McGuffey's Readers: Revised vs Original
Posted 10 February 2009 - 04:02 PM
Posted 10 February 2009 - 08:20 PM
Posted 10 February 2009 - 08:49 PM
Posted 10 February 2009 - 10:28 PM
Posted 07 March 2009 - 04:47 AM
If you're just using them for reading material after you've taught phonics and your children are reading well, I actually like the language and content of the originals better! (But, I also prefer the KJV, which most of my friends and family claim is not in English.)
However, if you want to use them to teach phonics, the revised edition is much superior, in fact, I don't recommend using the original at all, there was a period of whole word teaching going on from 1826 to 1876 which those fell under.
If you want to use them to teach phonics, the speller is the book to start with, not the primer or the reader, Spellers were used to teach reading back then, in fact, Noah Webster himself explains this in his 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language. The entry for spelling-book reads, "n. A book for teaching children to spell and read."
You can read about the history of reading and how spelling books and horn books were used here: (scroll down to the timeline)
Posted 26 September 2011 - 08:05 PM
I just wanted to mention that actually the Original series of the McGuffey (1836) has a Parent/Teacher guide written by Ruth Beechick where she actually incorporates how to use these with phonics methods very similar to SWR way of teaching phonograms (all 3 sounds of "a" at once for example). You would use the Phonics Made Plain flashcards with them that also correspond with ABCs and All Their Tricks.
Anyway, in case someone comes across this wanting to use Original McGuffey for phonics based reading...You can!
Posted 21 January 2015 - 04:32 PM
I know this thread is a few years old, but I'm hoping someone will still chime in to help me.
I'm thinking about the McGuffey's Readers for my 9yo. I'm wondering how helpful Ruth Beechick's Parent Teacher Guide is if you have the Revised Edition Readers.