Intelligent Design can just mean "God did it", but not necessarily "God did it in 7 days, literally." Â ID is often used, though, as a sneaky way for creationist curriculum to try to pass it off as "scientific". Â In practical terms of what individual people believe, ID can simply mean that God or a creator is the originator of the physics of our universe.
Â
You might be interested in NOEO. Â The company is Christian, but uses secular materials. Â It doesn't deny evolution, but in the guidebook it will say things like, "this week the readings will be looking at evolution. Â You might like to be prepared to discuss your family's beliefs at this time." Â So a family that is creationist could choose to read the materials and say "this is the scientific view of things, but here is what we believe and why we believe they're wrong," or simply choose to skip that section entirely. Â That's how NOEO toes the line -- it includes evolution and sexual reproduction, etc, but gives a 'warning' when it's coming up so families can choose how to approach it. Â But the reading materials themselves are completely secular in origin.
Â
There is not a lot of copywork, even though it's based on Charlotte Mason methodology. Â It focuses on the narration side of things rather than the copywork. Â Basically, each day there's an assigned reading (and/or sometimes an experiment or project) and then the child writes a summary of what they read or learned. Â There's no 'fill in the blank' or 'question and answer' sheets which can be mindless busywork. Â And there are several available response sheets they can choose from for their summaries... including DRAWING. Â Full-page writing, full-page drawing, or a half-page (top section drawing, bottom section lines for writing) each. Â This was PERFECT for my son when we started using it, since he was intelligent but a weak writer, who loved to draw. Â He could barely put a sentence together on paper, but he would draw this immensely detailed pictures with just little notes underneath filling in a few notes. Â I could easily see from this that he understood the material even if he couldn't write an essay about it, and this was a big 'eureka' moment for me, when I realized that we could work on his writing skills completely independently and separate from his science skills and there was no need to conflate the two! Â
Â
The readings are entirely age appropriate and quite enjoyable, generally there's an encyclopedia as the core text and several 'living books' or other fun books as supplements. Â There are lots of hands-on activities, the amount of which does vary slightly depending on which course you get. Â And it's very, very easy to use. Â The heart of it is really just a schedule -- telling you which readings to do in which books each day, and when to do the experiments etc, so that it forms a coherent year-long program. Â
Â
My son did Biology II a couple of years ago as his first foray into formal science studies. Â This year (he's 13 now) he's doing Physics III -- and has on his own stopped using the drawn response forms... this past summer *he* decided he was ready to write more, so we're doing a formal writing program now and he's catching right up! Â We also have Physics I which will be for my daughter to use, likely next year (it was sent to us by mistake and they told us to keep it! Â Bonus!)