Anyone looked at Gather Round yet?

[ktgrok]

36 minutes ago, 8FillTheHeart said:

Have you verified that the content instruction is accurate?  I wouldn't trust anything so poorly written. Gloss/beautiful artwork fall under marketing, not markers of quality.

So far so good, we use a Sibley's bird book as well as the curriculum for each bird. But..since it is the first unit she no doubt had way more time to research and refine and such than later ones when she was on a schedule to release new ones. 

28 minutes ago, mshanson3121 said:

Read the first sentence. It could be interpreted to mean that all invertebrates have exoskeletons, which of course, isn't correct

Wow, that's bad. 

[mellifera33]

Huh. This reminds me a bit of a curriculum that I rejected last year. Beautiful format, lovely pictures, fun activities, and an apostrophe in each plural. lol 

[Allie]

5 hours ago, 8FillTheHeart said:

Have you verified that the content instruction is accurate?  I wouldn't trust anything so poorly written. Gloss/beautiful artwork fall under marketing, not markers of quality.

In the Facebook group there was a serious issue with the Asia unit. 

 “When it is talking about the Cu Chi tunnels it says the Viet Cong dug them "in an effort to better supply American and South Vietnamese forces." Did they mean to better attack, or maybe surprise, the American/S. Vietnamese forces”
 

The woman who runs the company replied with the following.

“Hey, not a typo... just talked to the author (and expert) and she said that the American troops join the South Vietnamese to help them (it was a civil war). The Viet Cong was South Vietnam, they were who the American's were fighting with against the communist government in North Vietnam. So the Viet Cong was supplying both the Americans and their troops, they were allied. <3“

And then later the author of the unit replied.  

“Hey all! I’m the author of Asia, the one Rebecca checked with when this question came up...I will admit, I am Canadian, and although I knew about the Vietnam war in general, I had never been taught about it as a kid and did not know a whole lot about the details of it before writing this lesson. When Rebecca asked about it,  there was a “wait, is that right?” thought in my head, so I quickly fact checked to make sure I was responding correctly and apparently I read it wrong!!! 😬 When I had time to look at the lesson and double check my facts, I realized that it was just missing a couple of words. I probably wrote that late at night, and just forgot to type those words. I assure you, no disrespect was intended towards any of the brave men that fought in this conflict. Though I am Canadian, my husband’s grandfather was a US navy vet, and I am deeply thankful for the work the US military has done over the years to protect both our corner of the world and other beautiful countries that have needed assistance in a military capacity. The second last sentence of the section should read “They (the Viet Cong) dug tens of thousands of miles of tunnels in an effort to COMBAT THE better supplied American and South Vietnamese forces.”

This was a huge issue with many who used that unit. But as someone said above they have a very strong YouTube following, and it doesn’t seem the moms using this notice or care about the concerns listed here.

 

 

 

 

 

[Allie]

I actually really wanted to love GR. I agree with someone above who said it could have been wonderful if she had just stuck to a unit study instead of claiming it is “all you need except math”. They insist you don’t need anything else, which is concerning. Of course, the grammar and editing are concerning too. The concept is great. It’s just poorly executed. 

[Lang Syne Boardie]

I'm going to guess that the parents who are enthusiastic about this program, feel that way for two reasons:

1. They were not well-educated, themselves. It's likely that every person expressing concern in this thread is at least 40 years old, or was educated outside of the United States. The younger parents do not recognize these problems AS problems, because a lot of them were in school during the beginning of the teach-to-the-test era. They might have experienced very little in the way of dogmatic grammar exercises, or history lectures, or actual science textbooks. They might not have wondered, as I did, where exactly this author is finding her information for history and science, because nothing is cited...I wouldn't wonder that, either, if my education had been based on websites and printouts and multiple choice! (I've come back to add that some of the parents are likely second-generation homeschoolers who learned from multiple choice programs instead of through direct instruction.)

2. They are probably very excited about personally teaching their own children, and learning with them, because they are the first generation of homeschoolers to have tried the park-them-in-front-of-computers method (or their children experienced it in school) and they've learned that it stinks. This sounds *better.* And by the way, I am very, very excited about THEIR being excited.

So if we veteran homeschoolers had time and energy, now would be the moment for Charlotte Mason style parent practicums. I don't mean Classical Conversations style. I mean "bridge your academic gaps and learn how to teach" courses, and also a return to regular support meetings for homeschool educators. Not just for "homeschool moms" who are defined as "not sending their children to school." I mean educators who intend to take the responsibility of teaching.

Edited March 4, 2020 by Lang Syne Boardie

[beaners]

@Lang Syne Boardie

I am under 40, educated in the US, and very concerned about what I have been reading. 

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Addendum to my post above: Did she not also begin this as a direct criticism of a different curriculum (and subsequent sheep-stealing of the groupies thereof)? If so, if they think they've got a religious "truth" found only with this gal, that would be a third reason. Albeit a cult-like one that I wouldn't bother addressing.

[8filltheheart]

1 minute ago, mshanson3121 said:

 

I am speechless, just dumbfounded speechless. This right here, out of everything else, is the biggest reason NOT to use this curriculum. Honestly? This is downright PATHETIC and there is no excuse for it. The really sad thing is, she's charging an arm and a leg, for a sub-par, factually incorrect, grammar-error laden curriculum, and most (not all!) of her Kool-Aid drinking followers have NO CLUE.

Me, too.  That they blatantly admit to knowing absolutely nothing about what they are writing units for.......Hey, Mikey, they'll buy anything.

[Allie]

1 minute ago, Lang Syne Boardie said:

Addendum to my post above: Did she not also begin this as a direct criticism of a different curriculum (and subsequent sheep-stealing of the groupies thereof)? If so, if they think they've got a religious "truth" found only with this gal, that would be a third reason. Albeit a cult-like one that I wouldn't bother addressing.

 

Yes. She first criticized her previous (and heavy) support of another curriculum on her YouTube channel, then days later announced she had written a book for Masterbooks who denounces that other company, and then I believe it was just several months later that she announced Gather Round. She leads with her religion and has switched her main Facebook group now to a religious only group.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

@Allie locking down the group makes it even worse. Thank you for sharing that. 

[Allie]

1 minute ago, Lang Syne Boardie said:

@Allie locking down the group makes it even worse. Thank you for sharing that. 

 

Yes, I honestly never thought about it the way you expressed it until now. It could be that many of these families are sticking by it and singing its praises because of the religious aspect. Last week (or maybe it was the week before), she came out and put a statement of faith on her main (huge) Facebook group and announced it could no longer host curriculum discussion and would now be very narrow in discussion topics, etc. There is a separate page specific to Gather Round. 

[hands-on-mama]

2 hours ago, Allie said:

In the Facebook group there was a serious issue with the Asia unit. 

 “When it is talking about the Cu Chi tunnels it says the Viet Cong dug them "in an effort to better supply American and South Vietnamese forces." Did they mean to better attack, or maybe surprise, the American/S. Vietnamese forces”
 

The woman who runs the company replied with the following.

“Hey, not a typo... just talked to the author (and expert) and she said that the American troops join the South Vietnamese to help them (it was a civil war). The Viet Cong was South Vietnam, they were who the American's were fighting with against the communist government in North Vietnam. So the Viet Cong was supplying both the Americans and their troops, they were allied. <3“

And then later the author of the unit replied.  

“Hey all! I’m the author of Asia, the one Rebecca checked with when this question came up...I will admit, I am Canadian, and although I knew about the Vietnam war in general, I had never been taught about it as a kid and did not know a whole lot about the details of it before writing this lesson. When Rebecca asked about it,  there was a “wait, is that right?” thought in my head, so I quickly fact checked to make sure I was responding correctly and apparently I read it wrong!!! 😬 When I had time to look at the lesson and double check my facts, I realized that it was just missing a couple of words. I probably wrote that late at night, and just forgot to type those words. I assure you, no disrespect was intended towards any of the brave men that fought in this conflict. Though I am Canadian, my husband’s grandfather was a US navy vet, and I am deeply thankful for the work the US military has done over the years to protect both our corner of the world and other beautiful countries that have needed assistance in a military capacity. The second last sentence of the section should read “They (the Viet Cong) dug tens of thousands of miles of tunnels in an effort to COMBAT THE better supplied American and South Vietnamese forces.”

This was a huge issue with many who used that unit. But as someone said above they have a very strong YouTube following, and it doesn’t seem the moms using this notice or care about the concerns listed here.

 

 

 

 

 

I really don’t even know what to say in regards to this. I read this to my husband, and he is equally appalled. It’s almost scary to see so many people falling in line behind this lady. Their poor children!

[hands-on-mama]

7 hours ago, mshanson3121 said:

Read the first sentence. It could be interpreted to mean that all invertebrates have exoskeletons, which of course, isn't correct

 

 

Ha! We were the ones to buy this unit and find tons of incorrect and poorly worded statements. Granted, my 12 year old knows more than most on the subject of marine biology, but these mistakes would have been easy to catch with half a brain. They were the kind of things that would stop you in your tracks and make you really think for a moment about what you just read (and not in a good way).

I’m glad I bought the one unit for one reason entirely. I no longer have to wonder if the grass is greener. Unit studies very much intrigue me, but my work schedule truly prevents me from executing one well. We’ll stick with our tried and true programs.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

There's an elephant in the room: Religiously motivated homeschool curriculum.

This gal is ignorantly claiming the Viet Cong...gah, I can't even type it.

But far more established and supposedly qualified authors of classic homeschool curric have been biased and dishonest about history and science for years. 

[beaners]

Just now, Lang Syne Boardie said:

There's an elephant in the room: Religiously motivated homeschool curriculum.

This gal is ignorantly claiming the Viet Cong...gah, I can't even type it.

But far more established and supposedly qualified authors of classic homeschool curric have been biased and dishonest about history and science for years. 

Is it better or worse that these mistakes are based out of utter ignorance, and not only an attempt to manipulate what kids learn? This wasn't crafting a narrative intentionally. This was a complete lack of basic background knowledge. 

[Lang Syne Boardie]

7 minutes ago, beaners said:

Is it better or worse that these mistakes are based out of utter ignorance, and not only an attempt to manipulate what kids learn? This wasn't crafting a narrative intentionally. This was a complete lack of basic background knowledge. 

That's a very good question; I was just sitting here thinking similarly. I would think that intentional deception is worse...on the other hand, the end result is the same: Children being taught ideas or facts that are not true.

In my local school district, children do not have textbooks and frequently do not have actual curricula. The younger children have iPads and the high schoolers have Chrome books. There is a basic scope and sequence, but teachers (who are very, very short on time) are left to cobble together whatever they can find online. Nobody knows what the children are reading or what the sources are, except for those rare occasions when a student shares his (outrageous) lesson with his parent, and it goes viral on the Internet! This occurs in many poorer school districts in the USA.

Maybe overall, in education, we are losing our grasp on some important values. 

Edited March 4, 2020 by Lang Syne Boardie

[ktgrok]

12 hours ago, Lang Syne Boardie said:

I'm going to guess that the parents who are enthusiastic about this program, feel that way for two reasons:

1. They were not well-educated, themselves. It's likely that every person expressing concern in this thread is at least 40 years old, or was educated outside of the United States. The younger parents do not recognize these problems AS problems, because a lot of them were in school during the beginning of the teach-to-the-test era. They might have experienced very little in the way of dogmatic grammar exercises, or history lectures, or actual science textbooks. They might not have wondered, as I did, where exactly this author is finding her information for history and science, because nothing is cited...I wouldn't wonder that, either, if my education had been based on websites and printouts and multiple choice! (I've come back to add that some of the parents are likely second-generation homeschoolers who learned from multiple choice programs instead of through direct instruction.)

 

I will say that at least in the North American Birds unit, the only one I have, she does have a list of sources at the end of each day's information. Now, there are no footnotes or anything, to make it easy to find which part came from where, but there are sources listed. 

That said, I think you are right, it does smack of those kinds of lessons found in school these days. 

As for the excitement over it, honestly, it IS pretty fun and interesting. At least the bird ones. So that is part of it. And for tired, overwhelmed moms not hving to juggle a lot of books is certainly appealing. 

12 hours ago, mshanson3121 said:

 

I am speechless, just dumbfounded speechless. This right here, out of everything else, is the biggest reason NOT to use this curriculum. Honestly? This is downright PATHETIC and there is no excuse for it. The really sad thing is, she's charging an arm and a leg, for a sub-par, factually incorrect, grammar-error laden curriculum, and most (not all!) of her Kool-Aid drinking followers have NO CLUE.

Yup - I keep going back to HOW expensive it is given how poorly done it is. For that money why on earth can't she hire a freaking editor to go over it? A REAL editor, not a random homeschool mom. 

As a comparison - one month's worth (if you use it as intended) of Gather Round is $50 for the digital bundle for every level - you get all 4 levels for that price. One month's worth (two units worth) of Layers of Learning, which also covers all age ranges, is $10. Now, LoL won't have worksheets for every day of the month, but still!

12 hours ago, Lang Syne Boardie said:

Addendum to my post above: Did she not also begin this as a direct criticism of a different curriculum (and subsequent sheep-stealing of the groupies thereof)? If so, if they think they've got a religious "truth" found only with this gal, that would be a third reason. Albeit a cult-like one that I wouldn't bother addressing.

Yes. I actually held off buying the first unit mostly because of how turned off I was by her campaign against TGTB. And her smugness about it. She was all, "I am only speaking out because it is my DUTY as such an influential person". Um, no. 

That said, my kids wanted to learn about birds at our feeder, and it was not bad for that. But there really is no escuse for some of this stuff. 

Edited March 4, 2020 by Ktgrok

[8filltheheart]

11 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

I will say that at least in the North American Birds unit, the only one I have, she does have a list of sources at the end of each day's information. Now, there are no footnotes or anything, to make it easy to find which part came from where, but there are sources listed. 

That said, I think you are right, it does smack of those kinds of lessons found in school these days. 

As for the excitement over it, honestly, it IS pretty fun and interesting. At least the bird ones. So that is part of it. And for tired, overwhelmed moms not hving to juggle a lot of books is certainly appealing. 

Yup - I keep going back to HOW expensive it is given how poorly done it is. For that money why on earth can't she hire a freaking editor to go over it? A REAL editor, not a random homeschool mom. 

As a comparison - one month's worth (if you use it as intended) of Gather Round is $50 for the digital bundle for every level - you get all 4 levels for that price. One month's worth (two units worth) of Layers of Learning, which also covers all age ranges, is $10. Now, LoL won't have worksheets for every day of the month, but still!

Yes. I actually held off buying the first unit mostly because of how turned off I was by her campaign against TGTB. And her smugness about it. She was all, "I am only speaking out because it is my DUTY as such an influential person". Um, no. 

That said, my kids wanted to learn about birds at our feeder, and it was not bad for that. But there really is no escuse for some of this stuff. 

I'm sorry, but I still do not get the appeal at all.  A program written by individuals with no background on the subject matter without cited sources for the information provided filled with grammatical errors for multiple grade levels? 

What educational guidelines are being used to determine content? Grade level appropriateness? 

I am really speechless. The lack of discernment over quality is mindboggling.  

[8filltheheart]

16 minutes ago, OKBud said:

There is a certain cohort who saw what Jenny Phillips did with The Good and The Beautiful and they identified with her, as a person, very strongly. After a while it turned into something very ugly. More "I'm just like her people should love ME" than "I just love her, she's the best." This woman isn't the only one, but she was maybe the best at playing the pandering lifestyle-youtube game.  

Conversely, Phillips gave her work away for free. For a long time, those LA levels that are still free were the only things she had for sale. TGATB is definitely a bit of a phenomenon, but as far as I know, Phillips has been above-board and sincere and generous. Importantly, she has specific goals in mind and a mission to achieve with her work. She's not just trying to get part of the market share of homeschool stuff, she earnestly wants people to have access to materials that meet her criteria. 

I think that this Spooner woman appeals more to the group insisting that one does not need to read any books to prepare themselves for homeschooling their children [I come across so many of these and it makes me unendingly furious!] than the religiously-motivated homeschoolers.  She wields her faith for money-- It's pretty self-evidently not deeper than that. 

Thanks for this explanation.  I guess the bolded makes sense.  But, honestly, they are accepting that the people writing the materials they are using to educate their children also don't need any background preparation.  (oh.....lightbulb moment when I typed that......that makes sense in terms of acceptance of co-op teachers/CC tutors, etc having zero background in the subject they are teaching.  Strangers with no understanding of the topic having control over your children's education.  Let's jump on it.  Sorry, I'm in a very sardonic mood.)

[mellifera33]

2 hours ago, OKBud said:

I think that this Spooner woman appeals more to the group insisting that one does not need to read any books to prepare themselves for homeschooling their children [I come across so many of these and it makes me unendingly furious!] than the religiously-motivated homeschoolers.  

 

Is this a common view? I have come across lots of people (online, anyway) who want a 100% online curriculum because they don't have time to teach or don't want to teach, but I've never encountered someone who bragged about teaching from ignorance. That's just bizarre. 

Edited to add: I called over my 12 y/o to ask him about the Viet Cong error. His eyes got wide and he was speechless for a moment. And it takes a lot to get this kid to be quiet. 😛

 

Edited March 4, 2020 by mellifera33

[ktgrok]

3 hours ago, 8FillTheHeart said:

I'm sorry, but I still do not get the appeal at all.  A program written by individuals with no background on the subject matter without cited sources for the information provided filled with grammatical errors for multiple grade levels? 

What educational guidelines are being used to determine content? Grade level appropriateness? 

I am really speechless. The lack of discernment over quality is mindboggling.  

Well, I don't think the people using it realize that the writers have no background - you saw in the facebook post that the creator said the asia unit was written by an expert. People believe her when she says it. And she does hav ea list of sources at the end of each section. 

As for grade level apprpriateness, it includes 4 levels so she tells people just to try it and see which fits your kid. I don't think that in itself is bad. 

As an idea, it's not bad. As implemented - with "experts on Asia" who don't know who the Viet Cong were- it's bad. Very bad. But people using it don't necessarily see those errors, and she's relying on crowdsourcing to catch them and submit them so she can fix them. Guess that's cheaper than a proof reader...but really bad news for those using it before they get caught, IF they get caught. 

[ktgrok]

1 minute ago, mshanson3121 said:

And to me, one of the biggest issues with this is - you're not allowed to discuss the errors. She shuts down complaints, dismisses them etc... So, her two groups are filled with positive, glowing reviews and compliments - they create the illusion that it's the perfect curriculum, not an error to be found.

I've posted one error and it stayed up, and I have seen multiple posts about the viet cong issue on there, those are still up. 

[Allie]

She made a video recently talking about how she didn’t like seeing negative reviews on her page about her own curriculum. As far as I’ve seen, they cracked down on them. 
 

Another thing that confuses me is that they say (unless you are pre or early reader) you do not need to do units in order. Language arts builds on itself, yes? So you would theoretically want to follow a well thought-out scope and sequence. If you’re saying that’s “all you need”, there should be a specific order in my opinion.

[ktgrok]

21 hours ago, Allie said:

She made a video recently talking about how she didn’t like seeing negative reviews on her page about her own curriculum. As far as I’ve seen, they cracked down on them. 
 

Another thing that confuses me is that they say (unless you are pre or early reader) you do not need to do units in order. Language arts builds on itself, yes? So you would theoretically want to follow a well thought-out scope and sequence. If you’re saying that’s “all you need”, there should be a specific order in my opinion.

Yeah, I THINK how that is worked around is that the language arts is mostly copywork and studied dictation, and the writing is pretty open ended, so there is room to improve and add more as they get stronger through the year? 

So far we've just used the first unit, and not all of it. And we have continued to use LLFLE as I do want more explicit grammar than LLFLE does. 

[8filltheheart]

Which comes back to the point of who decided the scope and sequence? The content? Has anyone successfully used the same approach long-term? Is there any evidence supporting it is a sound academic program? What is her academic background? How old is her oldest?  Other than marketing and artwork, what are her qualifications for people trusting her materials?

[mellifera33]

3 hours ago, 8FillTheHeart said:

Which comes back to the point of who decided the scope and sequence? The content? Has anyone successfully used the same approach long-term? Is there any evidence supporting it is a sound academic program? What is her academic background? How old is her oldest?  Other than marketing and artwork, what are her qualifications for people trusting her materials?

 

Usually I'd breeze over these types of questions, trusting that a homeschooling parent would be willing and able to determine what materials fit into the scope and sequence of their homeschool, but I am coming to realize that the proportion of the homeschool community with which I am familiar is rather small, and perhaps not representative of the community as a whole. With self-publishing easier than ever, and so many people deciding that expertise is bunk, I can only see this problem growing in the future, and not just for homeschoolers. Wasn't there a recent thread about how many public school teachers cobble together lesson plans from questionable materials on Teachers Pay Teachers? 

 

 

 

[ktgrok]

1 hour ago, mellifera33 said:

 

Usually I'd breeze over these types of questions, trusting that a homeschooling parent would be willing and able to determine what materials fit into the scope and sequence of their homeschool, but I am coming to realize that the proportion of the homeschool community with which I am familiar is rather small, and perhaps not representative of the community as a whole. With self-publishing easier than ever, and so many people deciding that expertise is bunk, I can only see this problem growing in the future, and not just for homeschoolers. Wasn't there a recent thread about how many public school teachers cobble together lesson plans from questionable materials on Teachers Pay Teachers? 

 

 

 

Honestly, the scope and sequence thing is the least problematic to me. But I'm not big on the whole idea that kids should learn certain things certain years or a certain order, other than math. And even then, only sort of. If my kids learned SOMETHING about social studies and Something about science I don't care if it was the "right" thing to learn. As long as they are learning and enjoying it. 

But, factual errors do matter, as I don't want them learning misinformation. 

[8filltheheart]

31 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

Honestly, the scope and sequence thing is the least problematic to me. But I'm not big on the whole idea that kids should learn certain things certain years or a certain order, other than math. And even then, only sort of. If my kids learned SOMETHING about social studies and Something about science I don't care if it was the "right" thing to learn. As long as they are learning and enjoying it. 

But, factual errors do matter, as I don't want them learning misinformation. 

Do you hold that view for college bound high school students? 

[ktgrok]

31 minutes ago, 8FillTheHeart said:

Do you hold that view for college bound high school students? 

Yes and no. 

What kind of college? What are the entrance requirements for that school? 

If the entrance requirements mean they have to study certain subjects taht still doesn't mean they have to study a particular set of information in that subject, unless they plan to take SAT subject tests. If they don't, then something like Biology is a broad field, with lots of options for topics as well as methods of learning. I'd want to be sure we cover some basics, so yes ...but would be pretty open to how we do it, and what areas we go in depth, etc. 

And if they are going to go to a school that doesn't require that - maybe a CC which are a great deal - I'd be even more open. 

But - that doesn't mean this curriclum should say they are "enough" for any kid with any goals. It's ludicrous to think ANY curriculum is going to be a great fit for EVERY kid. That they try to claim it is is crazy talk - and I've said so on their facebook group, lol. 

 

Edited March 6, 2020 by Ktgrok

[8filltheheart]

28 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

Yes and no. 

What kind of college? What are the entrance requirements for that school? 

If the entrance requirements mean they have to study certain subjects taht still doesn't mean they have to study a particular set of information in that subject, unless they plan to take SAT subject tests. If they don't, then something like Biology is a broad field, with lots of options for topics as well as methods of learning. I'd want to be sure we cover some basics, so yes ...but would be pretty open to how we do it, and what areas we go in depth, etc. 

And if they are going to go to a school that doesn't require that - maybe a CC which are a great deal - I'd be even more open. 

But - that doesn't mean this curriclum should say they are "enough" for any kid with any goals. It's ludicrous to think ANY curriculum is going to be a great fit for EVERY kid. That they try to claim it is is crazy talk - and I've said so on their facebook group, lol. 

 

Thanks for sharing.  Your post clarifies the appeal.  

I personally cannot fathom using any science or history units at the high school level put together by just anyone without a background in the field.  I can't imagine approaching high school science in random units b/c I cannot fathom mastering chemistry or physics without logically designed sequencing.  Ecology, yes, I can see units working for ecology.  But, no, not biology as taught today focused on cellular biology and biochem.

I hope parents who have kids who think they want to pursue a STEM field or a 4 yr U recognize the weaknesses.

[ktgrok]

37 minutes ago, 8FillTheHeart said:

Thanks for sharing.  Your post clarifies the appeal.  

I personally cannot fathom using any science or history units at the high school level put together by just anyone without a background in the field.  I can't imagine approaching high school science in random units b/c I cannot fathom mastering chemistry or physics without logically designed sequencing.  Ecology, yes, I can see units working for ecology.  But, no, not biology as taught today focused on cellular biology and biochem.

I hope parents who have kids who think they want to pursue a STEM field or a 4 yr U recognize the weaknesses.

I THINK (and can't swear to it as I'm not using it for highschool, just as a jumping off place for elementary kids 10 and under), that in highschool they use the topics in the guide just as a starting point - they do their own research (starting maybe in middle school) on the topics and write reports, do projects, etc all using outside sources. Even the elementary age kids you are supposed to be using outside books, videos, etc alongside the actual guide. 

So not just relying on the info put together by the non expert curriculum writer - using actual books/resources/etc. 

And mastering chemistry or physics is not a goal all homeschoolers have for highschool. And there is much to be said for the argument that the shift to focusing on cellular biology and biochemistry was a bad idea - at least for some students, possibly for the majority of them. 

But I agree, I hope those who have kids wanting a particular path do the research to see what that requires. 

[mellifera33]

2 hours ago, 8FillTheHeart said:

Thanks for sharing.  Your post clarifies the appeal.  

I personally cannot fathom using any science or history units at the high school level put together by just anyone without a background in the field.  I can't imagine approaching high school science in random units b/c I cannot fathom mastering chemistry or physics without logically designed sequencing.  Ecology, yes, I can see units working for ecology.  But, no, not biology as taught today focused on cellular biology and biochem.

I hope parents who have kids who think they want to pursue a STEM field or a 4 yr U recognize the weaknesses.

 

Looking at the curric in question, it's obviously not for stem-y high school kids. But I think that a series of unit studies for high school could work. There would have to be a flowchart to show which classes were absolute prerequisites for others, but there would be some choice. History units would go along with the science units, and would be non-chronological. For example, one unit might be classical mechanics, Newton, the English Civil Wars, Pope, Dryden, and Pilgrim's Progress. Another might be atoms, elements, the periodic table, Mendeleev, 19th century Russian history, and selections from the golden age of Russian literature--Gogol, Chekhov, Pushkin, Tolstoy. The elements unit would have to precede stoichiometry, Jeremias Benjamin Richter, Holy Roman Empire/Prussia, and The Sorrows of Young Werther. Astronomy/Mayan history/Popol Vuh. Botany/the role of plants in Ancient literature--Gilgamesh, the Bible, Greek Myths. Microbiology--story of Cholera in Victorian England, class system, workhouses, Dickens. Just spitballing. lol.

[8filltheheart]

14 minutes ago, mellifera33 said:

 

Looking at the curric in question, it's obviously not for stem-y high school kids. But I think that a series of unit studies for high school could work. There would have to be a flowchart to show which classes were absolute prerequisites for others, but there would be some choice. History units would go along with the science units, and would be non-chronological. For example, one unit might be classical mechanics, Newton, the English Civil Wars, Pope, Dryden, and Pilgrim's Progress. Another might be atoms, elements, the periodic table, Mendeleev, 19th century Russian history, and selections from the golden age of Russian literature--Gogol, Chekhov, Pushkin, Tolstoy. The elements unit would have to precede stoichiometry, Jeremias Benjamin Richter, Holy Roman Empire/Prussia, and The Sorrows of Young Werther. Astronomy/Mayan history/Popol Vuh. Botany/the role of plants in Ancient literature--Gilgamesh, the Bible, Greek Myths. Microbiology--story of Cholera in Victorian England, class system, workhouses, Dickens. Just spitballing. lol.

I am going to bail on engaging in this conversation bc in no way do I agree even though I am an advocate of unit studies and non-textbook education. 

[mellifera33]

9 minutes ago, 8FillTheHeart said:

I am going to bail on engaging in this conversation bc in no way do I agree even though I am an advocate of unit studies and non-textbook education. 

Conversations in which everyone agrees are not very interesting. 🙂  But yeah, my five minutes of daiquiri-inspired brainstorming isn’t really the basis for a high school curriculum. It seemed like a good idea at the time. 😄

[ktgrok]

Ok, so I glanced at the highschool level of NAB and ok, yeah, that's even lighter than I thought. Not saying it wouldn't be the right fit for some kids - it likely would be. But again, the claim it is all things for everyone is just ludicrous. 

[8filltheheart]

6 hours ago, mellifera33 said:

But yeah, my five minutes of daiquiri-inspired brainstorming .... seemed like a good idea at the time. 😄

Lol!! I've made quite a few of those before!!!! 🤣

[Allie]

On the website under FAQ she talks about high school and scope/sequence. Both answers are concerning, in my opinion. It is clear she has no true understanding of how High School courses work.

“If I don’t use the units in order, won’t my kids miss things? Gather ‘Round is both spiral and mastery, so nothing will be missed. Different concepts are covered in different units. One unit we might focus on adjectives and then the next unit sentence structure (which reminds them about adjectives but if they haven’t covered that, it isn’t critical) then another unit might be types of sentences, etc. We'll cover it all again in the years to come so that it gives your child lots of practice to master topics. By the time they have mastered a concept they will be moving up to a higher notebook level where new things will be taught and eventually mastered!”

 

”How would you list this for High School credits?

From what I read credits are based from hours. If you are going on the system of 1 credit for a 1 year course (as opposed to New Jersey's system or California, etc.) then you would get the following if you did the full year for High School:

• 1 LA Credit
• 1 General Sciences credit
• 1/2 history credit
• 1/2 social studies credit (humanities, government, social issues, etc.)
• 1/2 Geography credit
• 1/2 an art credit

And if you give credit for Bible then 1/2 Bible credit. (I would personally add More Than Words so that would be a full credit for that then.)”

[maize]

I do think it would be possible to take a unit studies approach to something like high school biology and still cover all the standard material, but it would take someone very familiar with the material in question to craft the units.

I'm trying to pull together more of a living books approach right now for chemistry and microbiology for my oldest. I'm doing this both because I feel I learned much better that way myself (we had lots of books on scientific topics in the home, written by researchers and subject matter experts and I read many of them) and because trying to get her to focus for more than ten minutes at a time on textbook work is like pulling teeth but she will sit and read a more interesting book.

[8filltheheart]

@Allie I looked at that yesterday.  It was clearly evident that she has no idea about high school transcripts, credits, and college admissions requirements.  "General  science" credit would not meet the legal requirements in many states for a high school science credit if the state stipulates what science credits are required for a high school diploma.  Not all states specify such requirements, but some do.  Colleges most definitely do (standard requirements are a physical science and biological science plus at least one additional in either category or at an advanced level, at least 2 lab science.....and those are definitely the requirements on the weaker side.)

ETA: Most states and Us also require a foreign language.

3 hours ago, maize said:

I do think it would be possible to take a unit studies approach to something like high school biology and still cover all the standard material, but it would take someone very familiar with the material in question to craft the units.

I'm trying to pull together more of a living books approach right now for chemistry and microbiology for my oldest. I'm doing this both because I feel I learned much better that way myself (we had lots of books on scientific topics in the home, written by researchers and subject matter experts and I read many of them) and because trying to get her to focus for more than ten minutes at a time on textbook work is like pulling teeth but she will sit and read a more interesting book.

A well-planned design meeting the needs of the individual is doable.  Mass marketing random units claiming that meet the needs of all students is absurd. I've designed ecology, astronomy, meteorology, geology units for my kids. I designed them around science books written by experts in the field, Great Courses lectures, and college-level textbooks.  But, in no way would I sell those plans to anyone let alone sell them claiming they would meet the needs of any student.  I am not a science expert and it would be irresponsible for me to claim what I designed would meet the needs of any/all students.  Yikes.  That is hubris in the extreme.

Edited March 6, 2020 by 8FillTheHeart
shouldn't type while walking on a treadmill :)

[Lang Syne Boardie]

On 3/6/2020 at 8:42 AM, Allie said:

On the website under FAQ she talks about high school and scope/sequence. Both answers are concerning, in my opinion. It is clear she has no true understanding of how High School courses work.

“If I don’t use the units in order, won’t my kids miss things? Gather ‘Round is both spiral and mastery, so nothing will be missed. Different concepts are covered in different units. One unit we might focus on adjectives and then the next unit sentence structure (which reminds them about adjectives but if they haven’t covered that, it isn’t critical) then another unit might be types of sentences, etc. We'll cover it all again in the years to come so that it gives your child lots of practice to master topics. By the time they have mastered a concept they will be moving up to a higher notebook level where new things will be taught and eventually mastered!”

 

”How would you list this for High School credits?

From what I read credits are based from hours. If you are going on the system of 1 credit for a 1 year course (as opposed to New Jersey's system or California, etc.) then you would get the following if you did the full year for High School:

• 1 LA Credit
• 1 General Sciences credit
• 1/2 history credit
• 1/2 social studies credit (humanities, government, social issues, etc.)
• 1/2 Geography credit
• 1/2 an art credit

And if you give credit for Bible then 1/2 Bible credit. (I would personally add More Than Words so that would be a full credit for that then.)”

Where to start.

So in her world, history wouldn't be a social studies credit. 

[Emily ZL]

As a former lawyer, one thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is how problematic that "expert" comment was. If the owner claimed her curriculum was written by an "expert" in the field, that is a representation of fact (contradicted in writing by the alleged expert herself). And if that representation was made for commercial gain, that is, to convince people to buy the curriculum on that basis, they may have a lawsuit on their hands for fraud. (Edited to stress: I'm not accusing the company or owner of anything! Just saying they might consider these types of concerns.) I think this person is in over her head. How is her company structured? Has she protected her assets properly? This isn't an area where I have any expertise at all, but I wouldn't be surprised if some enterprising young lawyer trying to drum up business might not make something of this. It's just too tempting with so much good paper trail out there already, and there's a lot of surplus lawyers out there looking for someone to sue. (Of course, nothing I have said here should constitute legal advice for anyone. Consult a licensed attorney. I am not personally making any accusations against this company.)

Edited March 7, 2020 by Emily ZL

[8filltheheart]

52 minutes ago, Emily ZL said:

As a former lawyer, one thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is how problematic that "expert" comment was. If the owner claimed her curriculum was written by an "expert" in the field, that is a representation of fact (contradicted in writing by the alleged expert herself). And if that representation was made for commercial gain, that is, to convince people to buy the curriculum on that basis, they may have a lawsuit on their hands for fraud. (Edited to stress: I'm not accusing the company or owner of anything! Just saying they might consider these types of concerns.) I think this person is in over her head. How is her company structured? Has she protected her assets properly? This isn't an area where I have any expertise at all, but I wouldn't be surprised if some enterprising young lawyer trying to drum up business might not make something of this. It's just too tempting with so much good paper trail out there already, and there's a lot of surplus lawyers out there looking for someone to sue. (Of course, nothing I have said here should constitute legal advice for anyone. Consult a licensed attorney. I am not personally making any accusations against this company.)

I actually wondered about that and the claim that it meets the need of all students. 

[lulalu]

Well, if it is this easy to make money selling a curriculum maybe I should give it a try. 😂 

She seems to bypass talking about her qualifications. So I can only assume she has none. I have nothing wrong with moms designing and writting curriculum for their own families without any qualifications. But selling it to others is a problem. 

I think this is a symptom of people wanting to make an easy dollar. It really just feels like she wants to make money easily. It really might be best for her to just get an established part time job. Making and selling curriculum is not this easy. It takes work and time lots of time, and knowledge. 

 

[mellifera33]

4 minutes ago, lulalu said:

Well, if it is this easy to make money selling a curriculum maybe I should give it a try. 😂 

She seems to bypass talking about her qualifications. So I can only assume she has none. I have nothing wrong with moms designing and writting curriculum for their own families without any qualifications. But selling it to others is a problem. 

I think this is a symptom of people wanting to make an easy dollar. It really just feels like she wants to make money easily. It really might be best for her to just get an established part time job. Making and selling curriculum is not this easy. It takes work and time lots of time, and knowledge. 

 

Someday someone’s going to make a killing with a homeschool curriculum MLM...

[lulalu]

1 hour ago, mellifera33 said:

Someday someone’s going to make a killing with a homeschool curriculum MLM...

I'll start it and get in at the top! 

I promise everyone can make the same amount of money. 

[Emily ZL]

8 hours ago, lulalu said:

Well, if it is this easy to make money selling a curriculum maybe I should give it a try. 😂 

She seems to bypass talking about her qualifications. So I can only assume she has none. I have nothing wrong with moms designing and writting curriculum for their own families without any qualifications. But selling it to others is a problem. 

I think this is a symptom of people wanting to make an easy dollar. It really just feels like she wants to make money easily. It really might be best for her to just get an established part time job. Making and selling curriculum is not this easy. It takes work and time lots of time, and knowledge. 

 

I don't think it's crazy to have a side hustle going as a homeschool mom, especially if you are already putting together plans from scratch for your own family. The devil is in the details, though. When SCM or Pam Barnhill sells their plans, they are mostly using credible outside resources for the actual info. They aren't claiming to have the expertise to literally write the curriculum from scratch and be the primary resources too. There's a huge difference between GR telling you "here's all you need to know about this subject and you can trust that it's accurate" and the morning time plans that say "read this book by Demi" and "play this CD from maestro classics."

[mellifera33]

2 hours ago, Emily ZL said:

I don't think it's crazy to have a side hustle going as a homeschool mom, especially if you are already putting together plans from scratch for your own family. The devil is in the details, though. When SCM or Pam Barnhill sells their plans, they are mostly using credible outside resources for the actual info. They aren't claiming to have the expertise to literally write the curriculum from scratch and be the primary resources too. There's a huge difference between GR telling you "here's all you need to know about this subject and you can trust that it's accurate" and the morning time plans that say "read this book by Demi" and "play this CD from maestro classics."

 

Yes, I am organizationally challenged and I happily pay for a nice schedule and booklist that helps me stay on track. 

7 minutes ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

I think I have this figured out with a plan- after all, imitation is the sincerest form flattery, right?! 

The secret to success appears to be appealing to the insecurities of a bunch of homeschool moms, telling them they can't do it alone,  and then getting them to pay you vast sums of money (which a large percentage struggle to afford)  to let them all join together in a Community™ (make sure you get that ™!)  with equally insecure mothers on a weekly basis so they can be insecure together, and make them also do all the work of reserving the space, planning the meetings, collecting the dues due to you, providing the materials, and doing the actual teachings.

It will also be advantageous if you make up some catchy songs, yet spend vast amounts of time hire some lawyers for the purpose of keeping said songs off of YouTube, because heaven forbid someone hear your songs without paying through the nose to do so. Threatening legal action is highly effective. Then you get the Moms to spend money to go to workshops to learn the  singing of The Songs™ complete with Hand Motions™. Definitely, prohibit them from using any materials other than yours, or those sanctioned by you and your top MLM members (who also conveniently curriculum publishers!) while said Mothers are meeting in the Community™ they paid vast sums of money to enter into. This while also then slowly bringing in other curriculum publishers over the years that are *required* purchases they also can also pay to use within your MLM (joint exploitation!) and aren't allowed to buy used.

 And yes, you can have all of this income while no one actually produces any leadership or service value on your end whatsoever! Oh, and then the last step is you block anyone from your websites/forums who suggest these same mothers could do this all for FREE if they wanted, were one of them to do something so daring as buy a used Manual™ used online for $7 and then meet up with some local friends at the park of library. You should pretty much banish anyone who suggests that. Through those steps, voila. You will have a highly successful MLM, even perhaps Cult,  before you know it! At least from what I can tell where I live. Maybe start in Texas. 

 

Expect a cease and desist letter in your mailbox tomorrow...👩‍💼 Does that emoji look like a lawyer? She's supposed to be a lawyer.

[8filltheheart]

32 minutes ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

I think I have this figured out with a plan- after all, imitation is the sincerest form flattery, right?! 

The secret to success appears to be appealing to the insecurities of a bunch of homeschool moms, telling them they can't do it alone,  and then getting them to pay you vast sums of money (which a large percentage struggle to afford)  to let them all join together in a Community™ (make sure you get that ™!)  with equally insecure mothers on a weekly basis so they can be insecure together, and make them also do all the work of reserving the space, planning the meetings, collecting the dues due to you, providing the materials, and doing the actual teachings.

It will also be advantageous if you make up some catchy songs, yet spend vast amounts of time hire some lawyers for the purpose of keeping said songs off of YouTube, because heaven forbid someone hear your songs without paying through the nose to do so. Threatening legal action is highly effective. Then you get the Moms to spend money to go to workshops to learn the  singing of The Songs™ complete with Hand Motions™. Definitely, prohibit them from using any materials other than yours, or those sanctioned by you and your top MLM members (who also conveniently curriculum publishers!) while said Mothers are meeting in the Community™ they paid vast sums of money to enter into. This while also then slowly bringing in other curriculum publishers over the years that are *required* purchases they also can also pay to use within your MLM (joint exploitation!) and aren't allowed to buy used.

 And yes, you can have all of this income while no one actually produces any leadership or service value on your end whatsoever! Oh, and then the last step is you block anyone from your websites/forums who suggest these same mothers could do this all for FREE if they wanted, were one of them to do something so daring as buy a used Manual™ online for $7 and then meet up with some local friends at the park or library. You should pretty much banish anyone who suggests that. Through those steps, voila. You will have a highly successful MLM, even perhaps Cult,  before you know it! At least from what I can tell where I live. Maybe start in Texas. 

ETA- If you can get a Cooking Magnate to also endorse your MLM on her blog for several years, that also seems to ensure further success. 😁

Yep. Telling moms they can do this doesnt pay nearly as well bc you destroy the purchasing base.

[El...]

2 hours ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

I think I have this figured out with a plan- after all, imitation is the sincerest form flattery, right?! 

The secret to success appears to be appealing to the insecurities of a bunch of homeschool moms, telling them they can't do it alone,  and then getting them to pay you vast sums of money (which a large percentage struggle to afford)  to let them all join together in a Community™ (make sure you get that ™!)  with equally insecure mothers on a weekly basis so they can be insecure together, and make them also do all the work of reserving the space, planning the meetings, collecting the dues due to you, providing the materials, and doing the actual teachings.

It will also be advantageous if you make up some catchy songs, yet spend vast amounts of time hire some lawyers for the purpose of keeping said songs off of YouTube, because heaven forbid someone hear your songs without paying through the nose to do so. Threatening legal action is highly effective. Then you get the Moms to spend money to go to workshops to learn the  singing of The Songs™ complete with Hand Motions™. Definitely, prohibit them from using any materials other than yours, or those sanctioned by you and your top MLM members (who also conveniently curriculum publishers!) while said Mothers are meeting in the Community™ they paid vast sums of money to enter into. This while also then slowly bringing in other curriculum publishers over the years that are *required* purchases they also can also pay to use within your MLM (joint exploitation!) and aren't allowed to buy used.

 And yes, you can have all of this income while no one actually produces any leadership or service value on your end whatsoever! Oh, and then the last step is you block anyone from your websites/forums who suggest these same mothers could do this all for FREE if they wanted, were one of them to do something so daring as buy a used Manual™ online for $7 and then meet up with some local friends at the park or library. You should pretty much banish anyone who suggests that. Through those steps, voila. You will have a highly successful MLM, even perhaps Cult,  before you know it! At least from what I can tell where I live. Maybe start in Texas. 

ETA- If you can get a Cooking Magnate to also endorse your MLM on her blog for several years, that also seems to ensure further success. 😁

This. Is. Epic. 

I have difficulty choosing between the laughing and crying responses, but I'll go with the laugh.

[ktgrok]

So, I've emailed Gather Round to ask if they at least have a list of Errata so that those who have current units can look and check and make notes of any changes/fix any mistakes in their own copy until a new version comes out. I'll let you know what they say. Such a list seems like the LEAST they could do, so that at least the crowd sourced edits would be out there rather than having people have to figure it out themselves. It seems like a standard practice to me - right? Like, generally a company will fix the errors in the next printing, but until then you use that list to note the corrections in the old text. 

Also, they are pushing out updated versions right now, with corrections made, but here is the thing - I already have printed everything. I don't want to reprint every page AGAIN if there are corrections or new stuff only on a few pages. When I asked if she could tell me what the changes were, so I'd know what pages to reprint, she said no, no list of changes, but off the top of her head she knew of two actual errors that were fixed, aside from general typos. One of the two was one I had told them about myself, lol.