We Can Do by Moshe Kai with guest Robert Levy discussing Saxon Math.

[Jenene]

Sorry, Robert wasn't saying that you were implying anyone was unschooling    Just wondering if anyone considers themselves an unschooler here as I would consider brillkids and unschooling mutually exclusive.

[Robert Levy]

No prob...we're on the same page.  I agree, mutually exclusive.

[Tamsyn]

Wow, I guess I need to get cracking with the math.   

I have been talking with my husband a lot about this and what we think is an appropriate amount of math, and WHY we want it to be a priority.  Ultimately I think that the reason that math is so important is because it is a language in and of itself.  Children learn and internalize languages better than adults.  I agree with Robert on the importance of doing it early and I appreciate the motivation.

I'm not going to push for 20 hours a week though, I'm going to push for 10 hours or 5 lessons, and would be very pleased to accomplish that.  I apologize if it makes anyone's skin crawl (  ), but I hold music in the same level as math in importance in my family.  I'm taking the strong emphasis with a grain of salt because there are many mathematicians in the Levy family, so naturally that's what is important to you.  Music is important to me, and like math, it is a language best learned in childhood.  My peers with the best scholarships were the ones who put in the hours during childhood.  An adult would never be able to catch up.  If a family's dream is to see their child compete in the Olympics, that opportunity comes only once.  I guess I'm just raising my hand to say that I don't think it's inherently wrong for a family to have other priorities, and we don't all need to become math experts.  (Brace for impact, Tamsyn.  )  Still, after this thread, I'm going to give it my best shot! 

On self-correcting.  It worked for me.  I corrected my own work and did very well.  It didn't work for my brother after me.  He cheated and he has paid dearly for it.  It's sad because he really regrets it now and can't change the past.  My mom feels bad that she didn't catch it sooner.  In my home we skipped the evens, so he didn't do math at all for almost a year.  After that she tore out the answers and now my siblings do the work and they get to self correct even-numbered lessons and she corrects odd ones, or something like that.  None of us are math-whizzes, but it worked for us.  My mom has 10 kids and was never pushing for whizzes, and as mentioned, time is a big issue for her.  When you have a lot of children you have to find a give and take.  Luckily children learn a lot from each other.

[Mandabplus3]

Tamsyn, 5 lessons a week is a perfectly reasonable goal. Completely achievable too. We manage it most weeks. ( didn't manage it during the school holidays while I was working but mostly we do) 5 lessons a week year round ( no long summer breaks) gets you 260 lessons a year! There are only 120 lessons in each book. After the first book you don't need to do the first 40 lessons ( they are summer break revision!) so at your SLOW pace you will finish 2 books per year and still have a spare 60 days!
As the levels go up and get harder you may struggle to do a lesson in 2 hours but hey you have 60 days spare to catch up! You will zoom through it! 
I understand your stance on music. I won't let my kids quit their music yet either ( not that they would let me!) it's a valuable life long skill just like math. It may not make them rich ( unless they choose that musical life path) but it will. Make them interesting and entertaining people to socialise with and that is a valuable thing in itself.
My oldest does Gymnastics because she is that good it would be wrong to stop her, my younger girl is very good but does it for the joy it brings her mostly. I can see my oldest perusing Gymnastics as a life long career so it is pretty important to our family. I still see no reason she can't do both. Be awesome at math and awesome at gym and play piano! It all comes down to time management. Usually MINE
Your children should be able to follow their dreams and still. Be super successful in both math and reading. You know we can have our cake and eat it too! 

[lzp11]

I have been 'lurking' and following this thread with great interest since the beginning.  Thank you Robert for all your insights.  One of the main impacts on me has been to make me better able to understand the need to prioritize maths and make choices about future education. I am based in the UK so don't follow all of the discussions about US curriculae though.

I was really interested to read of the 20 hours a week that you devoted to maths.  This makes a lot of sense to me following the 10,000 hours to reach expertise rule from many different sources, which would suggest that at this rate it would take about 10 years to become an expert in maths - it sounds like that roughly is a  match for your journey?  Would you agree?

I'm interested on your take on other curriculae that are available.  It strikes me that 10,000 hours on any half decent curriculum in maths (or anything else) is likely to take most people to a pretty high level.  Do you have any opinion on approaches such as Singapore math (where they have a far higher achievement in math across the whole population compared to most other countries) or Rightstart, for example?  I can see that Saxon has worked fantastically well for you, so I understand why you would advocate this as one of the best routes to follow.  I'm wondering if it is a less good fit for some children, whether you see it as a stand alone choice or one of many possible good options. 

I like the way that you raise these issues so clearly and eloquently.  My oldest is 3.8 years and not quite ready for following a formal curriculum although we do a lot of preparation and maths development work using various materials including different types of abacus.  Like you as she gets older I will be afterschooling her and I can see that the reality is that there is limited time to do music, sport, maths, reading, languages etc etc.  So there are some hard choices to be made.  Like Manda and Tamsyn, I also place value on some non-maths subjects (music in particular) and sport / exercise is to me an essential part of a healthy lifestyle.  So I think we will struggle to find 20 hours for math (I hear you sigh and shake your head disapprovingly  !!!).  I do have a rationale though.  Many careers also place a high value on a range of skills and expertise and I would like to equip my children to have both academic, communication, leadership and other skills for their future lives. For example, in my field (medicine) it is essential to have a very broad range of these and to be able to demonstrate them on a CV for admission to university as well as the requisite academic requirements. 

However, where we can hopefully agree is that maths is super-important to focus on, starting from early in the child's education, and that if we are to choose academic subjects to pay attention to, then this is the big area to go for.  This is the one message I have taken from this thread.  We will aim for 10 hours.  I hope this is achievable.

I'm interested in your comment about the importance of learning to read (I agree).  Once a child can read (which does not necessarily take a long time, especially if starting early as many of us have done here), then what do you see as the next steps?  Do you mean learning to read is the process of systematically learning to decode words using phonics instruction or do you also refer to the later skills of increasing fluency in reading more complex text, fictional and non-fiction etc?

[Robert Levy]

Tamsyn,

No, I'm not here to dictate to people exactly how to raise their kids and what to do and not do.  Music bugged me, because my wife is like you, very talented (piano) and in her case badly wanted David to be good too.  And David was good at it too, piano and violin.  The only problem was that he HATED it, and we had screaming session after screaming session about it.  I was stuck in the middle, but had to support my wife.  So with David, it was just a matter of time before he hung up the violin and tried his hardest to forget it ever happened.  It also gets under my skin when people say music helps kids learn math.  Maybe it does, but with David 8 years ahead in math (when he started piano), how much more help did he need?

So you have violin and piano, then add gymnastics, girl scouts, and whatever else, not to mention actual school, and all of  a sudden the hours for Saxon are reduced and reduced.  That's my real point - I agree, you're right regarding music, if it can earn the kid a scholarship, it may well be worth the effort, and has to be started early, as you say.  But again it's priorities.  Music like sports, is very difficult to make a living in -  maybe one in a thousand reach that level (if that).  Leaning Calculus by age 15 (like Robinson's kids), almost guarantees the kid will make a good living providing his head stays on his shoulders (and provided his parents aren't idiots that shop him around to the media, and I don't see that here).  So my complaints about music are more to the effect that it's combined with a bunch of other activities and math is left out of that structure and has to be worked into available time.

As to number of Saxon hours, I guess the bottom line is you get out what you put in.  10 hours isn't bad, and will keep the kid well ahead of his grade level.  With that, the kid will not get messed up by "The System" and should do great.  Looking at Dr. Robinson, he did 12 hours a week and had Calculus completed at age 15, so it's hard to complain about that (I would estimate that David averaged around 18 hours).  But beware, if the kid is in school, after-school time becomes harder to get as he gets older.  I found that out with David, between homework and useless projects, it was getting hard for him to have enough time for his college math (during his first year in college, he was still enrolled at our Christian school and also taking math classes at our community college).

Sorry to hear that about your brother, and I forgot about ripping out the answers in the higher-level Saxon books.  Yes, I did that, and yes, I nailed him copying the answers after he 'finished' a section in 20 minutes and couldn't show me where he did the work.  David had the terrible disadvantage of having a father whose brain is wired EXACTLY the same as his - I knew everything he would think of (in the dishonest world) before he even thought of it.

[Robert Levy]

Mandabplus3,

Thanks for your posting.  I think I pretty much said it too in my prior posting (before I read yours).  I don't want to come across as saying a parent is neglectful if the kid only does 10 hours of Saxon per week, rather than 15 hours.  LOL.  As I mentioned just prior, the key is that the math is learned properly, which means not in school (at least in the US), and 10 hours a week of Saxon will assure that (probably even a bit less).  The idea being that the proper way to do math is drilled into the heads of the kids, so when the "creative" new ways of learning math, like the Lattice Method for division used in this video (and in huge numbers of schools in the country, thanks to Everyday Math) is covered in school, the kid will look at it more as a fun game to play around with numbers, but knowing inside (his head) the real way to do those problems:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/Tr1qee-bTZI&rel=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/Tr1qee-bTZI&rel=1</a>

Achieve that, and you are a hero in my book (and will be in your kids' eyes too...even if they don't appreciate it at the time), regardless of how many activities the kid does outside of school.

[Robert Levy]

Hi Lzp11,

Welcome to the discussion, as you've seen, I don't mind shooting off my mouth a bit.  Hopefully you've seen Dr. Robinson's video.  One of the most important points to get from that is to not let the schools dictate the educational schedule for your kids, simply because they've been dumbing down for decades now, but kids are not getting any dumber (i.e., the dumbing down is political, part of the child-centered trend in society).  I'll post a few comments to your posting now:
------------------------------------------------

"I have been 'lurking' and following this thread with great interest since the beginning.  Thank you Robert for all your insights.  One of the main impacts on me has been to make me better able to understand the need to prioritize maths and make choices about future education. I am based in the UK so don't follow all of the discussions about US curriculae though."

I love having people from all corners of the world on this thread (or, at least the English-speaking world).  Feel free to ask questions then.  I know from reading UK newspapers that terminology is often different over there.  But since you understand the need for math being a priority, you are where you need to be.


"I was really interested to read of the 20 hours a week that you devoted to maths.  This makes a lot of sense to me following the 10,000 hours to reach expertise rule from many different sources, which would suggest that at this rate it would take about 10 years to become an expert in maths - it sounds like that roughly is a  match for your journey?  Would you agree?"

I don't agree with the hard number, at least in math, because much of time in math is spent reviewing and testing (and doing problems slow, because of having to go back), maybe half of the time.  With David going so fast through Saxon (he covered 4 grade levels in his first year), he didn't need to review (so I skipped the early sections in each book), and I didn't need to test, because I treated every section as a test.  He would do the section, I would mark it up, and then he'd go back and fix his mistakes, every time (and every, single, problem).  Saxon's method, if used fast and thoroughly, takes care of the need for review and testing.  So with that out of the way, maybe something like a formula would work for the number of hours - something like:  Number of hours necessary = 50,000/(number of hours per week).  So if you spent 20 hours a week, you'll have it mastered in 2,500 hours, and if 10 hours a week, maybe 5,000 hours.  Something like that, but maybe not quite as steep.  I also think with Saxon, that 10,000 hours is way too long, as that would imply something like 7 hours per section for the entire series.  Now working on cars, or especially doing plumbing, or plasma physics, yes, I can see the need for 10,000 hours to be a master.


"I'm interested on your take on other curriculae that are available.  It strikes me that 10,000 hours on any half decent curriculum in maths (or anything else) is likely to take most people to a pretty high level.  Do you have any opinion on approaches such as Singapore math (where they have a far higher achievement in math across the whole population compared to most other countries) or Rightstart, for example?"

Don't know Rightstart, but l've also heard good things about Singapore Math.  My general rules for a good math book is the following:
1)  Black and white (no need for color)
2)  No calculators (or very, very, little calculator work, as in Saxon)
3)  3 authors at most (typical textbooks have 60 or so now)
4)  No diversity reviewer approval
5)  Likewise no pictures of Nelson Mandela
6)  No fancy new approaches to solving problems (i.e., Lattice Method for division)

I put the Nelson Mandela quip in there because I saw a textbook with his picture.  He actually is a hero of mine, being willing to stay in jail rather for his cause, for decades, while the South African government was willing to release him (I think based on him leaving the country).  But I don't remember him coming up with any great mathematical achievements.


"I can see that Saxon has worked fantastically well for you, so I understand why you would advocate this as one of the best routes to follow.  I'm wondering if it is a less good fit for some children, whether you see it as a stand alone choice or one of many possible good options."

I think it's the best, not based on my one case, but based on many, many other examples, starting with its popularity with home schoolers (who have no political agenda).  To answer your question, back when Saxon was independent, they had a page of anecdotes on their website.  One of my favorites was a public school where they gave the old, beat-up, worn-out Saxon books to the students who were in the "average" math level, and gave new cutting-edge math books to the honor's math class.  Needless to say, those "average" students ran circles around the honor's students at the end of the year, when they were all tested.  While one can never promise individual results, I think the best chance for success is with Saxon...now you just have to find a way to get your hands on it, over there.

 
"I like the way that you raise these issues so clearly and eloquently.  My oldest is 3.8 years and not quite rady for following a formal curriculum although we do a lot of preparation and maths development work using various materials including different types of abacus.  Like you as she gets older I will be afterschooling her and I can see that the reality is that there is limited time to do music, sport, maths, reading, languages etc etc.  So there are some hard choices to be made.  Like Manda and Tamsyn, I also place value on some non-maths subjects (music in particular) and sport / exercise is to me an essential part of a healthy lifestyle.  So I think we will struggle to find 20 hours for math (I hear you sigh and shake your head disapprovingly  LOL !!!)."

No, not 20.  And (this won't go over with the feminist crowd too well, but what the heck), I always wonder if I would have gone slower if David was a girl.  The idea of having a little girl that's 11 years old starting in college would have scared me a lot more than David, and I would have worried a lot about her social development.  So you can do less...just don't get to the point where you're doing it in your "spare time", because, if nothing else, your school will take care of filling up that time.


"I do have a rationale though.  Many careers also place a high value on a range of skills and expertise and I would like to equip my children to have both academic, communication, leadership and other skills for their future lives. For example, in my field (medicine) it is essential to have a very broad range of these and to be able to demonstrate them on a CV for admission to university as well as the requisite academic requirements."

I think that much of the other stuff you mention is just good parenting and comes over time, not something that you have to do 10 hours a week when the kid is young.  I didn't care about any of that.  I did care that my kid understood that he was NOT anything special...he was just an average kid that had math forced on him early (and yes, he thanks me nearly every day now, especially for being able to skip high school).  I made damn sure that he never denigrated anyone below him academically (except jokingly, as he would call Dr. Robinson's kids slackers for not finishing Calculus until age 15).
 

"However, where we can hopefully agree is that maths is super-important to focus on, starting from early in the child's education, and that if we are to choose academic subjects to pay attention to, then this is the big area to go for.  This is the one message I have taken from this thread.  We will aim for 10 hours.  I hope this is achievable."

It is achievable, as a kid has at least 40 hours of awake time outside of school every week.  It's only a question of priority.  If the kid doesn't make 10 hours of Saxon, it's because other things are more important to the parent, that simple (sorry, but 10 hours is about my minimum).


"I'm interested in your comment about the importance of learning to read (I agree).  Once a child can read (which does not necessarily take a long time, especially if starting early as many of us have done here), then what do you see as the next steps?"

In my case, not much.  We had David initially reading at just about exactly your oldest kid's age (3.8 years).  From there we read tougher books, and then finally, I had him read Hamlet to me, with the proper punctuation and play-acting (really just voicing) the roles, so he would sound like a woman with Ophelia and sound scary when the Ghost showed up.  It was fun, but that was the end of my instruction (about 4.2 years old) - there was nothing more that I could teach him.  I figured the grammar and other stuff would get filled in at school, and that worked out.  The key is simply being able to read, because The System's method is designed to fail the kids (i.e., Sight Words through third grade, and only then phonics).  Other stuff like comprehension isn't can't be taught, it comes over time (but being able to read first certainly helps!), and spelling was a breeze for him, I think because he learned to read properly.  We never did one spelling lesson, other than study for spelling bees, which we won handily.


"Do you mean learning to read is the process of systematically learning to decode words using phonics instruction or do you also refer to the later skills of increasing fluency in reading more complex text, fictional and non-fiction etc?"

LEARNING to reading is exactly what you said, systemically decoding the English language using phonics.  Everyone eventually does that (if they learn to read), it's only a question of when those connections are made.  If made as a 3 or 4 years old, then the kid is set for life.  If delayed by Sight Words until the kid is 10 years old, he will struggle, no different than trying to learn a second language as an adult.  In between the results are likely on a sliding scale.  The stuff after that will come as the kid picks up vocabulary and context, so I didn't worry about that at all, and I was right.

[nee1]

Thanks for your contributions, Robert. Highly, highly appreciated.

Robinson cautions against overloading the curriculum in the 'Course of Study' notes on  Robinson Curriculum CDs. I quote an excerpt:

Our school has only three subjects - reading, writing, and arithmetic. After the students have finished mathematics through calculus, which occurs at ages 14 to 16, physics and chemistry are substituted for mathematics.  The students are not permitted to use either a computer or a calculator for any purposes until they have finished calculus. All general subjects such as geography, history, economics, and literature are taught simply through reading. Writing of essays, reading, and ordinary oral conversation are the only instruction they receive in grammar, spelling, and punctuation. These are not taught as separate subjects. We have no grammar or spelling lessons. The vocabulary lessons [in the CDs] also serve as instruction in spelling. The student learns to spell the words as he learns its meaning. (We have now added grammar and spelling books to our curriculum for optional work, since we realise that they are helpful to some students)........

It is important to realise that, although the brain continues to refine and think about the materials contained in school lessons throughout the 24 hour day even when the student is asleep, there is a limit to mental activity. Parents frequently add numerous subjects formally to their curriculum because they want to be sure that their children do not miss anything  (foreign language and geography are examples). In doing so, they actually cause the children to miss important material. Each added subject subtracts from the mental attention available for subjects already in the curriculum. Most added subjects are simply facts and skills that a person can acquire at any age and are largely acquired by reading or experience.

It is essential that the precious formal study time of childhood be concentrated upon those skills that a person cannot easily and completely learn at a later time and upon the development of skills that will enhance learning throughout life. ........

Then elsewhere in the Course of Study, he says:

Mathematics and Science are the most difficult subjects, so the learning of these subjects suffers the most from excessively long breaks. Math and science are also the most important subjects because they teach the child to think and to reason quantitatively.

Scholars in earlier centuries emphasised Latin, Greek, and the study of ancient classical philosophers and thinkers. They did not do this because the ancients had all the best ideas or because they were the most complicated and erudite subjects available. The purpose was to exercise the brains of the students as much as possible, so that they would learn to think effectively.

Now we have much more learned subjects with which to exercise the brains of students. No one in our time, regardless of his profession, can be considered well educated unless he has learned a substantial amount of mathematics and science and personally solved many quantitative problems in the course of that learning.

After the five or six hours of self study each day, the child goes about life including farm work, recreation, and other activities. A significant amount of time is spent in recreational reading, but this is not required. A good variety of extracurricular activities is of great value. For example, all of the children play the piano. This introduces them to music and enriches their lives. They are also ham radio operators. This is convenient for us. We carry hand-held 2 meter radios which allow us, using repeaters on the surrounding mountains, to be in constant contact everywhere in SouthWest Oregon. This enhances safety and saves time in finding each other...........

Arithmetic, writing, and reading - and nothing more.  All else should be part of the extracurricular day. If you want the student to show off in another language or excel in some other pursuit, fine. Just do not make it a part of the academic hours. These must be reserved for fundamental knowledge which he must acquire during the first and best hours each day.

The best hours can vary, of course for each student....... Usually a student does not perform well if he does not go to bed at a reasonable hour and have plenty of sleep..... Do not allow your students to be up at 11pm or midnight and then expect them to do good quality academic work in the morning.

We follow this program 6 days per week, 12 months per year, unless we are diverted by a trip or project. The net result is 6 days per week, 10 to 11 months per year.

  QUOTE ENDS.

[nee1]

5)  Likewise no pictures of Nelson Mandela

I put the Nelson Mandela quip in there because I saw a textbook with his picture.  He actually is a hero of mine, being willing to stay in jail rather for his cause, for decades, while the South African government was willing to release him (I think based on him leaving the country).  But I don't remember him coming up with any great mathematical achievements.

               Robert, you are so, so funny!

[Robert Levy]

Hi Nee1,

Some comments for you:
---------------------------------------------------------

"Thanks for your contributions, Robert. Highly, highly appreciated.  Robinson cautions against overloading the curriculum in the 'Course of Study' notes on  Robinson Curriculum CDs. I quote an excerpt:"

You're welcome, but thank you for the inspiration.  Like I've said, the people on this forum seem to understand that (nearly) all kids are created equal, except for a small number on both ends of the intellectual spectrum.  The real difference is whether the parents want to take charge of their kid's primary education (i.e., reading and math), as Mr. Robinson did, I did, and most of you guys seem to be ready to do.

As to overloading, needless to say, I agree with Mr. Robinson, and have always believed that much of what is taught in the schools is "busy-time" - which is to give the kids something to do, but not really the critical stuff.  Like he implies, why bother sticking that stuff in their heads, especially if it detracts from the important stuff, and in the end it will have to be re-learned later, when the kid understands the math.   But, if there is free time...then it's probably not harmful either.

[Kerileanne99]

I completely have to say thank You to everyone contributing to this thread! I have been recovering and felt unable to contribute, but have been following closely! And those of you who know me know just how much of a role Maths play in our lives...if all else fails, and we are not up for much else, we manage to muddle along with something new and exciting for math. Honestly, after Alex's progress with reading, it is the very most important thing to us.
And, if we concentrate,science, music, geography,SO many things can be worked around our Maths play!

Nee1- thanks so much for your rigorous, yet analytical review of the Robinson curriculum! I DO think that these ideas helped me clarify my teaching methods...I do tend to focus on the 3 r's, but as we are focused more on Early Learning, this takesona very distinctive style!
I would say that the absolute majority of our day is absorbed by 'math'.... But new lessons only take about 10 minutes! Everything else is incorporated into games, reading ( we do a HUGE number of 'living math books, Life of Fred, Theoni Pappas, IPad App style material). She is a prolific reader for just turning three, and we are currently 'buddy reading Charlotte's Web...

I  know that many others in the forum focus on languages, music, sports, etc.... And we do as well, butALWAYS with a Math, Reading, and now Writing (Love You, TV Teacher!!!!) focus.  Even rockclimbing on our wall has recently been about solving 'square root' puzzles:)

Thanks so much for inviting this forum into your living room Robert, as it has highly motivated me!

Here is Alex playing a game of ''Princess Math' (in her princess costume!) to calculate how long Rapunzel's hair need be for different situations:)

[Kerileanne99]

Oh, Jenene-
Sorry to just now be able to respond to your query regarding Life ofFred as a primary program---

Honestly, ( and I say this because I own and have used bits and supplements of every math program you can imagine!), I cannot envision using LofF as a complete program! It is so, so much fun as as a supplement, and it is absolutely awesome for gauging just how much my kiddo has gleaned from her RS, Singapore, and supplemental math....but on its own??? NO WAY for Early Learning!

We tend to read about a chapter per night,as a reward for accomplishing all of our other goals. ( I tend to hype it up and truly treat it as a reward!) and she thinks of it not as math but as an extra bonus extensive of time before bedtime!
What is hilarious and awesome to me is that I have noticed that if I 'send her to bed with math on the brain?' ...she inevitably wakes up with' math on the brain'...as in, the very first words out of her mouth tend to be an equation or math reference! So HILARIOUS to hear her dreaming a out her multiplication tables (learned over Xmas, a Googol, infinity, or giving 'binary kisses!'
Have you managed to download the Life of Fred Samples from the website???
Also, highly recommend the shorter, more amusing chapters in Theoni Pappas's books: Penrose Rhe Mathematical Cat, The Further Adventures of Penrod The Mathematical Cat, etc...Alex adores the concept of a Fractal, and a Googol, from the follow-up books...

[Jenene]

Thanks for your thoughts, Kerileanne99.

That was what I assumed of Life of Fred.  Fun and interesting but not a math program in and of itself (for the early years at least - I think the upper level ones are different but I haven't looked into them at all).  That was why I thought maybe we could use it as a fun 'break' between Saxon books but after just having 3 weeks off between books it is taking a bit of work to get back into it so I'm not particularly sure I want to have a break between the books any more.

[Mandabplus3]

Yes I agree having breaks is NOT a great idea, just a couple of weeks off really slows down the calculation speeds, thinking ability, problem solving and the lessons take ages to complete until they are back in the swing of it again! No more breaks! Even a few questions in a day is better than none!

document.getElementById('recent_loading').style.display = 'none';document.getElementById('recent_page_box').style.display = '';

Page: 1/4  

Loading...

Members

• Total Members: 214769
• Latest: Meobi

Stats

• Total Posts: 110526
• Total Topics: 19136
• Online Today: 439
• Online Ever: 826
• (January 22, 2020, 12:09:49 AM)

Users Online

• Users: 0
• Guests: 400
• Total: 400