Topic
Policy
Category
Topics
15 issues matching filters
Policy
- Weekly DispatchAug 17, 2026
Starting homeschool with no summer to plan it: what changes when a school placement fails, a family moves, or a crisis sets the timeline
Every guide in this dispatch so far has assumed a family with a clean runway, a decision reached over the spring, a summer to research curriculum and set up a room, and a first day in late August that the last two issues could treat as the actual beginning. Most families who homeschool arrive that way. Some do not. A school placement fails in October, a family relocates with two weeks of notice, or a crisis pulls a child out of a classroom on a Tuesday with no plan behind it, and that household is not late to the routine the last two issues described, it is solving a different problem. The state paperwork has to be filed correctly on the first attempt because there is no summer left to redo it. The curriculum has to be assembled from what a family can get its hands on this week, not what arrives by mail in six. And the child who just left school under duress usually needs more time to settle than any family in this position has time to give. This issue takes that family on its own terms instead of squeezing the September plan around it. Plus the policy dispatch, as the federal tax credit North Carolina joined moves a step closer to naming its approved organizations, more states have joined the program than the count in January reflected, and North Carolina's extended ESA+ families reach their acceptance deadline the same week this issue publishes.
The first sixteen issues of this dispatch have assumed, without saying so, a family that got to choose when its homeschool year began. That assumption produced clean arguments about routines and multi-age mornings, and it also quietly excluded a large and specific group: families who did not choose their start date at all. A school placement collapses in October. A move lands a family somewhere new with two weeks of notice and a child who has to be somewhere on a Monday. A crisis, a medical leave, a custody change, an expulsion, removes a child from a classroom with no plan behind it. None of these households get a summer to compare curriculum, build a school room, or ease into the decision, and the standard advice this dispatch has already given, buy less than expected, take a month per year of school to decompress, start the record on day one, was written with time this family does not have. This issue takes the compressed-timeline start on its own terms. It begins with the piece that is not optional and not academic: North Carolina requires a Notice of Intent filed with the Division of Non-Public Education before a child is withdrawn from an enrolled school and before home instruction begins, and DNPE's own guidance is explicit that a family should not withdraw a child or start teaching until it has received written acknowledgment that the notice was received, a sequencing gap that can run several business days and that a family already living inside a crisis frequently discovers only after acting out of order. It then addresses what actually changes about the teaching itself: no research runway means the safest first move is fewer subjects run from whatever is already at hand instead of a curriculum ordered and waited for, and a child arriving mid-crisis usually needs the decompression period this site has recommended elsewhere even though the family has the least slack to give it, a genuine tension this issue names instead of resolving with false reassurance. It closes with a plain list of what a first week in this situation needs and what can wait a month without cost. Plus the policy dispatch, covering the status of North Carolina's list of approved scholarship-granting organizations under the federal tax credit, an opt-in count that has grown since the 23-state figure this dispatch cited in January, and the August 17, 2026 deadline for North Carolina's extended ESA+ families, which lands on the date this issue publishes with no outcome yet on the record.
Mid Year Start·Crisis Homeschooling·Notice Of Intent·Dnpe·North Carolina·Deschooling - Weekly DispatchAug 10, 2026
The second child is a different problem than the first: what actually combines across ages and what a family is really solving when it adds a sibling to the school day
A family running one child has been able to give that child near-continuous attention, and the arrival of school-age sibling number two does not just add work, it removes the thing the first year was built on. The routine established over the last two issues has to survive a constraint it never faced, which is that only one child can have the parent at a time. The fix is not more hours or more enthusiasm. It is sorting subjects into what genuinely combines across grade levels and what cannot, then staggering the individual attention so each child gets a real turn instead of a diluted one. Plus the policy dispatch as North Carolina's extended ESA+ offers hit a hard deadline and the federal scholarship tax credit North Carolina opted into moves a step closer to its 2027 start.
The last two issues built a first year, then a first two weeks, for a household that was, mostly for the sake of a clean argument, teaching one school-age child. The simplification was useful and it is now due for correction, because most homeschools are teaching more than one child within a few years of starting, and the routine that survived the opening fortnight has not yet been tested against the constraint that actually reshapes a homeschool day: a parent can give direct, undivided instruction to exactly one child at a time. A family with one child never has to solve this. A family with two does, immediately, and the common first response, running the older child's lessons and then the younger child's lessons back to back, produces a day long enough that neither child gets the parent at full attention and the household abandons the routine within weeks. This issue sets out the alternative most large homeschool families converge on independently, refined and popularized under names like Morning Time or the morning basket, which rests on a single sorting decision. Content subjects, meaning history, science, Bible, literature read-alouds, art, and nature study, are taught to every age in the room at once; the response scales to the child instead of the material being duplicated per child, and the practice traces to the Charlotte Mason tradition of shared living-book readings and narration, popularized in its current form by Pam Barnhill's Morning Time materials. Skill subjects, meaning math, reading instruction, spelling, and formal writing, build in a strict sequence and cannot be combined without shortchanging one child or the other, so they stay individual and get delivered in a staggered rotation, one child receiving direct instruction while the others do independent or supervised-adjacent work, typically starting with the child who needs the most support and finishing with the child who needs the least. The issue is direct about what this system does not solve. It does not restore the undivided attention a single child had, and pretending otherwise sets a family up to feel like it is failing at something that was never actually available to it once a second child arrived. What the system delivers instead is a real, focused block for each child every day, content that is taught once instead of twice, and an older child's growing independence that becomes the mechanism freeing the parent for the younger one. The under-five child who is too young for lessons but old enough to disrupt them gets a separate, specific answer: rotation and novelty in a reserved set of activities, not an attempt to fold the toddler into instruction meant for older children. Several publishers, including Sonlight, My Father's World, Tapestry of Grace, and Ambleside Online, build their programs around the combine-content principle directly, supplying a single family-wide content plan with leveled assignments layered on so a family does not have to design the combination itself. Plus the policy dispatch, covering the August 17, 2026 deadline for North Carolina families to accept extended ESA+ award offers and the mechanics of the federal education tax credit North Carolina joined via the legislature's override of a governor's veto, ahead of the credit's January 2027 start for taxpayer contributions.
Multiple Ages·Large Family·Morning Basket·Sibling·Homeschool Day·Independent Work - Weekly DispatchAug 3, 2026
The first two weeks: what a new homeschool should actually attempt before it tries to cover anything
A family that has chosen the curriculum, built the day, learned to read progress, selected its outside resources, and worked out what to do when a child refuses now faces the part none of that prepares it for, which is starting. The common instinct is to open on day one at the pace the family intends to hold in March, and that instinct is responsible for a large share of the collapses that arrive three weeks later. The first two weeks are not for covering material. They are for installing a routine that a family can repeat on a bad morning, and the schedule that survives that test is almost always shorter than the one written in July. Plus the policy dispatch as North Carolina extends its ESA+ offers and the Texas funding calendar turns out to work differently for homeschoolers than for private school families.
The last five issues built a working early-grades year and then addressed what to do when it meets a child who will not participate, which completes the planning and leaves the execution untouched. This issue takes up the first two weeks of an actual homeschool year and argues that they serve a different purpose than the rest of it. The failure this addresses is specific and common. A family that has prepared carefully arrives at day one with a full schedule and the intention to run it, and the preparation itself is what makes the full-speed start tempting, since the materials are bought and the timetable is written and holding back feels like waste. What that start ignores is how much is genuinely new at once. The hour is new, the working space is new, the books are unfamiliar, the relationship between parent and child inside a lesson is a role neither has occupied before, and the transitions between subjects have never been performed, which matters because transitions rather than lessons are where a young child's morning is actually consumed. A schedule that assumes every one of those works on first attempt will fail, and the family will usually misattribute the failure to the curriculum or to the child instead of to the schedule that was never tested. The issue proposes a different measure for the opening fortnight. The question at the end of two weeks is not how much was covered but whether the routine repeats without force, whether day eleven resembles day three, and a family that can answer yes has built something a bad morning cannot dismantle. The practical shape that follows is a first week considerably shorter than the target, limited to one or two subjects, anchored by a fixed start time treated as the only non-negotiable element, with explicit attention paid to the transitions between activities. Week two adds a single element at a time, which preserves the diagnostic value of the exercise, since a routine that breaks after one addition identifies its own cause while a routine that absorbs five changes at once identifies nothing. The issue then works through the four failures that surface earliest: a parent's uncalibrated sense of what a sufficient day looks like, drawn from a school model that spends most of its hours on logistics a home does not have; the younger sibling whose needs were never given a place in the schedule; a timetable with no margin, which converts any ordinary interruption into a lost morning and then into evidence of failure; and materials that live somewhere other than where the lesson happens, which quietly adds minutes to every transition. Families arriving directly from public school are treated separately, because their first two weeks are less about starting a routine than about ending one, and the adjustment period they need is real and is not idleness. The issue also notes the obligations that begin on day one whatever the academic load, since attendance and record-keeping requirements are set by state law, vary substantially, and cannot be reconstructed after the fact. Plus the policy dispatch, covering North Carolina's extension of 2026-27 ESA+ award offers on a three-week acceptance clock following the July state budget, and the Texas Education Freedom Account distribution calendar, which pays homeschool and other non-private-school accounts in full at the start of the year while reserving the installment schedule for private school awards.
Getting Started·First Week·Homeschool Day·Routines·New Homeschoolers·Deschooling - Weekly DispatchJul 27, 2026
The day the child will not do the work: telling ordinary resistance from a signal worth acting on in a K-3 homeschool
The curriculum is chosen, the day is built, the progress is readable, and the additions around the core are settled, which is a complete early-grades year on paper and no protection at all against the morning a six-year-old refuses to open the math book. Every homeschool meets this and no curriculum prevents it, because resistance is not a curriculum problem in most cases and is a serious one in a few. This issue separates the ordinary friction that every young child produces from the smaller set of signals that indicate something structural, gives the order in which a family should change things so it does not throw out a working program over a bad fortnight, and names the point at which the right move is an outside opinion. Plus the policy dispatch as the Texas accounts are funded on a calendar that works differently for homeschool families than for private school families.
The prior four issues built a complete early-grades year, the curriculum selected against a family's actual constraints, the day assembled around a young child's working attention, the progress read by watching the child work without a school's testing machinery, and the enrichment resources around the core chosen on whether they serve the child instead of the parent's fear of doing too little. That is a full picture of a functioning K-3 homeschool and it offers no defense whatsoever against the morning the plan meets a child who will not participate in it, which is the situation this issue takes up. The refusal is close to universal and it is heaviest in the first year and the youngest grades, and the most common mistake a family makes in response is to treat it as evidence that the curriculum was wrong, because the curriculum is the visible, purchasable, swappable thing and changing it feels like action. In most K-3 cases the curriculum is not the problem. The issue works through the ordinary causes in the order a family should test them. The work may be genuinely too hard, which is a placement problem and not a program problem, and the fix is to move down a level inside the curriculum the family already owns. The work may be too easy, which produces a resistance that looks identical from the outside and requires the opposite correction. The timing may be wrong, because a young child has a narrow window of real working attention and a lesson scheduled outside it will fail regardless of its quality. The child may not be developmentally ready for a skill the scope-and-sequence assigned to that grade, particularly in handwriting and formal reading, where the ordinary range of readiness spans years and a standard sequence describes an average child who does not exist. The remedies for all four are cheap, and the issue argues for a strict order of operations, adjusting time and length first, then the mode of the lesson, then the placement level, and only then the curriculum itself, on the reasoning that a family which reverses that order spends hundreds of dollars solving a problem that a different hour would have solved for free. The issue then addresses the cause families find hardest to examine, which is that a meaningful share of resistance originates on the adult's side of the table, transmitted through a parent who is tense about being behind, and the issue treats that as a diagnosis and not an accusation. Finally it separates out the pattern that is not ordinary friction, the resistance that attaches to one specific skill while the rest of the day goes fine, that persists across every change the family makes, that comes with physical distress or avoidance out of proportion to the task, or that accompanies a gap which does not close over months of consistent work, and it names that as the point where the correct next step is an evaluation, past which further schedule tinkering is only delay. Plus the policy dispatch as the first Texas Education Freedom Account distributions land, with homeschool and other non-private-school accounts paid in full on July 1 and private school accounts moving toward an October installment.
Resistance·Reluctant Learner·K 3·Elementary·Homeschool Day·Learning Differences - Weekly DispatchJul 20, 2026
Beyond the curriculum: which of the library, the co-op, the outside class, and the online supplement add to a K-3 homeschool, and which only add to the schedule
The curriculum is chosen, the day is assembled, and the family can read whether it is working, which finishes the core of the early-grades year and opens the question of what to add around it. Four resources present themselves to every new family, the public library, the co-op, the outside class, and the online supplement, and each is sold as enrichment while each also carries a cost in time, money, and attention that the core program has first claim on. This issue takes the four in turn, names what each one genuinely adds to a K-3 home and what it mostly adds to the calendar, and gives the test a family can apply before saying yes: does the resource serve the curriculum and the child, or does it serve the family's worry that it is not doing enough. Plus the policy dispatch as the first Texas purchasing cycle closes.
The prior three issues assembled the core of the early-grades year, the curriculum chosen, the day built, and the progress read through observation rather than a school's testing machinery, and this issue turns to the resources a family adds around that core. Four of them arrive at every new homeschool and ask for a place in the week, the public library, the local co-op, the outside class, and the online or app-based supplement, and each is presented as enrichment while each also draws on the time, money, and attention the core program has the first claim on, so the family's real task is not whether each resource is good in the abstract but whether it earns its cost against the core. The library is the exception that is almost pure benefit, effectively free, deep, and directly useful to the early-reading years, and the issue treats it as the backbone of a K-3 reading life rather than a weekly errand, describing how a running relationship with a good library does more for early reading than most paid programs and how to build the habit that makes it work. The co-op is the resource most oversold and most variable, genuinely valuable when it teaches a subject well or supplies a lab or a discussion a single family cannot, and mostly a scheduling commitment dressed as instruction when it is really a weekly social gathering, and the issue helps a family tell which co-op it is actually joining before it commits a morning a week to it. The outside class, the instrument, the sport, the art or dance class, adds a genuine skill the parent may not be equipped to teach and a fixed external commitment the rest of the week must arrange itself around, and the issue gives the plain arithmetic of how many fixed commitments a K-3 week can absorb before the core lessons start losing the mornings they need, which is a smaller number than an eager family expects. The online supplement and the educational app are where the most marketing money and the least evidence meet, sold as adaptive personalized learning and frequently working as a screen that keeps a child busy while teaching and measuring far less than the interface implies, and the issue distinguishes the few tools that do a defined job well, a math-facts drill, a typing program, a single well-built reading app, from the many that occupy time without advancing the child. Running under all four resources is one test the issue makes concrete and repeatable: a family should add a resource when it serves the child and the curriculum, a skill the parent cannot supply, a book the home cannot hold, a discussion the family of one cannot have, and should decline it when it mainly serves the parent's fear of not doing enough, because that fear will fill an unlimited calendar and the early grades are the years when a crowded calendar does the most harm. Plus the policy dispatch, which carries the close of the first Texas Education Freedom Account purchasing cycle and what the opening cycle revealed about how families actually spend the accounts.
Enrichment·Library·Co Op·Extracurriculars·Online Learning·Educational Apps - Weekly DispatchJul 13, 2026
Assessment in the early grades: how to know a K-3 homeschool is working without importing the apparatus of a school
The curriculum is chosen and the day is assembled, which leaves the question that arrives once a family is actually teaching: is it working. The early grades answer that question differently than a school does, because a parent teaching one to three children sees the evidence directly and does not need the testing machinery a classroom uses to see thirty children at once. This issue describes what progress actually looks like in kindergarten through third grade, the light records worth keeping and the ones a state may require, and the placement and readiness checks that tell a parent whether to move a child up, hold, or adjust. Plus the policy dispatch and the first full purchasing cycle on the Texas accounts.
The prior issue assembled the K-3 day, and this issue takes the question that arrives once a family is teaching it, which is how to know the early grades are working. The answer begins by setting aside the instrument most families arriving from a school reach for first. A classroom assesses constantly through quizzes, unit tests, and standardized batteries because a single teacher cannot otherwise track thirty children individually, and that machinery is a solution to a problem a home does not have. A parent teaching one to three children sees each child directly and daily, hears the reading lesson, watches the math worked, reads the writing as it is produced, and therefore knows where each child stands without a formal test. Assessment in the early grades is mostly disciplined observation, and the issue describes what progress actually looks like, the reading that moves from sounding out to fluency over the K-2 span, the math facts that shift from counted to automatic, the handwriting that becomes legible and the sentences that lengthen. The formal checks worth running are few and purposeful, a periodic reading-fluency read, an occasional math-facts check, a placement test when a program offers one, used to answer a real question rather than to generate a grade. The records worth keeping are correspondingly light, a running list of finished books, a dated folder of work samples that shows growth across the year, a simple log of what was covered, and on top of that whatever the family's own state specifically requires, which ranges from no records at all to annual standardized testing or portfolio review depending on the jurisdiction and must be checked against the state's own rules. The assessment that genuinely earns its place is placement, the decision to advance a child to the next level, hold at the current one, or adjust the pace, and the issue gives the concrete readiness signals that answer it for reading and for math. The failure mode named plainly is the family that imports the school's constant-testing apparatus into a home that does not need it, subjecting a young child who is visibly learning to quizzes that measure what the parent can already see and teaching the child that assessment is the point. Plus the policy dispatch, which carries continued reporting on the Texas Education Freedom Accounts as the first full purchasing cycle unfolds and the record-keeping the accounts themselves require of participating families.
Assessment·Record Keeping·K 3·Elementary·Placement·Reading Fluency - Weekly DispatchJul 6, 2026
The K-3 homeschool day: how little time the early grades actually take, and how to fit more than one child into a morning
The curriculum question is answered. The question that replaces it is how to put it together into a day, and the honest first fact is that K-3 takes far fewer hours than newcomers fear. The core fits in a morning, the skill subjects fit in the margins, and a family with more than one young child does not run two schools in parallel but combines what it can and staggers what it cannot. Plus the policy dispatch: the first reporting on how Texas families are actually spending the accounts that funded July 1, and where the early purchases are landing.
The K-3 curriculum coverage that ran from issue 03 through the skill subjects of issue 10 is complete, which moves the question from what to teach to how to assemble it into a day. The issue opens on the fact that most reassures and most surprises new families, which is that the early-grades homeschool day is short. A classroom spends much of its six hours on transitions, lines, attendance, and the management of twenty-five children, none of which a home with one adult and a few students pays, so the actual seated academic work of kindergarten through third grade fits inside a morning and often inside ninety minutes to two hours. The core, the daily reading lesson, the math lesson, and a read-aloud, is the spine of the morning, and the skill subjects from issue 10, handwriting in ten minutes, spelling in fifteen, an occasional song-based language session, fit into the margins rather than demanding blocks of their own. The structural problem the issue spends its length on is the family with more than one young child, where the workable model is to combine the subjects that combine across ages, the read-aloud, history, science, art, nature study, taught to all the children together at the oldest child's level with the younger ones absorbing what they can, and to stagger the subjects that are irreducibly one-on-one, the phonics lesson and the math lesson that each child needs alone while a sibling does independent work or plays. The issue describes loop scheduling as the technique that keeps the lower-priority subjects from being perpetually crowded out, names the planners and the morning-time approach that hold up in practice, and states the dominant failure mode directly: the family that imports the six-hour school day into the home overschedules, exhausts the children and the parent, and quits in the fall, when the early grades never required those hours in the first place. Plus the policy dispatch, which carries the first reporting on how Texas Education Freedom Account families are spending the funds disbursed July 1, the categories the early purchases are clustering in, and the marketplace mechanics families are encountering in practice.
Scheduling·Homeschool Day·Loop Scheduling·Multiple Children·Morning Time·Elementary - Curriculum ReviewJun 29, 2026
The K-3 skill subjects: handwriting, spelling, and the foreign-language question most families answer too early
The core stack is decided, and what is left is the ring of skill subjects around it. Handwriting splits between the two letter styles that drive every program. Spelling splits between the families that teach rules and the families that argue a separate spelling course is unnecessary in the early grades. Foreign language is not a program choice at all in K-3 but a timing question, and the honest answer for most families is later than the marketing implies. Plus the Texas ESA disbursement that landed July 1, and which of these subjects an account will actually reimburse.
Issue 09 finished the K-3 core with history and geography, which leaves the skill subjects that sit around the core: handwriting, spelling, and foreign language. These reward less deliberation than reading or math did, and the issue says so. Handwriting comes down to two decisions: which letter style the family wants, and the program that teaches it. The two reference points are Handwriting Without Tears, now published as Learning Without Tears, with its vertical manuscript and developmental, manipulative-driven approach, and Zaner-Bloser, the traditional vertical manuscript that most school-style programs inherit, with D'Nealian as the slanted alternative that eases the transition to cursive. Spelling splits differently, between the rules-based, Orton-Gillingham programs led by All About Spelling and the position that a dedicated spelling course is unnecessary in the early grades when a strong phonics reading program is already teaching the patterns. Spelling You See and the spelling strand inside Logic of English are graded as the other two common answers. Foreign language is treated not as a program choice but as a timing question, because it is the K-3 subject families most often begin too early, on too little time, and abandon. The issue argues that the only early-grades foreign-language instruction that survives is the low-stakes, song-based kind, with Song School Latin and Song School Spanish as the representative gentle entry, and that a family short on hours should spend them on the core and defer formal language. Each program is graded on the same rubric the core issues used, with the same caveat that the rubric measures execution and not fit. Plus the policy dispatch: the Texas Education Freedom Account program made its first disbursement to homeschool accounts on July 1, the recipient count for 2026-2027 grew to nearly 96,000 students, and the marketplace rules determine which of these skill subjects an account will actually reimburse.
Curriculum Review·Handwriting·Spelling·Foreign Language·Handwriting Without Tears·All About Spelling - Curriculum ReviewJun 22, 2026
The K-3 history and geography landscape: chronological-narrative, literature-based, and worldview-explicit programs, and the question each one answers
Nine elementary history programs across three families that disagree about what early history is. Story of the World and Mystery of History run the chronological narrative. BookShark, Build Your Library, Beautiful Feet, and Torchlight teach it through living books. Notgrass and My Father's World make the worldview the spine, with the secular-to-Christian range running through all three. Plus where K-3 geography actually lives, the Texas ESA July disbursement, and the dispatch.
Issue 08 covered the K-3 science landscape and made the point that the programs are not interchangeable because they answer different questions. History in the K-3 band has the same structure and one extra wrinkle, because history is where worldview is least hidden. The programs split into three families. The chronological-narrative tradition, led by Story of the World and joined on the Christian side by Mystery of History, runs history as a single four-year story from the ancients to the modern age. The literature-based tradition, BookShark and Build Your Library on the secular side and Beautiful Feet on the Charlotte Mason Christian side, teaches history through living books and narration the same way the family's reading already works, with Torchlight and its Curiosity Chronicles spine as the secular literature-rich all-in-one. The worldview-explicit tradition, Notgrass and My Father's World, makes the frame the spine rather than a footnote, typically American-first and Christian. Each is graded against the same rubric Every Homeschool uses, with the same caveat the art and science issues carried: the rubric total is the wrong number to choose on, because the programs are built for different jobs. K-3 geography is handled as the secondary subject it usually is at this age, mostly map work embedded in the history program rather than a separate course. Plus the Texas ESA July 1 disbursement to homeschool accounts, the national school-choice tracker update, and the weekly policy dispatch on which programs an ESA will actually reimburse.
Curriculum Review·History Curriculum·Geography·Story Of The World·Mystery Of History·Bookshark - Curriculum ReviewJun 15, 2026
The K-3 science landscape: kit-driven, literature-based, and worldview-explicit programs, and the question each one answers
Eight elementary science programs across three families that take three different positions on what early science is. Mystery Science and Generation Genius on video, BookShark and Sassafras through literature, Apologia and Berean Builders from an explicit Christian frame, with REAL Science Odyssey and the Charlotte Mason nature-study tradition between them. Plus the Texas launch timeline, the Tennessee award amount, and the dispatch.
Issue 07 covered the K-3 art and music landscape and made the point that art programs are not interchangeable because they answer different questions. Science in the K-3 band has the same structure, with higher stakes, because more families treat science as a subject the child must not fall behind in. The programs split into three families. The kit-driven and video courses, led by Mystery Science and Generation Genius, treat early science as engagement and exposure delivered on a low-prep format. The literature-based traditions, BookShark and Sassafras Science, treat it as reading and narration in the same way the family's history and reading already work. The worldview-explicit programs, Apologia's Exploring Creation series and Berean Builders on the Christian side, make the frame the point rather than a footnote. REAL Science Odyssey sits as the secular hands-on option that is neither video nor literature, and the Charlotte Mason nature-study tradition, through Exploring Nature With Children and Sabbath Mood Homeschool, defers formal science entirely in favor of observation. Each is graded against the same rubric Every Homeschool uses, with the same caveat as the art issue: the rubric total is the wrong number to choose on, because the programs are built for different jobs. Plus the Texas ESA launch timeline, the Tennessee award amount, the Arizona fraud-tracking move, and the weekly policy dispatch.
Curriculum Review·Science Curriculum·Mystery Science·Generation Genius·Apologia·Bookshark - Curriculum ReviewJun 8, 2026
The K-3 art and music landscape: Meet the Masters, Atelier, Charlotte Mason picture study, and Hoffman Academy for piano
Three art programs graded on the same rubric, plus the one piano program that anchors the music side. What a once-a-month subscription, a self-paced studio course, and a free narration tradition each do well, and where Hoffman Academy fits for families adding music. Plus the Texas final ESA rules, the Tennessee universal launch, and the dispatch.
Issue 06 covered Math-U-See versus Saxon Math K-3, the two heritage scripted math programs. Issue 07 turns to the corner of the K-3 stack that families add last and ask about least confidently: art and music. The art conversation runs through three programs that take three different positions on what elementary art instruction is for. Meet the Masters treats it as a once-a-month art-history-plus-project subscription. Atelier treats it as a sequential, self-paced studio course in technique. The Charlotte Mason picture-study tradition, available free through AmblesideOnline, treats it as observation and narration rather than production at all. The three are graded on the rubric Every Homeschool uses, with the caveat that they are not strictly interchangeable because they answer different questions. The music side is anchored by Hoffman Academy, the online piano program with a free tier and a paid premium track, covered on its own terms rather than forced onto the art rubric. Plus the Texas Comptroller's final ESA rules, the Tennessee universal ESA program, and the weekly policy dispatch.
Curriculum Review·Art Curriculum·Music Curriculum·Meet The Masters·Atelier·Charlotte Mason - Curriculum ReviewJun 1, 2026
Math-U-See vs. Saxon Math K-3, and the Texas ESA first-wave enrollment numbers
Two heritage homeschool math programs, graded on the same rubric. Plus the Texas Comptroller's first-wave enrollment report for SB 2 ESA, the South Carolina ESA reauthorization vote, and the dispatch.
Issue 03 covered Singapore Math Dimensions versus RightStart Mathematics, the two strongest mastery-with-conceptual-depth programs. Issue 05 covered All About Reading versus Logic of English Foundations, the two strongest phonics programs. Issue 06 covers the two heritage scripted math programs that elementary homeschool families have used for two decades: Math-U-See from Demme Learning and Saxon Math K through 3 from Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Both spiral, both scripted, both available used at scale. Both produce strong arithmetic outcomes on the standardized-test metrics that homeschool co-ops report. They are not interchangeable, and the differences are bigger than the front cover suggests. Plus: the Texas Comptroller's first-wave SB 2 enrollment report covering March through May 2026, the South Carolina ESA reauthorization Senate vote, and the weekly policy dispatch.
Curriculum Review·Math U See·Saxon Math·Elementary Math·K 3 Math·Texas - Curriculum ReviewMay 25, 2026
All About Reading vs. Logic of English, and the Tennessee ESA is signed
The two strongest scripted phonics programs, graded on the same rubric. Plus Governor Lee's signature on SB 0503, the ALEKS-versus-Khan Academy adaptive-math read, and the Step Up third-wave window.
Issue 04 paired Brave Writer and the Institute for Excellence in Writing on the same rubric and reported the Tennessee SB 0503 House outcome. Issue 05 covers the elementary reading-and-phonics decision tree: All About Reading from All About Learning Press against Logic of English Foundations, graded across the rubric's eight criteria. Plus Governor Lee's signature on SB 0503 and the implementation timeline; a head-to-head of ALEKS and Khan Academy for self-paced math, especially in grades 4 through 8; the Florida Step Up third-wave waitlist read; and the dispatch.
Curriculum Review·All About Reading·Logic Of English·Phonics·Tennessee·ESA - Curriculum ReviewMay 18, 2026
Brave Writer vs. IEW, and the Tennessee ESA lands on the governor's desk
The two strongest elementary-to-middle writing programs, graded against the same rubric. Plus the Tennessee SB 0503 House outcome, the multi-tool AI-tutor read for homeschool families, and the Florida second-wave waitlist clearance.
Issue 03 paired Singapore Math Dimensions and RightStart on the same rubric. Issue 04 does the same for the two most-discussed writing programs in the homeschool market. Brave Writer and the Institute for Excellence in Writing, across grades 3 to 8. Plus: the Tennessee SB 0503 House floor vote outcome and the path to Governor Lee's desk; a multi-tool comparison of the free-tier AI tutoring options homeschool families are actually using (Khanmigo, MagicSchool, Curipod); the second wave of Florida Step Up waitlist clearances; and the dispatch.
Curriculum Review·Brave Writer·Iew·Writing Curriculum·Tennessee·ESA - Curriculum ReviewMay 11, 2026
Singapore Math Dimensions vs. RightStart Mathematics
Plus Tennessee's ESA floor vote, the Khanmigo free-tier early returns, and what the Florida waitlist movement actually means.
The promised second curriculum review: Singapore Math Dimensions K-5 against RightStart Mathematics Levels A-E, the two most-used conceptually rigorous elementary math programs. Tennessee SB 0503 cleared the floor and the bill moves to Governor Lee. Two weeks of Khanmigo free-tier data from homeschool families. Florida's Step Up waitlist begins moving, what it means and what it doesn't.
Curriculum Review·Singapore Math·Rightstart Mathematics·Math Curriculum·Tennessee·ESA