curriculum, you must make it work for you and your family. Add or substitute whatever you feel needs adjustment. It does take some teacher planning initally, especially if you are needing to make many adjustments, but I do think it is worth it. Our approach is very personalized and my dds love it. I've always thought that loving the learning environment and loving the books are the greatest keys to a successful plan.:001_smile:

[stripe]

We've been mostly focused on math, as that was her area of greatest weakness, but dd is a good reader. Unfortunately, her attention span for chapter books is not where I'd like it to be, and I think having a planned literature curriculum will help with that. I know that if we use AO, it will be a more rigorous experience than what we are doing now, so I'll need to use the summer to transition her into it.

I don't think AO is very focused on math, so frankly, I wouldn't say if using it for math would or would not meet your needs. I think they have a very detailed plan for history and literature. So I would keep that in mind

[AngelaNYC]

Could you tell me what you liked or disliked about it? Did you follow the schedule exactly or improvise? Did you choose the year that corresponded to your child's grade level? How easy did you find it to add on other elements that you had chosen for your child?

 

Thanks!

 

 

We're on out 3rd year using Ambleside Online. I love the booklists and the schedules and we follow it as exact as we can.

 

But... We do remove all the religious books (I keep homeschooling separate from our religious studies) and have no problem with removing any other books that ds just doesn't like (after giving it a good fighting chance).

 

Buying the books on our own is great. I don't think I've spent more than $150 each year. I buy some new, some used, some on the Nook. The whole CM method is what drew me to it. I tried creating my own schedule based on CM, but it never seemed complete. Having a guideline like AO has been just what we needed. I love the reading schedules, but I really love the schedules for nature, poetry, artist, and composer. The AO website explains great ways to incorporate those subjects and my ds loves it all.

 

There's nothing I dislike about it. One of the first things I read on the website was that we could tweak it if we needed to. That was important to me and doesn't take away the beauty and essence of the program.

 

I chose a year below ds's grade level. We take our time with it. Ds is so busy with classes, trips, and activities all year, that academic seatwork may only get done 2-3x a week. It's an advanced and challenging curriculum. Ideally for ds, 1.5 Years behind his actual grade level seems to work best. So by the time he starts 5th grade in the fall, we should be about halfway through AO Year 3. (Math, Independent Reading, Writing, Spelling, Language Arts, and outside classes will be on or above actual grade level, though).

 

It's so easy to add on other elements. In addition to AO, we use Teaching Textbooks 5, Spectrum Word Study & Phonics 4, Flash Kids Spelling Skills 4, Immersion Spanish, Writing Strands, Simply Grammar, and various workbooks, flash cards, websites, & CD Roms. Ds has mild dyslexia so adding a phonics and spelling program helps a lot, so does letting him choose his own independent reading book. Normally though, you don't have to supplement with anything more than what AO suggests.

[ravinlunachick]

I don't think AO is very focused on math, so frankly, I wouldn't say if using it for math would or would not meet your needs. I think they have a very detailed plan for history and literature. So I would keep that in mind

 

Oh, I realize that. :) I just meant that we had been focusing heavily on math since we began homeschooling in February. That has been the #1 priority, but now that she is finally getting the hang of it (yay, Singapore!), we can have more balance in our curriculum.

[Mama2two]

:iagree: I am using it mostly for the literature selections by level. I am loving going back through Winnie-the-Pooh and Aesop's Fables, etc. I remember them from childhood and it's so neat to be reading them to my child (or having him read to me, etc).

I know that I could probably just come up with the lists myself, but I like using the schedule as far as what to read and when...we are just slowly making our way through :)

 

I also agree, I am using Yr 1 with my six year old this year. I don't follow the schedule exactly. I love it for litertaure, but do my own history (although we are doing Our Island Story) and add to the science

 

There are fantastic books for the literature

[AuntPol]

I used Ambleside for 2 years and this year switched to TOG and now I'm back to more of a CHarlotte Mason style with the TOG books that I have.

 

Next year, we would be at year 6 but I want a full year of Modern History instead of 12 weeks. So basically I took their format but plugged in my own choices based on what the library has. I have some 6 year and some 7 year things, some SCM, some TOG, etc.

[justamouse]

I don't think AO is very focused on math, so frankly, I wouldn't say if using it for math would or would not meet your needs. I think they have a very detailed plan for history and literature. So I would keep that in mind

 

Well, actually they don't because they are expecting you to plug in your own math curric.

[stripe]

Well, actually they don't because they are expecting you to plug in your own math curric.

Sure, but that's not exactly designing a full curriculum, to tell you, "Now, go do something for this subject." The use of nature study as the primary science is also not a very robust approach. SWB addresses this in her article on the CM approach.

I have posted multiple times about my opinion on Charlotte Mason (whose method I borrow heavily from) and math. She is very open in her books about thinking math is something to be endured, and I frankly find many Ambleside users haven't gotten much beyond that view, as they are more into literature. So I am not going to rehash my previous comments.

[Avila]

Could you tell me what you liked or disliked about it? Did you follow the schedule exactly or improvise? Did you choose the year that corresponded to your child's grade level? How easy did you find it to add on other elements that you had chosen for your child?

 

Thanks!

 

We don't use all of AO, but I do love their literature. My two younger kids especially enjoyed the Thronton Burgess Bird Book, the Andrew Lang Fairy books, and Fifty Famous Stories Retold this year.

 

There is also a free CM Catholic curriculum available called Mater Amabilis. It has some of the same titles as AO, but it has a Catholic emphasis. It is another good resource for CM enthusiasts. :)

[justamouse]

Sure, but that's not exactly designing a full curriculum, to tell you, "Now, go do something for this subject." The use of nature study as the primary science is also not a very robust approach. SWB addresses this in her article on the CM approach.

I have posted multiple times about my opinion on Charlotte Mason (whose method I borrow heavily from) and math. She is very open in her books about thinking math is something to be endured, and I frankly find many Ambleside users haven't gotten much beyond that view, as they are more into literature. So I am not going to rehash my previous comments.

 

Ah. I understand.

[AuntPol]

With Ambleside (as WTM), you plug in math of your choice and they give recommendations such as Right Start, Singapore, and MEP for lower years and Teaching Textbooks for upper years. These are very solid math programs and no less than what most homeschoolers use. They also have recommendations for living math books to read along with math program in upper grades. They also recommend math games and the living math website.

 

(Note: I used Miquon followed by all 6 levels of Singapore and then Life of Fred w/Khan Academy and have supplemented with some math games, Cyberchase, etc. and my 6th grade non mathy student is in 6A of Singapore and Decimals of LOF and my mathy 5th grader is almost done with Pre-Algebra of LOF -both score well on the Iowa Test and the latter can do 90% of the math SAT questions of the day).

 

**Note in Charlotte Mason's day, there was not a plethora of living math books. I think many we have today might be inspired by her philosophy. Math is really just one of those things you just "do" and you either like it or not but in the end, math is math.

 

01S111cience in Ambleside

Years 1 and 2 are only Nature Study with books about animals and birds

_WTM YEAR 1 is basically studying animals and plants and human body (Amblesdie moves body to later). WTM Year 2 is earth science and Amblesides books and nature study covers that within the rotation.

 

Year 3 starts adding extra science -you do nature study each week and do an non-nature experiment almost every week (from Supermarket book-very good-mostly chemistry from what I remember). You also read about nature in nature and inventions. Further nature is read about in the literature selections.

OR

you do the nature study, nature book, literature book about nature and do Apologia

 

WTM -chemistry twice a week -lots of definition writing and an experiment. I don't see a huge difference but that Ambleside does more science.

 

 

Year 4

You continue weekly nature study and read a nature book. There are two to choose from and we chose Explore HIs Earth which is all Earth Science. It is very good and my kids learned AND retained a lot. Additionally, you are reading It Just Couldn't Happen and doing a physics experiment each week. (OR do the nature study and book and do Apologia).

 

WTM- Do Physics Experiments and put information in notebook

 

In 4 years at Grammar Stage, Ambleside has done a rather rigorous job with animals and plants w/ nature study and books. They have covered quite a bit of earth science with Explore His Earth plus additional nature studies in rocks, soils. Additonal study in astronomy, earth science, and biology in It Just couldn't happen, and 1 year doing chemistry experiments and 1 year doing Physics. The main three differences is a) Human anatomy has not been covered and b) Everything is orally narrated instead of put in a notebook (except nature studies which is nature notebook). C) Ambleside covers several areas a year instead of 1 science at a time and has nature every year.

 

Year 5

Weely Nature study and read 2 nature books (one animals, one mostly earth science but some biology) and 1 book about the human body. You also read 3 biographies of scientists and do a physic experiment almost every week. (Or do the Nature study, 1 nature book, 3 scientist books, and Apologia).

 

Year 6

Again weekly nature study and nature books (one ocean related), 3 biographies and either Apologia or one of the science books -the preferred book is a pretty decent Physical Science book. The other covers chemistry, physics, astronomy, and earth science

 

 

7th-8th

You are told to do Apologia or Rainbow Science PLUS do weekly nature study, plus a special study of nature of your choice, plus a nature book and one other book (one a biogrpahy with LOTS of anatomy in it and one a book about insects).

 

Again I don't see much difference -Biology and earth science are covered mostly in the nature studies plus additional reading on those subjects (including human body and senses). YOu've read about most of the major scientists but in the context of time instead of subject. You've covered a lot of physics and some chemistry (and experiments almost weekly) in grades 5 and 6 and then repeating the basic stuff again with either the Aplogia general and physical or Rainbow.

 

 

 

High School

YOu do Apologia or BJU, weekly nature study, read the entire book of biogrpahies called Microbe Hunters and some of the Great Astronomers over the course of 3 years, spend 2 years reading a Physics book, 3 books by Fabre on insects, additional nature books each year (Muir, Thoreau, etc) and you read a book on Creationism and additional books of your choice. That's without year 12 being up yet!

 

Given that WTM's recommendation Read 3 biographies of that subject, and do a teach yourself guide and write a paper. I don't see a lot of difference or less rigor. With Ambleside, if you go the Apologia route -you will have done 3 of the sciences at high school level and 1-2 at AP level. Earth Science Year is all Astronomy w/WTM and with Ambleside, you will have 1 term in highschool doing astronmy as your nature study and read about the astronomers so it maybe slightly weaker in Astronomy but then it has the weather and climate and more traditional earth science topics. Ambleside is stronger in the nature and botony. In Physics, YOu would have done BJU or Apologia Physics plus an additonal physics book.

[AuntPol]

Sure, but that's not exactly designing a full curriculum, to tell you, "Now, go do something for this subject." The use of nature study as the primary science is also not a very robust approach. SWB addresses this in her article on the CM approach.

 

I have posted multiple times about my opinion on Charlotte Mason (whose method I borrow heavily from) and math. She is very open in her books about thinking math is something to be endured, and I frankly find many Ambleside users haven't gotten much beyond that view, as they are more into literature. So I am not going to rehash my previous comments.

 

 

I have never seen a curriculum out there that didn't have you "go do something for" math. You either use their book (if you are a straight user of say Abeka, BJU, etc. or you use a recommended source (Sonlight, Ambleside, and WTM).

 

How is doing Singapore or whatever for math as recommended any different than reading Robinson Crusoe for literature? The only difference is they tell you an exact book to read (but we all know everyone tweaks the book lists anyway) whereas in math , Ambleside gives several suggestions which you can chose based on how much teacher prep you want and your budget. THey actually do that in several subjects- even history this spine OR that Spine, this nature book or that Nature book (based on availability, etc -set up to be flexibile). It doesn't tell you that you have do Singapore books 1A and 1B in First or second grade. You progress at YOUR child's pace. So I have a child in Year 5 who is done with Singapore and then the 6th grader who runs a semester behind (5B and 6A) but still on course to start Algebra 1 in 8th grade and finish Calculus by her senior year. How is that not rigorous? Both do math about 15-20 minutes a day until this year when we moved up to 30 minutes max.

 

I really don't understand how they are supposed to make it more rigorous? I will try to search for your posts to see where you are coming from.

[stripe]

I was responding to a comment about beefing up math ('We've been mostly focused on math, as that was her area of greatest weakness, but dd is a good reader'). I don't feel AO has anything in particular in it that would count as a heavy math focus. CM in her book very clearly says that math shouldn't take up too much time. This approach, therefore, is NOT one that would result in a massive math focus.

 

From vol 6, p p 232 Mason says

The boy who gets 'full marks' in Arithmetic makes a poor show in history because the accuracy and ingenuity brought out by his sums apply to his sums only: and as for the value of Arithmetic in practical life, most of us have private reasons for agreeing with the eminent staff officer who tells us that,––

 

"I have never found any Mathematics except simple addition of the slightest use in a work-a-day life except in the Staff college examinations and as for mental gymnastics and accuracy of statement, I dispute the contention that Mathematics supply either any better than any other study."

 

and p 233, Mason says

To sum up, Mathematics are a necessary part of every man's education; they must be taught by those who know; but they may not engross the time and attention of the scholar in such wise as to shut out any of the score of 'subjects,' a knowledge of which is his natural right.

I don't really want to engage in some sort of war about AO. I have better things to do with my time. I think it's obvious to nearly everyone that this is a literature/history focused program.

 

They say, "Many of us are comfortable finding literature and other language-oriented materials that fit our childrens' specific needs; we need to become as demanding with what we require of our math materials, and as purposeful in the way we use them." I think this deserves repeating.

Edited April 16, 2011 by stripe

[AuntPol]

I apologize if I offended you!! I just hear this often that Ambleside is not rigorous in math and science but "I" personally don't "see" this but maybe my view of rigor is different?