Update... I did start Cambridge with them tonight, and they enjoyed it. It made for lots of fun practice after dinner, when various family members were going back and forth between the dining room and the kitchen. :) I'm guessing we'll probably spend around a week on each picture section or story, and another week on the "About the Language" section for each stage. At that pace, Unit I would take a full calendar year, which is 1/4 the intended speed (it was originally meant as a one-term course). But my guesses don't count for much around here. The inmates have a fair amount of say in the management of the asylum. :party:

We have Minimus and some other books intended for young children, and we all enjoy them, but they're pretty much intended as "appetizers" to get little folks interested in the language. Our children are already interested, and now they actually want to learn to speak, read, and write in Latin. And teach it to their dolls and stuffed animals. (Our homeschool was founded on the principle that a classical education should be for everyone, not just humans. ;) )

As it happens, my vintage copy of CLC Unit I (2nd edition, 1982, no color pictures ;)) just arrived in the mail. There are three parts: 1) Student book. 2) 32-page "Language Information" pamphlet, intended for the student, that contains all the grammar and vocabulary that they're expected to learn in this unit. 3) 98-page "Teacher's Handbook" with suggestions for lesson planning, evaluation, homework assignments, how to introduce and reinforce grammar concepts, etc. The Teacher's Handbook does explicitly state that the students should have additional daily language drill (though not memorizing and reciting tables, which they say is of "debatable" usefulness). There are suggested practice exercises for each grammar concept that's introduced, and it's clear that these suggestions are just meant to be a starting point. Teachers are expected to come up with more as they see fit. Has this advice changed in the latest edition? Do they now recommend padding the lessons with computer games, fun activity sheets, and song-and-dance routines, instead of old-fashioned drill and translation exercises? I'm starting to wonder what's going on over there at Cambridge. I agree that homeschool parents might find it challenging to to follow the advice in the TM, either because they don't have a feel for the language, or because they just have too much on their plates already. (I had this problem myself with Singapore, which is another reason we're no longer using it.) But CLC still seems like one of the best options for those who find themselves in the OP's situation. I mean, I think adapting Wheelock's for a 6 year old would be a bigger inconvenience. :tongue_smilie:

Thanks, Moira. I can see how using a very slow pace with Oerberg might be boring, unless we added a ton of supplementary games, worksheets, etc. Which is a possibility, but it might be too much for me to keep up with. I think even Cambridge is going to need some major tweaking, as I'll be teaching 5 year old DS along with 7 year old DD. He's kept up with everything we've done so far, and seems to have a real love of language (e.g., makes up his own crossword puzzles and word games) -- but he's still very much a semi-wild kindergarten boy. :D

I did the first couple of books of Cambridge with an "old-school" British teacher who drilled us frequently to make sure we had the grammar down pat. I guess I figured that was typical. Kind of like Singapore Math; it's pretty much a given that you're going to need extra drill. I don't see that this is necessarily a problem, just something to keep in mind. OTOH, I agree with Ester Maria about the excessive color pictures being a distraction. (Hmm, also like Singapore Math.) :tongue_smilie: The books we used 20 years ago just had black and white line drawings. I'm thinking about hunting down some older copies for my children to use.

Oops, somehow managed to miss dmmetler's similar thread on Cambridge: http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=225576 I'd still be interested in hearing about your experiences with Oerberg or other "middle/high school" curricula at this age. :)

Has anyone tried starting Cambridge Latin or Oerberg's Lingua Latina with children in early elementary, i.e., in the 5 to 7 year old age range? I'm not looking for theoretical opinions -- just feedback from people who've actually done this. I seem to recall reading posts from a few of them. If you've started children at this age with another Latin curriculum that was originally written for middle/high school students (Galore Park, Henle, an old grammar, etc.), I'd be interested in hearing about this, too. Thank you. :)

I don't see any mention of age restrictions on the site or the order form, but it would probably be a good idea to check with the organizers. Thanks for bringing this up. We also have young children (5 & 6) who would probably enjoy something like this fairly soon.

Forgot to mention that real live human beings are encouraged to suggest their own corrections. To do this, just move the mouse pointer over the text of the machine translation, and a pop-up window will appear. It's sort of like being part of a vast electronic version of Mr. Chips. Minus the canings. (And Petula Clark bursting into song in the 1969 version.) :tongue_smilie:

Please excuse me if this has already been mentioned somewhere. I was just using Google translate for something else, and noticed Latin in the drop-down. It's listed as an Alpha release, i.e. still in the very early testing phase. But still... good to know that they're at work on it. http://translate.google.com/#la|en| My Latin is pretty limited, but I tried a few things out on it. It seems to do well with common Catholic prayers (I'm suspecting it's been "fed" those already), but it thoroughly mangled many of the translation exercises from old Latin textbooks. All you experts out there, please throw some more stuff at it, and let us know how it does! If nothing else, at this stage, it will be good for a laugh. :D

My DD is the same age. She'll be starting Latin grammar (still deciding on a curriculum), working on social skills, doing various critical thinking activities, and probably learning a musical instrument. We're hoping that this will give her just the right amount of challenge, and help her adjust to the growing realization that she does not, in fact, know everything. ;) The independent study idea sounds good, too. :)

Thanks for the input. We've decided to give it a try. Despite much moaning and groaning about material she'd never seen before, DD managed to pass the 200 level diagnostic test for language arts. I've ordered level 300 for both LA and reading. I hope this works out. It looks like there's plenty of review. Meanwhile, her younger brother will inherit all the half-completed Kolbe and Seton workbooks. I think he might actually do well with them; he's a thoughtful child with a great memory. If not, I'll offer him a 25% discount on CLE, if he pays cash up front. ;)

Thanks for the offer; I'd appreciate it, if you get the chance. While I've seen convincing arguments (from SWB and others) in favor of continuing oral reading throughout the elementary grades, this is the first time I've come across the idea that we should be seeking out challenging material for this activity. Most people seem to give the opposite advice, i.e., that we should have them read passages that are somewhat easy for them, so they can devote their attention to the presentation rather than the content. I'd be interested to know the reasons for the other point of view.

Hi Jewel, I'm not homeschooling any SN children yet, but we've been given CH as a likely diagnosis for our almost 3 year old. She's clearly very bright, but has some challenges. I have no clue about what we can do to help her at this age, as there's very little information out there about the milder/higher functioning forms of this condition. Conventional therapies don't seem to be very useful, and though we've had some success with alternative PT, it didn't really stick. It seems as if we just need to present her with all the normal childhood experiences and let her figure out her own way to handle them, but I keep thinking there must be something more we can do. I'd love to hear anything you're willing to share about your DD's experiences. Feel free to PM me if you'd prefer.

Okay, fair enough. I'm not familiar with oration practice, at least not in this context. Is this something from Quintilian? Anyway, the MP suggestion still stands, as it looks as if nearly all their titles are rated above 4th grade level. Of course, it might not be feasible to spread a single one out over half a year (especially as there might be a mutiny from little people who want to know the ending :D).

Hmm, just realized that my post didn't quite make sense. Somehow my brain had got CLE language arts & reading mixed up. They're actually separate programs, and we're interested in both. (This is a perfect example of why I need workbooks! ;) ) That is really funny about your poor DD offering to buy her own book. I'm sorry to hear that Seton and VIE didn't work out for you, though it's reassuring to know that we're not the only ones. Just wondering -- were you enrolled with Seton or Kolbe when you did the courses? We weren't, and I'm wondering if that made a difference. I thought we wouldn't need lesson plans for 1st and 2nd grade, but maybe there's some secret ingredient in there. That's something I appreciate about CLE; they provide samples of all the LU's, Answer Keys, and Teacher Guides, and clearly indicate which ones are "integral" and which ones are "optional." With some of the Catholic curriculum providers, I find it really hard to figure out which materials are needed. Sometimes the lesson plans just say "do this page on this day;" sometimes they're an essential part of the curriculum. Sometimes the teacher's manual is just a copy of the workbook with the answers filled in; sometimes it's a gold mine of information. It makes it hard to figure out why the program didn't work for us. Maybe we were just doing it all wrong. :001_huh:

I'm looking for a solid, systematic, workbook-based language arts program for my rising 2nd grader. She's a gifted learner, but her written output is just about at age level. I'm sure we'll find many informal opportunities to practice her oral and written language skills over the next year, but given our current circumstances, I'm feeling a need to have workbooks as well. :) We're Catholic, and I had hoped to use Seton or Kolbe for LA, but they haven't turned out to be a good match for our needs. Their lower level books are quite formulaic, and DD quickly figures out how to get the "right answers" without really understanding what she's doing. :tongue_smilie: On top of that, Kolbe has their students go straight from the 2nd grade workbook into VIE 4 (old edition), which would be far too much writing for her. DD is thriving with CLE math, and now I'm feeling drawn to their reading program as well. We've already bought their 2nd grade readers for leisure reading, and are very happy with the contents. Still, I'm concerned that there might be some material at the upper levels, or even in the lower level workbooks, that our family would find objectionable. I know this is the case with the Pathways readers, which teach Anabaptist doctrine and history in grades 7 and 8. Can anyone help with this concern?

I guess my approach is a bit different, in that I don't feel the need to ask DD to read above her current comfort level. It seems to me that gifted readers tend to keep advancing at a fast rate on their own, no matter what their parents or teachers do. In the meantime, I'd like to offer her books that have rich language and interesting content, so we can spend our time digging into the sentence structure, precise word definitions, plot analysis, etc. She's naturally wired to be a very strong reader; my hope is to help her become an equally strong writer and literary scholar. FWIW, I looked up the "grade level equivalents" (based on the lexile score) for some of MP's book selections, and as I suspected, they're relatively high. 2nd grade: Little House in the Big Woods (4.2), Mr. Popper's Penguins (4.9) 3rd grade: Farmer Boy (4.3), The Moffats (5.2), Homer Price (6.6), Charlotte's Web (4.9) 4th grade: Heidi (7.9), The Lion, The Witch... (6.1) 5th grade: Robin Hood (9.0), The Hobbit (8.1) Maybe I'm delusional, but I think DD can get a great deal out of studying these books over the next few years, even if she's able to read them with relative ease (and even if she's already read them on her own, or heard them as read-alouds, as is the case with a few titles). :001_smile: There's a lot of depth in this list.

Are you looking for something that's difficult for her to read, or just something that she'll find interesting and thought-provoking? If it's the latter, you might take a look at Memoria Press's new Literature Guides, which are study guides for classic children's books. We've ordered a few of the 2nd and 3rd grade guides to check them out, and they look pretty substantial. Although our 6 year old is capable of reading at a 6th grade level, I think she'd get plenty of food for thought from an in-depth study of these books that are a "mere" 1-2 years above age level. ;) The current plan is for us to take turns reading aloud, and do most of the workbook exercises orally. I'm hoping to give her an experience of books as something that can be savored slowly and discussed with others... not just inhaled by the stack like fast-food sliders. :tongue_smilie:

Regarding helping with younger siblings: I forgot to mention that I sometimes pay the older ones for this, depending on the circumstances. E.g., the 6 year old gets a quarter for reading a story to her sister who's on the potty. I figure that job is "beyond the call of duty." ;)

Not sure if this would work for you, but I've found that both of our school-age children enjoy helping their little sister with her "preschool." We keep a special basket of school-time activities for her (plastic letters, jumbo beads for stringing, small stacking toys, etc.), and I'll just pull one out and ask them to show it to her. Keeps them both happy and occupied for a few minutes. :001_smile:

CLE is Christian Light; you can see samples at http://www.clp.org/ We have the Professor B materials, and I really like what I've seen of his way of teaching, but it turned out that my children wanted to start learning math before they'd developed the motor skills that are necessary for the early lessons. He spends a lot of time on rapid-fire drills where they have to show the numbers from 1 to 10 in different ways with their fingers, which is surprisingly difficult for little ones (but fun for those who can do it). I'm hoping we can go back to it later on.

I'm coming to the conclusion that there must be different types of "math adept children," just as there are different types of "language adept children." After all, people who have strong spatial skills, but struggle with dyslexia or other language-related disorders, can sometimes turn out to be very successful writers, comedians, etc. On the flip side, people who have strong verbal skills and relatively weak spatial skills (hand raised over here!) can sometimes turn out to be very successful at math. At the same time, given that it's not our "first language", it seems plausible that we might actually do best with types of instruction that would frustrate more spatial types. I can see this sort of difference in myself and DH, and also in DD and DS. We could all be described as "math adept" based on aptitude tests and levels of achievement, but the males seem to learn math in a different way from the females. (Not saying that this is always the case; just how it seems to have worked out for our family.) For instance, we're currently using Singapore level 1 for both children. DS does great with it -- something just "clicks," and then he zips through all the problems -- but it's sort of hit and miss with DD. I'm finding that I have to spend a lot of time coming up with alternate explanations. This is especially striking given that she already did Earlybird last year, whereas he's completely new to this style of teaching. We did a bit of Horizons with DD at one point and she really liked it, though I was prejudiced against it because it seemed too slow-moving and spiraly (which, as I kept reading, was supposed to be a no-no for bright DC). It didn't seem to make sense for her to spend so much time filling in pages and pages of review on stuff she'd already learned. But she actually enjoyed doing this, and now I'm thinking she needs that sort of structure, to help her consolidate her learning and strengthen her understanding of the concepts. I'm wondering if this is akin to the "overlearning" that can be helpful for dyslexic DC. Thinking back, maybe the fact that I was taught math the "wrong way" in public school (mostly verbal/procedural/drill based, pretty slow moving without much chance for acceleration) was what gave me the extra edge to excel at it, despite my less than stellar spatial abilities. If I'd had a "better" math curriculum, maybe I would have been a so-so student, or even struggled with it. Who knows? Anyway, based on some anecdotes I've read on these boards, I've just ordered CLE for DD, and will just use Singapore as a supplement for her (though it will still be DS's main curriculum). Looking forward to seeing how this works. :)

I was a very mathy kid (the kind that wins prizes in math competitions), but Saxon looks like fun to me. I can see how it could be very frustrating for a quick learner in a school setting, but as long as the child can work at his/her own pace, what's the problem? If the sheer amount of work is slowing them down too much, you can just have them do the odd-numbered problems. I guess I don't understand the resistance to doing stuff they already know how to do. We do it all the time in other areas of life, like cooking, crafts, dancing, or playing a musical instrument. Why wouldn't children who enjoy math, enjoy doing a varied selection of math problems? :confused: On a different note, true mastery methods (where you master a concept, then move on and don't go back to it) seem to be pretty rare. Even Singapore describes itself as a "spiral method." It's just that they spiral year-to-year, rather than day-to-day.

Just wanted to ditto what LisaDSB said. We have Rosetta Stone Latin Level 1, and while it's been great for the adults in the family, our children (ages 6 and under) were confused by the wide variety of pictures that are used to represent each concept. It's too bad, because they really enjoyed using the program, and were picking up the language like little sponges. In fact, the 2 year old, who was just watching over my shoulder, was picking it up even faster than the others. She was jabbing her pudgy finger at the screen... "Dere, dat's de puella edit!" Maybe one day they'll come out with a simpler version for the younger crowd. Rosetta Pebble? :)