Fourth edition of TWTM...here's your chance to weigh in!

[imagine.more]

This is an interesting idea. The thing that concerns me though is that non-typical learners not only do better with different resources, but they need a different approach all together, an entirely different scope and sequence, and for their learning to have personal relevance. 

 

Good point. But I also think a lot of parents with a seemingly typical kid will not read the special needs chapter in depth because they think "that's for kids with autism or intellectual disability or other bigger issues" and might miss the good advice that maybe their kid isn't just stubborn or lazy, maybe they are struggling with copy work and dictation because of dysgraphia. Or maybe they're not slow, maybe they are gifted but happen to have dyslexia and that's why they're still not reading.

 

So maybe the balance would be a small note or comment about "what if this isn't working" or "what if I know my kid has dyscalculia" at the bottom of each subject section that directs them to the special needs section. And like someone said earlier, I think a comprehensive look at the nitty gritty of doing alternative scope and sequence for each different special need a kid could have is outside the scope of TWTM. As long as there is some info to help and encourage parents to identify issues when they crop up and then a decent start at encouraging a few ideas for how to alter the plan and resources and a little advice for the most common issues to look into would be sufficient. 

[Spy Car]

Math

 

Miquon: A magnificent, hands-on, introductory math program that encourages children to be creative problem solvers and has deep parent/teacher resources. Miquon is a fantastic lead-in to Singapore style math. Its strengths are synergistic with the strengths/weaknesses of Primary Mathematics (Singapore).

 

Mathematics Enhancement Programme (aka MEP): A British implementation of a highly esteemed Hungarian math program. Includes both lesson plans for teachers and very intriguing student work sheet. Problems tend to require creative problem solving and logic, and are therefore fun for student who like to use their noodles. Free to download. There are also levels that can be done online. The method is very sympathetic with the Singapore method.

 

Beast Academy: The new(ish) elementary math program from the folks at Art of Problem Solving. The series is not yet complete, but that ought not stop you (IMO) from including this amazing "depth curriculum" in the next revision. The teaching text is "comic book" based in its style, but the content is very sophisticated. It follows the AoPS model of providing just enough information to student (or a little less) and asking them to solve problems (or fail in this pursuit) before walking them through the solutions. AoPS believe smart kids should face problems they can't solve (at least not easily, all the time). But they don't leave students frustrated, by walking though solutions in the story format. This is a unique resourse.

 

Art of Problem Solving: The consensus pick of WTM forum members for deepest Middle School/High School textbooks available for home education. Aimed at gifted/math adept students, its "discovery style" and difficulty don't make AoPS a perfect choice for all students. But for those who need a program that is not built on learning via endless repetition of easy problems, AoPS is a god-send.

 

Edward Zaccaro books: Zaccaro, in books like Primary Grade Challenge Math, Real World Algebra, and Challenge Math, has a gift for making "difficult" math topics easily comprehensible. This is true of understanding things like negative numbers. working with percentages, or working equations with variables. He is a gifted teacher, and these books are humane, warm, funny, and effective.

 

DragonBox 5+ and 12+: Including "games/apps" in TWTM might be a stretch, but these related apps are among the few that actually realize the oft touted (but rarely delivered) capacity of apps to promote real learning. That is, to go beyond "flash-card type" drill (which has its place too). By playing a game (that most students will not initially recognize as "math") young people discover the basics of working algebraic equations. These apps are brilliant. 5+ is designed for younger students, and can be completed relatively quickly. 12+ is a challenge, I felt a sense of accomplishment upon completion.

 

Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics by Liping Ma: While recommending another book on childhood education might seem outside the scope of TWTM, I'd argue it is a great idea. This book has inspired legions of WTM members (myself included) to aim for a different level of depth than the "traditional" algorithm-only approach (that often teaches "how" to solve problems, but fails to teach "why" the solutions are mathematically valid. Many (many) of us on this forum have sought out what are sometimes called "conceptual math" programs after reading Ma. She contrasts "traditional" methods (generally used by American teachers with low math skills) vs the depth aimed for in Asian (in this case Chinese) programs with high math skilled teachers. The book is a revelation for those who don't realize how different these approaches to math really are in their implementation and results.

 

English

 

Michael Clay Thompson Language Arts (MCT): I'm sure you're now familiar with MCT. A humane and effective Language Arts program for students who are fast on the uptake, and do not do best by the endless repletion of easy exercises.

 

American History

 

The Drama of American History by Christopher Collier and James Lincoln Collier: This multipart American history series for Upper-Elementary/Middle School aged students competes head-to-head with Joy Hakim, but is far better written, more engaging, and over-all superior in its handling of the critical turning points in American History. A much as possible they attempt to make their texts into a "story." When there are disputes (like Federalism vs Anti-Federalism, or North vs South) the best cases are made for both sides, so students can comprehend there were thinking people on both sides of issues. They manage this without pulling punches around what are "dark side" of US History, yet they do it without becoming polemical. These books are really interesting. Much better than Joy Hakim IMO. Most libraries have hard copies, and e-books were recently released for purchase or loan via Overdrive and Public Libraries.

 

Those are a few.

 

Bill

 

[shinyhappypeople]

 

DragonBox 5+ and 12+: Including "games/apps" in TWTM might be a stretch, but these related apps are among the few that actually realize the oft touted (but rarely delivered) capacity of apps to promote real learning. That is, to go beyond "flash-card type" drill (which has its place too). By playing a game (that most students will nor initially recognize as "math") young people discover the basics of working algebraic equations. These apps are brilliant. 5+ is designed for younger students, and can be completed relatively quickly. 12+ is a challenge, I felt a sense of accomplishment upon completion.

 

I think including apps like Dragonbox is a fantastic idea. 

 

What about also including websites and videos among the math resources?  This is trickier because sites come and go, but established sites like Dreambox deserve a mention as a math supplement, as well as videos like the ones at Education Unboxed.   

[quark]

Another idea (I haven't read all responses and this might be repetitive)...I really like how Janice Campbell's Excellence in Literature books recommend honors texts in addition to the recommended novels.

 

So along those lines, some recommendations for gifted/ accelerated learners might be very helpful too. I don't know if including a list of resources will be as helpful as a general how-to, e.g. how to compact the curriculum (one of the reasons we are staying away from WWS for example is that some parts are just too obvious for my kid while others will drive him to tears and it's difficult for me to determine how to decide what is important to cover, why and what I could leave out). Similarly, it might be helpful too to know how to increase depth of studies for accelerated/ asynchronous learners.

 

This might be more helpful in the grammar and logic stages because by the time you hit high school, you've already learned a lot from the intense, exhausting daily trial and error.

 

 

[Haiku]

This is an interesting idea. The thing that concerns me though is that non-typical learners not only do better with different resources, but they need a different approach all together, an entirely different scope and sequence, and for their learning to have personal relevance. 

 

I'm not sure they need an entirely different scope and sequence in all areas. My son has followed the WTM scope and sequence for science and history, for example, such as I have done it, and I still believe that the WTM style has merits that could be adapted for some (not all) struggling learners. I envision something like, "If your child has dyslexia, these are alternate resources to the ones just mentioned for typical kids." That way the special-needs kids are still under the WTM umbrella for those who parents would like to try to keep them there, rather than pushed off to the side in one chapter that couldn't possibly address the whole spectrum of needs.

 

It's just a thought. By the time a new book comes out, I will most likely be nearly done with homeschooling my kids, and I have already discovered the resources that work for us. I'm just thinking of future versions of my past self who became frustrated and couldn't understand why my son wasn't progressing with WTM resources and who doubted my abilities for a while before realizing that my son needed something different in some aspects. I think it would have helped me had the book included special-needs kids in with the rest rather than less than a page, near the back of the book, and one mention in the index of dyslexia (which directs you to a page telling you that letter reversals in young kids are not necessarily a sign of dyslexia). The mention of struggling learners in the 3rd edition directs people to the WTM Forums, which is helpful but still presents struggling learners and special-needs kids as beyond the scope of the book, and I don't think that's really always true.

[Haiku]

a small note or comment about "what if this isn't working" 

 

YES! I love this idea. It provides recognition that there will be kids who don't thrive with the strictly classical approach and acknowledges that there are other things you can do and still have a well-educated kid.

[quark]

I think including apps like Dragonbox is a fantastic idea. 

 

What about also including websites and videos among the math resources?  This is trickier because sites come and go, but established sites like Dreambox deserve a mention as a math supplement, as well as videos like the ones at Education Unboxed.   

 

There could be a small section or page that gives a link to a (PHP or Norton or whatever is agreed upon with the publisher) web page that carries well-categorized links. This would make it a lot easier to update broken links.

[Hunter]

I'm a fan of the 1st edition. I need to be brief as I'm typing on a phone.

 

I think it's time to come full circle a bit, and take a good look at where we were preY2K. The more more more methods aren't producing what we thought they would. Most of us are tired. I'm glad it needs to just be one book. More isn't what I think we need.

 

I don't want to suggest adding anything more, but I do think we need more eBook suggestions, free and professionally published.

 

For the 5th edition it would be lovely if you could even combine forces with eBook publishers to produce ebooks specifically to line up with TWTM 5th, or publish them yourself.

 

You probably need to publish the 4th sooner rather than later, but I think by 2020 we are really going to need to come full circle more to the 1st edition, but with eBook suggestions.

[Hunter]

Oh and eBooks formatted for smaller screens, rather than 8.5 x 11.

[Nan in Mass]

It might be helpful to point out how TWTM differs from other approaches. It took me awhile to work this out. I was a lot more comfortable once I had.

 

Other curriculums usually have the student do a series of assignments, each very gradually harder than the last one and each designed so that a good student CAN DO THEM PERFECTLY. This allows many different teachers to grade (more or less) uniformly. It allows students to get A's. The down side is that it is a one-size fits none approach, the assignments often feel contrived and artificial, and the curriculums can be complicated, expensive, and hard to use.

 

TWTM, on the other hand, tends to use one assignment for a whole year. The child's work slowly improves throughout the year. Simplicity and flexibility are the main advantages of this, I think. Students improve as they grow and the assignments aren't designed to have a "perfect". This approach tends to be more like adult academic writing and learning, making it easier for students to do higher level academic tasks. It mimics the way adults learn something, when they choose to learn something in an academic way. The student tends to be used to doing something hard and doesn't learn to give up just because he can't do something perfectly the first time round. The disadvantage of this approach is that it can be very disconcerting for a homeschooling parent. In the beginning, the child does the assignment badly. Naturally. The parent, having carefully explained and taught the material, expects the child to be able to do the assignment well, if not perfectly. Parent (and the more aware sort of child) becomes discouraged and concludes that TWTM is not a good fit for the child. For the parent who is trying to give grades and has no experience with what a suitable badness for this sort of assignment for this student looks like, this sort of assignment is a nightmare. Having a teenager who has figured out that he can teach himself anything he chooses feels like having a tiger by the tail. The teen is likely to insist on having a major say in his education and may not view college in the conventionally passive way.

 

Both ways have advantages and disadvantages. Personally, I think TWTM way is much easier, but I had a tendency to think I had misjudged somehow if my children could do something well right away, and my children refused to "waste their time" on anything they could do easily. And I wasn't trying to give grades. I gave feedback, but not grades. I couldn't figure out how to do it.

 

Some sort of warning that your child won't be able to do this well at first, some idea of what a "bad" job at first might look like, and some sort of rubric for those who really want to give grades would be helpful for the parents who are more orderly minded than I lol.

 

Nan

[Pen]

I'm not sure if there would be a way to indicate what sort of student a particular curriculum might fit, or not.

 

Writing Strands, for example, was a total waste for us, though I know it is great for some students.  I don't know what sort of students (or parents) it is a good fit for.

 

Brave Writer was better for us.

 

My guess is that these programs fit very different types of students/parents.

 

For me rather than a list at the end of each section, a list at the back that was somehow geared to ______ sorts of students are likely to do well with a, b, c, etc.;

 

while _____ sorts of students are likely to do well with q, r, s, etc.;   while ______ sorts of students are likely to do well with x, y, z,   would be more helpful.

 

 

Or where one could see if, say, Brave Writer was a good fit then likely m, n, o, would also be good fits, while if Writing Strands was a good fit then likely g, h, i would be good fits.  If that is possible.

[abacus2]

I will add to the suggestions to include Math Mammoth. Also, I don't know that it's classical exactly, but Home Art Studios DVD are fabulous art lessons.

[redsquirrel]

I think an option in the history logic stage chapter about either redoing the 4 year history cycle OR a 3 years world history and 1 year American history. I am not sure it is a big deal either way, but it is something that gets a fair amount of discussion in the logic stage forum. I would love to see some resources for that.

 

And is there something that is better than the "Critical Thinking in US History"?  I know, in many ways it is SUCH a good idea. You read works by historians and then try to determine the "bias" or focus of the writing etc. I own them all and have used them. And they are such a pain in the arse! The layout is poor, the whole thing is confusing to use, sometimes the questions are soooo esoteric.  I kept thinking that there had to be something better. 

 

I could go on and on about that publisher. For a company that calls itself "Critical Thinking Company" their products not well thought out or presented. You look at some of their materials and just :confused1:

[Catherine]

Re: STEM-oriented high schoolers: I've been there.  Plus 2e.

 

I would have really appreciated something to help me to evaluate the quality of my CC.  I'm in the unusual situation of have several community college systems within striking distance.  I learned that some are remedial, some are honors.  Not sure if this is only worthwhile locally but it turns out that one of the CCs has a co-operative admissions program with the state flagship's engineering school.  Not surprisingly, the math and physics at that CC are really excellent-not so some of their other offerings.  Is there any systematic way to evaluate CCs??

[Spy Car]

I'd also implore you Susan to re-evaluate your philosophical approach to Grammar Stage math. Specifically, to emphasize that the Grammar Stage should be the time students learn the "grammar" of math. Which means learning the mathematical laws behind the four basic operations and (related) fractions.

 

Reading TWTM now makes it seem like memorizing "math facts" in a Poll Parrot fashion might be a sufficient approach. This is where Dorothy Sayers doesn't work. We would not have students learn to read via "memorizing words" instead of learning the phonetic basis that underlies the skill. Yet, understanding (and teaching) the underlying mathematics is given short shrift in TWTM. This is a major problem in my mind, and something I'd love to see you address and/or re-think. 

 

Teaching for "understanding" should not be considered a "Logic Stage" development. The best elementary math education develops an understanding of mathematical axioms from the outset, and continues to develop and deepen those understandings over time.

 

You asked :D

 

Bill

 

 

[fraidycat]

 I do like how they are listed right after you talk about the subject.

 

And this is the exact reason why I have NOT yet finished reading the WTM (3rd edition), having owned it for 3 years and having tried reading it several times.  It feels like way too many trees, so I can't see the forest! I wish the resources were in a separate index at the back of the book.

 

 I am finally muddling my way through WTM - how I am accomplishing it is I've clipped the resources pages together so they are one big page that I can flip right past to get to the next section. This is a light-bulb moment that I've finally hit on just within the last couple of days and physically accomplished just today.

 

If there is one recommendation I would like to make for the 4th edition, it is to separate the resources from the how-to.  Pretty, pretty please.  I find them overwhelmingly distracting.

[Excelsior! Academy]

When I first borrowed TWTM from the library over a decade ago it was like a breath of fresh air!!  Nothing I had read before compared.   Our library had the first edition but by the time I purchased a copy the second edition was released.  I've been considering purchasing the third edition, but now plan to wait until the fourth is released.  

 

We did not care for Spelling Workout.  I may be a bit jaded because we primarily used it with my oldest child, who happens to be dyslexic.  Frankly, the proofreading sections were a bit of a nightmare for her.  Seeing misspelled spelling words was not at all what she needed.  I can't praise Phonetic Zoo enough, however Spelling Power comes in a close second.

 

Actually, it was on my list to reread TWTM again this summer, so I can't remember if you included NOEO science.  We no longer use it but feel it is an excellent program.  The elementary Chemistry was so much fun!!

[speed.cleaner]

What I would really like is for copies of the new edition to come with a unique code which allows one user to download an electronic version of the book (in the same way that many textbook publishers do) so I can always have a copy to hand without having to carry around my bedraggled, dog-eared, sticky-tabbed, underlined, well-loved, and quite heavy physical copy!

[Hedgehogs4]

I have found that All About Spelling was the fix for struggling spellers. I would have used it from the beginning if I had known about it (it didn't exist when we started). It was ideal in its entirety for a boy who needed the hands-on, and was easily adapted for my dd who didn't enjoy fussing with letter tiles, but both are solid spellers now, after trying nearly every program recommended, including SWO. 

[Guest PaulaMHP]

I am a former homeschooling mom, back when it was very frowned upon. My children are grown and gone with children of their own. Our daughter lives close to us and is homeschooling. I help her out when I can. After my kids were gone I went back to teaching and have taught Title 1 reading, 1st and 2nd grade, and kindergarten since then. I also went back and earned my reading specialist k-12 degree. YEARS back I had all the courses for remedial reading certification.

I would like to address The Logic of English. An excellent resource for TWTM. Our school started using LOE 2 years ago. I can't say enough good about the program. I hesitate to retire because I am blown away by the success we have had using LOE. Before LOE we used project Read, a heavy OG curriculum. I thought it was very good, better than Abeka, Bob Jones, Spaulding, Writing a Road to Reading, and others I had experience with but can't remember the names. LOE blew them all out of the water!

I, myself, learned more from LOE than from all the others combined.

My favorite parts are that it is extremely multi-sensory and it really pulls in thinking skills. Plus it gives the children the "tools" to read 98% of English words. They learn the 74 phonograms and the 31 rules and apply them.

I HATE worksheets and LOE only has a small workbook for reinforcement. The main reinforcement/review is from games and dictation. They start writing right away and do it frequently.

My granddaughter was in my class for kindergarten. (She is homeschooled now) She came in reading chapter books and my daughter was my biggest critic. What was I going to teach her when she was already so advanced. Well, she soared with LOE and was able to read the directions out of any teacher's manual if I had to step away. My daughter said she learned from her daughter all the wonderful things LOE taught her.

I loved that I was able to use it and make huge progress with my gifted students, my regular Ed students, my LD students, my special Ed students. I was thrilled that my student with Down's syndrome made incredible progress. OUR SPECIAL ED department uses it and raves about the success they are having.

I could go on and on.

I will be helping my daughter with LOE as she homeschools. Not because she can't do it, it is very user friendly, but because I adore the program. I wish I had had it throughout my teaching career in homeschool, private school, Christian school, and public school. A career that goes back to the '70s. I WISH I had learned it growing up.

[Nan in Mass]

Language exams...

 

As an alternative to AP or CLEP or SAT2 exams, national language proficiency exams have some advantages. They are more universally recognized in, say, Europe by future employers, and some certificates are "for life" and don't expire. For European languages, they give the student a more universally recognized level - A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, or C2. These are the "Common European Framework of Reference for Languages" levels. The student can put the level on his resume and job applications. The exams are expensive and the student has to travel to a major city to sit for them, but for us, they were way more useful than American school exams. American school exams are pretty much only good for college entrance and placement, as far as I know. These exams have nothing to do with university, although they are useful if one wants to go to a foreign university as a regular student, rather than as a languagr student. My youngest sat for the DELF exam at the Alliance Française in Boston. The result was useful for university applications and is something he will have on his resumé the rest of his life.

 

I also think that Saturday school is worth mentioning. Most nonbilingual people I know who haven't spent time in a foreign language situationI who have children who are truly functional in a foreign language either lucked out in an extreme fashion with their school system, spent a fortune on private school, OR SENT THEIR CHILDREN TO SATURDAY SCHOOL. It is expensive, time consuming, and usually involved a commute, but for families who are truly committed to giving their children a foreign language, it is worth it because it actually works.

 

In three or four sentences, you could give those parents who dream of giving their children a foreign language a goal and one way of achieving that goal. We were told that level B2 is usually what foreign universities want to see before they admit someone as a regular student, so this exam makes a pretty good goal.

 

HTH,

Nan

[Loesje22000]

That's right Nan in Mass, B2 is required here for French and German, for English we will have to reach C1.

No idea how to translate that to American Standards :)

[Nan in Mass]

I agree. Those general how-to-learn-anything (or teach) involving a spine and outlining and following bunny trails are the heart of TWTM, in my opinion. I somehow missed that when I first read the book, and I am pretty good at picking up that sort of thing, so Maybe you could emphasize it? (Or maybe I am just better at it now, after having homeschooled all these years?) if you gave it a label, like "academic way of learning", it might help? And emphasized that those foundational WTM skills like dictation and outlining feed directly into this, dictation because it helps lengthen the amount one can hold in one's memory before writing it down (essential for notetaking, either in lectures or from books) and outlining because it helps one to learn to pick out the main point and summarize and digest the information. (And the both teach spelling, grammar, and how to organize information.) Somewhere on the boards is a post I wrote about how the elementary skills feed into adult academics and study skills. I probably did a better job of explaining what I mean there. Not that you that you need it. I learned it from you in the first place. I just didn't "get" it until I tried to teach my high schoolers study skills.

 

You might mention spiders and flow charts. They are like outlining but are better for some visual people. In the end, to write anything, the spider needs to become a more orderly spider rather than a ball of yarn, since writing is meant to flow only one direction, but they still can be the same thing.

 

Nan

[Butter]

1.) Realistic times to spend on subjects, particularly at the elementary level.  Or, just get rid of the time estimates all together.  Over and over I have seen people with early elementary age kids worried sick over not doing enough or spending enough time because TWTM says to spend x minutes per subject.  In most cases, those time estimates are WAY too much.

 

2.) I do feel like the ease of adapting classical homeschooling for a SN kid is kind of too sunshine and roses.  I have a 2E kid.  He is dyslexic and dysgraphic.  But his IQ is also ridiculously high so I *can* adapt things pretty easily for him and he's quite successful.  He uses WWS (and it's probably the *best* of everything we used last year even though I almost rejected it as being too hard for him).  I do have to cut down the length of things he writes and I have to do more one-on-one with him rather than just having him read and do it.  But, for many SN kids a LOT more adjustment has to happen.  I agree with a pp that that's really outside the scope of a book like TWTM, but as that section is right now, I'm not sure it's very helpful or realistic for many SN moms.

 

3.) I'd also rather see the new edition going back to more of the how to do this than what to buy.  Just look at this thread.  There are so many opinions on the same things.  Put in Beast Academy, definitely don't put in Beast Academy.  Take out Writing Strands, leave Writing Strands in.  Some have mentioned adding in Math Mammoth, we hated it here.  I think more useful would be a list of possible resources (particularly since not everyone likes to get on-line much and particularly not onto forums), but directing people to the forums for more "real life" reviews by current homeschoolers.  If every curriculum suggestion was incorporated into the book, it could get even longer than it already is and become as confusing as the Rainbow Resource catalog for someone sitting down to try to select what they want to use.

 

4.) Whatever you do, please do not get rid of the lists of books to read.  Those have been truly invaluable to us in the Logic and Rhetoric stages.

[Nan in Mass]

I think you should mention how learning happens best? I,m no expert, but perhaps something like this:

A person needs to know something, then makes a framework (or has one already in his head), then finds the information and puts it into the framework, then reviews it right before it is forgotten, then uses the information to make it stick. Learning something the academic way is pretty artificial. I know lots of Latin plant names and plant biology because my mother talks when we garden together or take walks. I did not learn them in an academic way. If I wanted to learn them as an adult, I would probably use the academic way because it is fast and cheap and doesn,t involve another person. It is artificial, though, so I have to have to simulate need by asking myself starter questions, simulate a framework by reading the table of contents and flipping through my textbook a few times, then read more carefully summarizing as I go, then pick out which bits need to be memorized (flashcards for me), then fit the information into the framework by relating the new bits to what I already know (more questions for myself and reorganizing my notes), then do some assignments or write an essay or something to use the information, like following a bunny trail. How these two methods fit together is something I had to work out for myself. My family is sieve-brained, so it was essential that I figure this out. Otherwise nothing stuck. It also was essential that I distinguish skills from content. Content isn,t something I have much control over with my family, with our handicap. Skills, on the other hand, especially academic skills, this being homeSCHOOLing, I can give. Some content needs to be memorized, of course. They need to know the temperature that water freezes and the order of the colours of the rainbow and that George Bush was a recent president. For me, one of the biggest homeschooling challenges was recognizing which content was essential and which not. TWTM tries hard to help with this and does a good job, I think, but I would have proceeded more comfortably if I had figured out that that is what I was doing early on. I kept panicking because we weren't acquiring a large, teacher determined data base, the way public schools do, and yet I knew that I myself remembered almost NONE of that data. I'm not sure what you can do about that, but maybe it would be helpful to include a few sentences pointing out that skills tend to stick and be universally useful, whereas content varies widely according to time and place and sticks less well for some people, and therefore if you have to choose between the two, choose skills. Sentences that are starred and underlined so they can,t be overlooked.

 

Nan

[SnMomof7]

Perhaps some more how to advice on memory work. It is a perennial topic here and becomes harder to implement the more children you have. :). If you are recommending websites, Mystie at Simply Convivial has been a huge help and blessing to me in getting our memory work restarted.

[Nan in Mass]

Some resources for parents trying to prepare their children to survive college would be nice? We had a discussion and informal poll on the college board about surviving difficult STEM classes.

 

We decided that foundational math skills were the most important thing. STEM students need to put tons of time into learning algebra well and being able to problem solve. (You absolutely absolutely HAVE to put in the steps for solving a problem. These are universally recognized and every parent math teacher needs to know them in order to be able to teach their children to solve word problems. It would take a paragraph. Do a search fo how to solve word problems and you should be able to find the steps. It would take a paragraph or two of text to explain. Or maybe it is already included?) public schooll high math track students watch a teacher solve problems for 30 or 45 minutes a day and then go home to do 45 to 90 minutes of struggling through problems themselves. In high school, STEM oriented homeschoolers need to devote serious amounts of time to math. Most will need to get through calculus senior year.

 

We decided that most good STEM students worked in a study group.

 

And we decided that the top students did something the rest of us didn,t - recopied our notes. Robinson,s What Smart Students Know is a how to study book that explains how to study by rewriting your notes with various different organizational strategies, rather than just rereading them. This more active form of study is very time consuming, but may appeal to engineers, being a more hands-on approach to studying. It gives you something to DO when you study. It also helps you to link together lots of bits of information and make sure you really understand the processes, something essential for difficult science classes. Unlike some other study books, it gives samples. It contains other useful information as well, but it can be overwhelming, so you might want to include a few sentences about how these are essential study skills but take lots of practice before they can be done fast enough to be useful in an actual course.

 

The more selective university STEM programs want to see SAT2 math and science scores. Science and math AP or CC classes are common. Outsourcing if you aren,t a STEM parent is probably going to be necessary. Some uni,s want to see high school lab notebooks, so keep those, and copy the table of contents of any math or science books read or used in case you have to show those as well.

 

I found books by Cal Newport matched my own experience and were easy to read and helpful in the career- choosing, college survival process.

 

HTH

Nan

[Chanley]

Imagine.more and others--are you at all familiar with how the Logic of English course (Denise Eide) uses the O-G system? Any thoughts on how this works for struggling learners?

 

 

I tried to use LOE with my dyslexic child and it was not a good fit. The Barton system is far superior for dyslexia. The use of nonsense words and a multi-sensory approach is exactly what was needed for the 2 children I have tutored. Plus it is ridiculously easy for a parent to implement. 

 

LOE is an awesome program for a typical kid. I believe those English rules are important for everyone and Barton would move too slowly for a neurologically typical child who did not need remediation for dyslexia .That is where LOE belongs. 

 

I would love to see a Red Flag list at the beginning of a chapter about reading. Dyslexia comes with warning signs, all of which I ignored because I kept being reminded of Raymond Moore's Better Late Than Early advice. If you have a red flag checklist and then refer back to a special needs chapter, it would be extremely helpful. Parents could look down the list and decide to ignore or read the special needs chapter.  My son would have been spared so much grief had I listened to my own intuition and ignored everyone who told me, "ohh he is just a late bloomer".  I wish I would have noticed the warning signs earlier. 

[Nan in Mass]

Another STEM child problems that have been discussed frequently on the boards are balancing the need for rigorous conventional science classes with developing interest and creative problem solving. TWTM approach to science worked well for us, allowing us to do plenty of skill building, interest raising, and creativity development. We accelerated it, though, by about two years, and finished it off with CC intro (as opposed to general) science classes. (Youngest did calc based physics, since he was headed for engineering.) The tricky bit is finding suitably high but age appropriate materials for 7th and 8th grade. We used Singapore and Hewitt,s Conceptual Physics for 6th and 7th. Conceptual Physics was great. I wish I had read it when my first child was born so I could answer some of his endless 5yo questions more accurately lol.

 

We documented some of youngest,s creativity development (the time he spent being an engineer or scientist rather than studying it) by making them independent projects. This required that he keep a lab notebook, nature journal, and scientific notebook, write the results up in a report or paper, and properly design his experiments. (You need to include directions for this in the section on independent projects, I think, if you haven,t already.) We ordered his transcript by subject and called one subject "Independent Studies". His projects varied from ones that took years to ones that took a few months. Organizing by subject allowed us to ignore the time and just assign the appropriate amount of credit.

 

Natural history is a subject in which there is a huge amount unknown. The "lab" can be a backyard or nearby park. The equipment can be minimal. No scanning microscopes or particle accelerators needed. This might be worth mentioning, for parents who are looking for ways for their children to do real scientific work.

 

You do a great job of explaining how to do real historical research. Doing real scientific research is very similar. NonSTEM parents with STEM students would probably appreciate it if you did a similar thing for scientific research.

 

Do you have a few sentences explaining how to find time on a powerful microscope? Our sci museum was happy to let us use theirs. So was my husband,s place of work. So was the local bird sanctuary. We brought our samples there.

 

For budding engineers, a book on electronics probably isn,t going to work. I had to think back to the stories my engineer father told about how he learned electronics to figure out how to teach my own children. Little kits are the secret. Make magazine has a site that sells them. Apparently, engineers learn this in a hands-on way. You provide a soldering iron and kits and some old appliances to be dismantled, and THEN they begin either reading that electronics book or pestering an engineer with why questions. Next thing you know, they are making their own inventions. Forums are full of great adult engineers who would like nothing better than to share their knowledge with a youngster. This is the one place where it is super easy to find mentors because so many of the mentors are tech savvy and collected together in online communities.

 

I assume you have a bit about how to find reputable internet sources? If not, please include this. Public schools all do.

 

I,ll post about experiment design later, if you want.

 

Nan

[wapiti]

I think you should mention how learning happens best? A person needs to know something, then makes a framework (or has one already in his head), then finds the information and puts it into the framework, then reviews it right before it is forgotten, then uses the information to make it stick. Learning something the academic way is pretty artificial. I know lots of Latin plant names and plant biology because my mother talks when we garden together or take walks. I did not learn them in an academic way. 

 

My two cents:  IMO this framework sounds like learning via context, i.e., big picture before the details or whole-to-parts, as opposed to rote memorization or parts-to-whole ("academic" as used in this quote?).  I am a huge fan of context in which to place memory hooks, as my family has visual-spatial strengths and sequential weaknesses, so I completely agree with this thinking.  However, some kids are the other way around, with sequential strengths.  Indeed I have long assumed that Sayers' Poll Parrot idea and traditional education more generally are based on an incorrect assumption that most young kids learn best via sequential strengths.  Which method is best may differ by individual and of course the methods can be combined; I don't mean to set up a false dichotomy.

 

Then there's the issue of shoring up the weaknesses in sequencing by using the sequential "academic" methods, which you wrote some long threads about several years ago, e.g. here.  (Sorry if this opens up a can of worms... does anyone see what I'm trying to say LOL...)  Maybe we need to distinguish goals of teaching content and skills through strengths vs improving skill weaknesses when we are making choices for particular subjects.

[Nan in Mass]

My two cents: IMO this framework sounds like learning via context, i.e., big picture before the details or whole-to-parts, as opposed to rote memorization or parts-to-whole ("academic" as used in this quote?). I am a huge fan of context in which to place memory hooks, as my family has visual-spatial strengths and sequential weaknesses, so I completely agree with this thinking. However, some kids are the other way around, with sequential strengths. Indeed I have long assumed that Sayers' Poll Parrot idea and traditional education more generally are based on an incorrect assumption that most young kids learn best via sequential strengths. Which method is best may differ by individual and of course the methods can be combined; I don't mean to set up a false dichotomy.

 

Then there's the issue of shoring up the weaknesses in sequencing by using the sequential "academic" methods, which you wrote some long threads about several years ago, e.g. here. (Sorry if this opens up a can of worms... does anyone see what I'm trying to say LOL...) Maybe we need to distinguish goals of teaching content and skills through strengths vs improving skill weaknesses when we are making choices for particular subjects.

Yes. I was trying to be brief (ha ha) and trying to tread cautiously since this is FAR from my area of expertise. I thought I,d sort of toss around a few ideas and leave SWB to figure out how they fit together or track down the original threads and fill in the holes.

 

Nan

 

ETA I,ve pretty much done that with a lot of what I am saying here - mentioning things and hoping SWB can read my mind to fill in the rest lol.

 

ETA2 Thinking about this some more, I think the learning method I proposed is whole to parts to whole, so it works for everyone? Maybe? When I wrote it out, I was thinking more about high school learning, and how to teach oneself anything. I think of TWTM foundational skills as things one needs to learn in order to be able to do the full, learn-anything process, if that makes sense? Is that what you were trying to say?

 

ETA3lol I concluded that learning anything really complicated required a bit of both. The overview is so sketchy it is almost useless. You have to dive in and start learning things. When you have some learned, you can go back and acquire a slightly more in-depth overview, one that actually works as a framework. After that, it becomes more easy to remember the bits because they are linked to other things. Before that, you have to work extra hard to hang onto the bits. This takes patience and faith in the process. And many things are better learned in a non-academic way. Like those little kits to learn electronics. I realize that people get post doctoral degrees studying this stuff and it is a huge subject, but maybe SWB will find some use for this? I am her target audience, and maybe my simplification will work for other parents who are equally ignorant?

 

ETA4 Or maybe it isn,t and I should leave the complicated stuff to the experts. Sigh.

[Hunter]

I sat down with my 1st edition for a few hours this morning. It's less bulky than the 3rd. I think the 1st is really as big as a book can be, and still be loved. I'm like that with study Bibles. Sometimes bigger is not better. Some things are better left for another book, so your core loved book isn't too heavy to lug around, and truly be your daily companion.

[Guest berlywright]

Susan,

 

As a certified teacher who specialized in reading, a homeschooling mom who taught her struggling daughter how to read, and as a tutor I highly recommend The Logic of English for not only struggling readers, but as a solid foundation for beginning readers.

 

 

These are the things I tell parents to look for in a reading program:

 

1. Orton-Gillingham based program, researched based that teaches reading systematically.

2. Short lessons that are hands-on and are multi-sensory

3. Requires one-on-one instruction (not a computer based reading program)

4. Easy to implement and a enjoyable for the parent to teach

5. Combines all areas of Language Arts (you do not need a separate reading, spelling, writing, vocabulary, and grammar program)

 

The Logic of English fits into all of these categories.

 

The LOE does not require the parent to attend additional, costly training in order the implement the program, as the entire series is scripted. The parent is the expert when it comes to teaching their child how to read.

 

Foundations includes

 

1. activities to build phonemic awareness (a child will not learn how to read unless they are able to hear and manipulate language,this is an essential beginning skill).

2. handwriting instruction

3. introduction of 74 phonograms and 30 spelling rules

4. sequential instruction, the child is not expected to read or spell words before they have been taught the skills necessary to do so

5. builds reader from sounds, words, phrases, sentences and then to fluent readers reading real books

6. uses many hands-on materials (shaving cream, games, Nerf guns, etc) in the lessons

 

Essentials includes

 

1. basic phonemic awareness activities

2. introduction of 74 phonograms and 30 spelling rules

3. sequential instruction, the child is not expected to read or spell words before they have been taught the skills necessary to do so

4. teaches students to think critically as they analyze words

5. reviews knowledge previously learned in engaging ways

6. combines grammar, vocabulary, spelling, morphology, fluency, and composition (a stand alone language arts program, no need to purchase another program).

 

I have used both Essentials and Foundations with several children of all ability levels. It is much more than it has been described on this board as just a program that circles. Foundations A introduces spelling/word analysis lists around Lesson 20. There are just 5 words at the beginning, but the number increases as the students moves through the program. Essentials has 15 words per a lesson and numerous charts for students to analyze words. Students are given words that teach a specific spelling rule or phonogram to mark, but I do not remember seeing them circle words. 

 

The Logic of English is an Orton-Gilligham based program, though there are some Spalding components (phonograms, combination of Language Arts and using spelling/word analysis for reading instruction), The Logic of English is a program that stands on its own. I appreciate that the program is scripted, it does not require extra training, I do not have to make my own spelling notebook and it is engaging and fun for me to teach. The program teaches most of the English language is decodable instead of the false belief that English is so complicated and full of exceptions. Additionally, I love that the author of The Logic of English continues to research how English is changing. This is evident in the inclusion of additional phonogram sounds, such as y having 4 sounds /y/, /i/ /I/ /e/.

 

At the age of eight, we were told my daughter was not eligible to participate in the Scottish Rite reading program because her disability was too severe for their program. I was told that she needed to be put into special classes with a special teacher so that she might one day be able to function in society. I tried using numerous different reading programs, developmental therapys, vitamins, special glasses, etc. At the age of 12.5, I found The Logic of English. She was a fluent reader by the age of 14. She is now a 16 year old attending college prep classes at a homeschool co-op.

 

I am passionate about teaching and learning. After trying numerous reading programs, I have found The Logic of English to be the easiest to implement, the most thorough and the most successful program for Language Arts instruction.

 

I cannot recommend including The Logic of English in the upcoming 4th edition of The Well-Trained Mind enough. The Logic of English will not only prepare students to be fluent readers and writiers, but will also teach them necessary critical thinking skills necessary for progression through The Trivium.

 

Kim Wright

 

PS Let me add The Logic of English website is a wealth of information!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Hunter]

I really miss preY2K resources that focused on generic instructions for using trade books.

 

1st edition was a trade book that listed lots of trade books.

 

The growing reliance on textbooks is not only expensive, but it creates a mess that is harder to dispose of than trade books.

[Kalmia]

Dear Susan,

 

I would love to see Denise Eide's Logic of English listed among your top picks for spelling/reading curriculum. I jumped from SWR (Spell to Write and Read by Sanseri) as soon as I got LOE Essentials in my hands. There was no learning curve for the parent as you find with SWR or Spaulding. It is open and go like WWE. LOE is also secular, unlike SWR or Rod and Staff. Lessons were introduced in a sensible order such as the sound alikes "oi" and "oy" together. Denise takes into account the American pronunication of "ey" at the ends of words like honey as long "E" rather than sticking to the short "i" sound as SWR does. There is just the right amount of repetition. There is an entire teacher training course for free on YouTube. She produced an advanced word list for Essentials. She explains how to sound out the Dolch List! She makes videos explaining "crazy words." She includes foreign phonograms in her advanced phonogram list. She expanded the curriculum to include a foundations level. I suspect she will be doing more with Latin and Greek roots and morphographs in more advanced levels soon. She uses games and multisensory activities. Nerf guns are allowed. Spelling could not be made more fun. I used it with both my kids (and myself!) with excellent results and then passed on the recommendation to other families with struggling readers whose teachers did not have time to help them. Plus, even though this is not really a reason to buy a curriculum, Ms. Eide shares her own struggles with spelling and she radiates goodness and honesty, and this last bit makes her videos a pleasure to watch.

 

I would agree with a previous poster that for students with dyslexia, Barton (and LiPS) would be a better option. Struggling spellers and even good spellers will get plenty out of LOE.

 

As to the expense, Denise Eide did produce a book called Uncovering the Logic of English ($15) that in conjunction with her free teacher training YouTube videos, free materials on her website,  and an hour of time writing out your own phonogram and spelling rule cards is enough to teach the program making the price similar to Spalding which is another great OG program.

 

Thanks,

Laurel

 

[Guest PaulaMHP]

Math- Life of Fred. My admin okayed me using it in my kindergarten class after we finished Saxon. My daughter was using it to homeschool, that's where I saw it. The students LOVED it and couldn't get enough of it. I loved all of the thinking skills used.

[Hunter]

I shudder to think about a new homeschooling mom seeing LOE recommended, and thinking she needs do all that or she is not homeschooling properly, or not homeschooling classically.

 

Essentials isn't finished and I'm thinking it never will be. And the mutilevel program is a huge investment in every way.

 

If I were to do LOE and full out STEM, I wouldn't have the resources left over to tackle any of what is in 1st edition TWTM that started all this.

[Crimson Wife]

 

5. Combines all areas of Language Arts (you do not need a separate reading, spelling, writing, vocabulary, and grammar program)

 

Personally, I consider this the biggest drawback to Logic of English. Many, many, MANY homeschooled kids are not at the same level for each of these LA topics. Especially kids with dyslexia or other learning disabilities, who may have strong vocabulary and grammar understanding but weak reading & spelling skills.

 

I really wish Denise Eide had done what Marie Rippel did in AAS/AAR and left out the grammar instruction.

[aelgraham]

When I followed the WTM logic stage history with my son, we struggled. I think the literature was advanced for my less academically-inclined student. I would love to see a broader range of selections. We also struggled with the methods. The reading, list of facts, timeline, and summaries didn't lead to the rich study and retention I wanted. I'd love to see a few ideas to mix things up a bit throughout the year. I tried to incorporate "conceptual frameworks" to peg things on (along these lines http://www.studentsfriend.com/onhist/frame.html),but couldn't quite put it into practice.

 

He was my first, and I didn't have the confidence to adapt or understand why he wasn't "getting it." 

 

Things went better as we added in 'living books' from the Beautiful Feet lists, particularly Albert Marrin's histories.

 

I also think that Latin for Children is great. I know it's more "fun" that some of the WTM's more serious recommendations, but when you're doing Saxon, Rod & Staff, WWS, etc., you need something a little silly to break it all up. 

 

Hope that is helpful; you have certainly helped me all these years!

 

 

 

[Roadrunner]

I have very mixed feeling about LOE (Essentials) as well. It is outrageously expensive, yet we didn't get much out of it. Grammar instruction was especially disjointed. If the price were better, maybe...

 

 

[shinyhappypeople]

I like LOE.  It's much more open-and-go than other Spalding-inspired programs, but it's overkill for a lot of kids and requires writing readiness at the same time as reading readiness.  

 

If you include it in the 4th edition (and it would be a worthy inclusion) I'd like to see the simplest options (OPGTR, Phonics Pathways, HTT, etc.) presented as programs to try first.  They're simple, inexpensive, and work fine for most kids. 

[silver]

What's with the sudden burst of people writing essays about their love of LOE? For some of them, it's their only post on the forum. It seems ... odd.

 

Anyway...

 

As many others have stated, I like reading about the how and why. What method do you recommend, why does that method help get to the end goal of a robust classical education? How does implementation of that method work? That's more important/useful to me than a prescription-like list of curriculum to use in order to obtain a "perfect" education for my children.

 

For me, curriculum is mostly about either the hand holding or the pre-planning. Could I teach my children elementary level math without a curriculum? Sure. Do I want to plan out a proper sequence and make up sufficient number of practice problems on my own? No. So I buy a math curriculum. Could I teach my child to read or spell with something cheaper than LOE or AAS/AAR? Sure. But when I started, I wanted the hand holding. When I search for curriculum, I know what sort of method/style I want and try to find something that best fits that style.

[luuknam]

Okay, since you asked...

 

The order of the 4-year science cycle seems kind of arbitrary. I don't agree that the ancients were more into biology than astronomy and earth science. I also don't think people used to do 4-year science cycles with one year per science, so it seems kind of made up to make things fit nicely into the 4-year stages of TWTM.

 

I've been enjoying reading some of the "Science in Ancient ..." series, but I'm not sure I'd include it in any book yet to be published. The 1988 edition of "Science in Ancient ..." is better than the circa 1998 edition (though there are more books in the 1998 series, including books on science in later time periods), and I don't think there is a more recent edition. Mostly just mentioning them because others might enjoy either series if they can find them in their library.

 

Example 1988:

 

http://www.amazon.com/Science-Ancient-China-First-Series/dp/0531104850/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top?ie=UTF8

 

Example 1998 (with a School Library Journal review describing the differences between the two editions):

 

http://www.amazon.com/Science-Ancient-China-Past/dp/0531159140/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top?ie=UTF8

[daijobu]

Hi, SWB:  Do you plan to include resources for computer science, electronics, and math competitions?  (If not, you should, lol.)

 

Computer Science:

Python Programming for the Absolute Beginner by Michael Dawson

AoPS Python online courses (intro and intermediate)

Amplify MOOC (now called "Edhesive")

 

Electronics:

Make: Electronics by Charles Platt (volumes 1 and 2)

EEME Teach Your Kids Electronics online class

 

Math Competitions:

See my post #9 in this thread.

 

ETA:  I wanted to add that all these activities were a wonderful addition to our homeschooling experience, and made it (IMO) superior to a traditional school curriculum.  

[Excelsior! Academy]

A timeline of important milestones during the high school years, for the college-bound student:  when to take the PSAT/SAT/ACT and any AP/SAT II exams, when to get on college mailing lists, when to do college visitations, when to do early admission/early decision/regular admission (and what the differences are between these), etc.

 

Oh my!!  Yes!!!

[luuknam]

The order of the 4-year science cycle seems kind of arbitrary. I don't agree that the ancients were more into biology than astronomy and earth science.

 

Also, cellular biology didn't develop until after the microscope, and DNA is a 20th century discovery, and oh so important in biology today. So, if we're going to do things chronologically, I'd probably put astronomy & earth science first, then physics, then chemistry (materials science really took off in the 20th century too, while most of physics with the exceptions of quantum physics and relativity were well established before then), then biology. Although I could probably come up with arguments for pretty much any order of the sciences.

 

I'm not planning on separating them into separate years though.

 

I really don't know what the best thing would be wrt when to teach what (wrt science). I just wanted to point out that the 4-year cycle as described in TWTM came across to me as being completely arbitrary and likely is a 4-year cycle like that just to fit in with the history cycle and the 4-year cyclical model of the 3 stages, even though that may or may not be the best way to approach teaching the sciences. It just felt unnatural.

[Colleen in NS]

Personally, I consider this the biggest drawback to Logic of English. Many, many, MANY homeschooled kids are not at the same level for each of these LA topics. Especially kids with dyslexia or other learning disabilities, who may have strong vocabulary and grammar understanding but weak reading & spelling skills.

 

I really wish Denise Eide had done what Marie Rippel did in AAS/AAR and left out the grammar instruction.

 

This is why I prefer TWRTR's 3rd and 4th editions, but not the ones afterwards.  The later ones get more into writing and grammar and integrating lessons.  I liked WRTR because it zeroed in on how to teach reading, and then I could pick other things for grammar, for composition, etc.

 

[RosieCotton]

I'm going to second someone's suggestion to do a high school only book with info on how to transition as well as all the other useful information you have in there on how to get them ready for the rest of their life.

 

 

 

I would buy high school only book in addition to the 4th edition :) and need more info on how to transcript and taking college classes early, and all the particulars for high school like others have already mentioned.

 

For some reason I am more concerned about this than anything else, and am thinking about sending them to our private christian school for HS rather than tackle this.

[blondeviolin]

Logic of English Foundations is a fun, learn-to-read program.  It's open-and-go, very developmentally appropriate, and FUN.  It has all of the activities that some kids need or look forward to in school activities.  These are the sort of things that you really could think of on your own, but don't often have the time or forethought to.  Perfect for an artsy, crafty, or kinesthetic child.  

 

My oldest didn't need or want the activities, she was a git-r-done kid.  My third child didn't need as explicit phonics instruction but she loved the activities.  My second child NEEDED the explicit phonics and morpheme instruction. And, yes, I do suspect he's a stealth dyslexic.  He did 100 Easy Lessons, OPGTR, AAS, and even WRTR.  LOE Foundations (and age) was the key for him.

 

I can't speak to Essentials yet.  My oldest will be using it this year, but I'm also comfortable in my ability to tweaking and adjusting as works best for her and me.

 

I'd also love to see REAL Science Odyssey mentioned in the grammar stage science programs.  The projects, crafts, and activities are perfect and not overwhelming.  If you need a do-the-next-step program, RSO is it for us.

 

MEP is a great (and FREE!) math program.  Math Mammoth is solid.

 

Getting Started With Latin is a great resource as well.

 

I really wish you'd mention the audio companion to FLL.  There's nothing cuter than hearing a 2yo sing the helping verbs while his older sibling works on memorizing.  LOL

 

For PreK, a great resource IMO is the Core Knowledge PreK "workbooks."  They really aren't workbooks.  They are very open-and-go, simple activities that can be expanded or left as-is.  The workbook and the PreK "text" are all you need to have a pretty decent little preK guide.

 

We also find some internet content enriching and fun: Animaniacs have a few youTube videos that are educational even if they are a bit outdated (presidents, states and capitols, countries of the world, the Ballad of Magellan), etc.  Horrible Histories is a fun resource.  My kids love the songs (and memorized the kings and queens of England easily because of it).  The History Teachers (on YouTube) has great covers of songs that teach history.  Starfall.com has a GREAT preK/K paid section that is fun for kids to enjoy.  BrainPop and BrainPop Jr have been great enrichment subscriptions.  Khan Academy and Education Unboxed are great for math.  In our quest to make sure our kids are taught out of the best books, lets make sure we're not enriching with the technology around us.  Sometimes all it takes for a topic to come alive is to just google or youtube a topic.  (My oldest memorized her Latin declensions quickly thanks to a youTube video.)

 

And maybe a bit about how all of the how-to explanations, curricula, ideas, websites, books and whatever are all SUGGESTIONS.  They are TOOLS and home educators really should use them in a way that works for THEM.  If that means omitting having your child write the follow-up to a science experiment because it's not developmentally appropriate for that child, do it.  

[kbutton]

I would love to see a Red Flag list at the beginning of a chapter about reading. Dyslexia comes with warning signs, all of which I ignored because I kept being reminded of Raymond Moore's Better Late Than Early advice. If you have a red flag checklist and then refer back to a special needs chapter, it would be extremely helpful. Parents could look down the list and decide to ignore or read the special needs chapter.  My son would have been spared so much grief had I listened to my own intuition and ignored everyone who told me, "ohh he is just a late bloomer".  I wish I would have noticed the warning signs earlier. 

 

:iagree:

 

Actually, a red flag list for other academic areas (and maybe a few behavioral ones) would be nice. They should NOT be worded as a warning against trying certain levels of work with a child, but more as a "if this isn't working, you might want to watch for this." SN kids, particularly if they are 2e, are often all over the map on most measures of "readiness." IIRC, the Eides' book has lists that compare and contrast what various symptoms could be (http://www.amazon.com/Mislabeled-Child-Understanding-Learning-Success/dp/1401302254/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1437344992&sr=8-2&keywords=brock+and+fernette+eide). Many of us know that it requires testing to figure out the particulars, but having a reference point would be so helpful, and these lists might give you ideas for a red flags list.

 

Someone mentioned having personal anecdotes and tips from homeschool parents. I don't know how you feel about that, but if you feel they would add too much content to the books overall, please consider putting them in the SN section even if you don't use them in the rest of the book. SN is such a daunting idea to most people that they it's very easy to tell yourself something is okay when it's not, and personal anecdotes can dispel a lot of mythology. 

 

Maybe you can find some stats or research to incorporate into a graphic showing the overlap and prevalence of certain kinds of learning problems--many people don't realize that symptoms and therapies for some problems overlap or that some needs are actually quite common (like dyslexia). Maybe list common ages at diagnosis--a lot of 2e kids with ASD are diagnosed much later than kids with ASD who are not gifted, for instance. Trying to cover all SN in a book like this would be too difficult (as others have pointed out), but I think the best things you can do would be to 1. list red flags in a way that opens up minds to what SN look like before parents waste precious time, 2. help people make the leap to investigate what is going on by helping them see the available options for testing, 3. provide evidence for the idea that classical education can be customized for these kids, and 4. give people a basis from which to do further research (point them in a solid direction with some evidence behind it).