wehave8
-
Posts
980 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Classifieds
Store
Posts posted by wehave8
-
-
Some of these posts really have me confused (I know that's easy to do right now in my life! :) )
But, really, many suggest holding off on spelling until reading fluently. I know the OPer is using AAS, but Spalding and some other programs teach spelling before reading fluently.
Mine were all well into the Ayres List before reading FLUENTLY. Was I doing something wrong?
Pam
-
Ha! I'll update when we've been going for a while. Luckily, I can combine the younger two. I plan to spend two weeks per lesson for the little ones, and go much faster with the older (possibly a little more than one lesson per week). We'll see how that works for everyone. The crazy thing is that I've scheduled it such that I'll be teaching all 3 kids at the same time, but I think there is enough "do on your own" sections that I can flip between the two sets of kids. Famous last words, I'm sure. :D
What all did you purchase for LOE Essentials?Pam -
Ha! I'll update when we've been going for a while. Luckily, I can combine the younger two. I plan to spend two weeks per lesson for the little ones, and go much faster with the older (possibly a little more than one lesson per week). We'll see how that works for everyone. The crazy thing is that I've scheduled it such that I'll be teaching all 3 kids at the same time, but I think there is enough "do on your own" sections that I can flip between the two sets of kids. Famous last words, I'm sure. :D
Great! When you get all the bugs worked out maybe you could share your plan!
I'll be watching...and rooting for you!
-
We're going to start LOE Essentials in a couple weeks. Looking it over, I think I won't completely die of boredom like I did with Spalding. :lol: Plus I think my 7 year old will like it better. I plan to run the 5 and 7 year old together (5 year old is stronger at reading/writing, so him keeping up won't be a problem). I'll take my 5th grader through it at a faster pace. All 3 can play games together (I got the games book but made my own game cards).
I think this will be a good fit for oldest and youngest. Not sure about middle. If it's not a good fit for him, I'll put him back in R&S Phonics and Reading, which has worked well for reading. He just doesn't spell much yet (except his name and "cat"... his stories are all lots of "cat cat cat" :lol:). I think LOE would kill two birds with one stone for him - reading and spelling. He's also a very logical kid, so a program that explains "why" is good for him, and LOE's phonograms will make more sense to him than Spalding's did (he totally could not get over the 'y' saying /i/ thing in Spalding... I tried! Plus he has trouble remembering a word he has just sounded out a minute before, so memorizing a bunch of think to spell words ending in 'y' is WAY too complicated for him when he could just remember a simple rule that multisyllable words ending in an /E/ sound are usually spelled 'y' and sometimes 'ey').
LOE may or may not help my 7 year old's spelling. He may need something like Apples & Pears (which I own :lol:) or Sequential Spelling. I think it will at least benefit his reading though, and if it helps his spelling too, great! The other two kids will likely spell better with it, knowing their learning habits. And I think I'll be able to stand teaching it, which is incredibly important. ;)
boscopup-- I want to hear how LOE goes with teaching 3
childrenBOYS :), especially being that yours are about the same ages as mine!Pam
-
As an alternate: McRuffy.
I have used R&S and CLE for all my kids. All the kids started crying about CLE 205. It just moves way too fast. R&S was way too slow and the pages are cluttered and crammed 4th on up.
Just shows how different every child is, and how one works for some and not others. I never thought any of my children were very mathy, but my JUST turned 9 yo is almost done with CLE 3rd and loves to do 2 lessons a day if I let him. :)
-
For my youngest son working on CLE first grade now takes about 30 min. Maybe 40 if he walks off while I help someone else. That is with flash cards and speed drills. We do ALL that is in the TM. :)
Pam
-
The Sunrise editions of CLE (which I assume everyone is talking about) looked awfully busy to me, but a friend who is very math-y thought it was a good thing that so many different ways were shown to learn different concepts. I preferred R&S's more direct approach. :-)
Not sure what your friend is talking about. CLE is very straightforward in its approach. It is a traditional style of teaching just like R&S. Are you sure you aren't confusing it with Math Mammoth? That's what looks busy and teaches different ways to do a problem. CLE isn't like that.
Yes, I am sure. I was holding the Light Unit in my hand. :-)
Well I guess it's a matter of opinion, but I've USED CLE Sunrise Edition, and both R&S Editions. My daughter-in-law has also, and both of us have children who could only get through a CLE lesson because of NOT feeling cluttered and busy. Just saying....AND I do like R&S a lot 3rd grade and up. :)
-
"Twaddle" That's why I liked the older edition of R&S math for grades 1 & 2. It did not have the 'twaddle' that the new edition has. When I got the new edition (I wish I would have save the last copies I had of the old) and saw the way they changed it, I tried CLE, and mastery or no mastery, it was very direct, to the point! And it was the drills in CLE that my boys haven't forgotten!
I read this before and liked her points (actually, I have it saved in my documents :) ), but I don't think it addresses the 1st & 2nd grades of the R&S new edition. It is right on about the older levels. I had some that did well with R&S 3rd-8th, and some did Saxon 4th +.
Rod and Staff is a traditional math program, more similar to the math programs used in the 50s and 60s to many of the programs used today. These were excellent math programs, and most would acknowledge that Americans were better at math when we used these traditional math programs than students are today who are using all of these programs that are emphasizing “conceptual understanding†every step of the way. Traditionally, math was taught with the classical model, where there was more emphasis on drill and memorization in the early years, with an increase in conceptual understanding or analysis occurring each year. R&S does teach conceptual understanding, but it is quite difficult to see until you are perhaps 2 or 3 months into the program because it is done in the early years with little baby steps.
The best example I can think of this is the instruction with fractions. My daughter’s understanding of fractions, now in the fourth grade, is absolutely wonderful. Rod and Staff began with the traditional dividing of shapes into halves and thirds and fourths in the second grade, and also advancing to two-thirds or three-fourths, and the idea the three-thirds or four-fourths equals one. In the third grade, they apply this knowledge to math in all types of contexts - what is one half of a foot, what is one-fourth of a pound, what is one-fourth of a dollar? What is three-fourths of a dollar? This is done pretty much, off and on in the daily lesson, all year long, and is seen in MANY word problems. My daughter really understood fractions and applying them to numbers and real problems.
Then you move to fourth grade, and they introduce counting by halves, by fourths, and by eighth, using a ruler as a visual aid at first. So they count 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, 1, 1 1/4, 1 1/2, etc. and also 1/8, 1/4, 3/8, 1/2, 5/8, 3/4, 7/8, 1. After doing this exercise for several days, they do equivalent fractions, but it is almost not necessary to explain anything, because they have already figured out that 4/8 = 1/2 and that 2/8 = 1/4 because of the counting exercises. They just now learn the algorithm that shows that this same logic can apply to numbers which can’t be visualized, such as 27/36. By the time my daughter reached the lesson where they taught how add fractions, she already ‘understood’ that you could just add the numerators of like fractions, but that you couldn’t do that with a fractions like 1/8 + 1/4, but that you needed a common denominator. This understanding was about 2 months in the developing and it would have been difficult to see by just flipping through the book.
Somewhere around this general timeframe, they are also doing long division and giving remainders as an answer, but combining it with word problems so that it is obvious why the remainder is actually a fraction such as “3 boys share 4 peaches. How many peaches will each boy get? What part of the remaining peach will they get?†After a couple lessons with word problems like this, they have division problems where they are supposed to give their answer with the remainder as a fraction, and they are then introduced to the term “mixed numbers.â€
So, yes, I would say there is wonderful teaching in R&S that leads to conceptual understanding, it is just done in a different way than many modern math programs, and that it occurs very slowly in the lower grades. Because there is a strong emphasis in the primary grades on drill, particularly fact drill, people often get this misconception of R&S, especially if they look primarily at the student workbooks or text instead of at the TM. The real lesson and the real learning takes place in the daily lesson at the whiteboard. The workbook and/or textbook is mainly just review problems and/or drill.
-
I've used CLE Math for our last 3 boys-- 1st through 3rd. The youngest is still in first. I bought R&S 2 times for the oldest 2 (of our younger 3 :) ) and sold it both times. I liked the old, first edition, but I could not get through the new edition. It was WAY too 'schoolish' for me. I'm trying to be more specific but having a hard time finding the right way to describe it. The only thing I remember is the little ducks and the climbing the cliff part with their facts. It may go better for classroom teaching (which is what it is written for). CLE is PERFECTLY scripted. I never used a scripted program with any of my other children (we've homeschooled all 8), and I didn't think I could with CLE Math. But I was very pleased with how it was written. It flowed sooooo well. My boys LOVED it. When I tried to switch, they got VERY frustrated and cried for CLE! We did 2 lessons many days in CLE the first and second grades just because they liked it so well. I cannot rave about it enough. Four of my grandchildren use it, also, who were struggling students, and it turned their Math skills right around! I use to think if struggling students did well with a program it was because it must be a 'below level' program. I now know that is not true, and especially with CLE Math! Their spiral teaching is in just the right amount of increments with just the right amount of review to get the job done and done right! :)
A vote for CLE!
Pam
-
After HOURS and DAYS of reading posts and studying samples, I've decided I am definitely going to go through all the R&S English levels. However, I am thinking I will not do the writing. I want to alternate Writing Strands and Institute for Excellence for Writing. I haven't had time to thoroughly look over the full scope and sequence of these programs yet, but I was wondering if there are any writing genres NOT covered in one of these programs that would be in the R&S writing.
Pam
-
What is CtGE and LLATL?...I have been on the forum for a few years now and still have no idea what half the abbreviations mean :-)
CtGE= Climbing to good English
LLATL= Learning Language Arts Through Literature
:) Pam
-
I like quick, to the point, explanations of concepts/lessons. While I like R&S in many ways, I don't like the drawn out lessons as you get to the mid-upper levels. I also do not like it being a text book. I chose CtGE over R&S for those very reasons. I would have stuck with LLATL, but for now I need something that has that get-er-done feature. So far I am pleased with CtGE based on 5 completed lessons and reading over the book. So my experience is very limited, but these are the reasons I chose CtGE.
Thank you, Susie! What level are you doing?
Pam
-
If you already had a writing program, what would you choose for Grammar for 4th and 5th graders?
My thoughts are EG or doing the Grammar (skipping writing lessons) out of R&S or CtGE.
Pam
-
My oldest two finished a CTGE book during the first semester of our 2013/14 school year. We've actually been taking a bit of a break from formal grammar and did a lot of Bravewriter style writing. Now we're working through Wordsmith Apprentice (which we really LOVE). I honestly don't know what we're going to be doing next year.
Thanks!
-
I've not used it all the way through, but used levels 1, 3, and 4. It filled a void for us for a time. It was more than adequate and "got done" every day.
What do you use now?
Pam
-
Thanks for the links Susie and Hunter!
Pam
-
Can anyone share experience using this all the way through?
Pam
Anyone else...or at least a few of the older years of it?
-
Can anyone share experience using this all the way through?
Pam
-
Remember that the manual was written for classroom teachers. Even if you only do the spelling lesson (because through the fourth edition, Spalding wasn't intended to do grammar or the comprehensive composition or literature that it does now), in a classroom it can certainly take up to three hours. At home...no. A thousand time no. :-)
And remember that the method is Spalding; WRTR is the manual. :-)
Thank you. I have the 3rd and 4th editions.
And...
"And remember that the method is Spalding; WRTR is the manual. :-)"
That's why I said I 'used' WRTR meaning I 'used' Romalda Spalding's manual with her method in it. Just like I 'used' SWR meaning I 'used' Wanda Sanseri's manual with her method in it. :)
-
I think the 3 hours is all of language arts, not just spelling.
Sounds better!
Pam
-
I have used WRTR with some of our graduated children, but being so many years ago, and the three oldest were taught to read in public school (they were K, 1, & 2 when we took them out to homeschool), all I remember was how much time it took. I have been doing SWR with our youngest 3, but I really want to use WRTR next year and see how it goes. I have been trying to find a time to sit down and read through the manual again. One thing I came across that reminded me of my fear of using it was when I read that it should take about 3 hr. a day to teach! If you've used it, did it really take you that long? I have slow boys, but everything else I pick up to use has things that I just. can't. teach! (like i and y saying E :thumbdown: )
Pam
-
If you use WRTR starting in 1st grade, how many years would you continue in it. And when you are through with it, what do you use next?
Pam
-
Of course, I can't help but giggle over the typo in the title. :laugh: "phoincs"
Thanks. I fixed it. Showing my age and stiff fingers. :( How embarrassing.
-
None. They are all too dry and boring.
So what do/did you like instead?
Pam
Why is our day so long? (Feedback on Schedule)
in K-8 Curriculum Board
Posted