Ordinary Parents Guide...

[Pamela H in Texas]

Can someone who has used this help me out?

 

Is it a bit slow for the first year's worth of lessons? And have you found that slowness to really help in solidifying things for ease of gaining skill?

 

I was just looking at the sample pages and it seemed that the first 173 lessons are a bit slow and yet it covers everything by the end. So maybe there is benefit in going slow?

 

Or maybe because I only had a sampling of lessons, I got the wrong idea altogether?

[lionfamily1999]

How old is your dc?

 

Luke's using it and the slowness helps cement the concepts, but for an older child, I imagine you could go faster.

[ohmel]

I think it's just right for my reluctant reader. He knew all the letter sounds so we skipped those beginning twenty some lessons and started off with the vowels. Reading does come easy for him (as compared to math which he just gets) so the short lessons are helping learn the rules without making him dread reading.

[Pamela H in Texas]

I chose another program (actually 2) for our "cottage school." But then I liked some things I saw with OPG. So looked into it. :)

[wildflower]

We only found WTM 2 months ago, attended the conference in Williamsburg, where we found OPG. Before that I had used an old LA Leche book (over the winter only) for cooperative pre-schools to guide my assorted ventures in homeschooling.... we had covered the consonant sounds in our passing. DD1 really needed the vowel work, so we took a month (maybe 6 weeks) doing that, and now have spent a week covering the consonants up to Pp. I make my own cards and we review quickly each day all of the previous cards then buzz through the next lesson. The nice thing about OPG is that they will give you the consonant sound in the beginning and end of a word plus with c they give you ck at the end- it has helped DD#1 (4.5 years old) a greater mastery and plenty of memory work, which is so important since that is so much of what WTM the early years is about IMHO. OPG is a very thorough guide.

HTH!

[kmacnchs]

When my oldest was two, she knew her letters and sounds so I decided to start OPGTR. We zoomed through the first lessons on letter sounds (I can't skip...type A personality and all). I am a big fan of the book. She is 3 and on lesson 113 and we are actually taking a break from learning anything new and just practicing reading fluency with Bob Books and other early readers from the library to master what she has learned. I did not think it moved slowly at all. It is (as the earlier mother said) VERY thorough and I like that! I also like that it goes from non-reader to master reader...not K reading, 1st grade reading, 2nd grade reading, like other programs do. And, it can be used over and over (less money in the long run if you have a lot of kids) because there are no workbooks - I like that!

[RegularMom]

I'm halfway through OPG for the second time right now, with my younger dd.

 

Yes, it is slow. But it's really really thorough.

 

The absolute most frustrating thing about OPG for me is that it waits so long to introduce two-syllable words. The vast majority of the "beginning reader" books at the library are chock full of the Dolce words, and many of them are two syllables. So, for the first year of OPG, I'd use Bob Books, McGuffy readers, and screen meticulously through the early reader shelves at the library, looking for books that had mostly one-syllable words and only a minimum of r-changed words and multi-syllable words.) It seems like most of the early readers out there on the shelves are developed by look-say proponents. Or at least that's what it's felt like these past few years, when searching for books my girls could read independently and feel successful at it.

 

It's a long wait to get to that point where your child can peruse the shelves at the library and read most of what's there on her own. (We've just arrived there recently with my younger dd; it's such a relief.)

 

But when you get there, having gone through OPG, it's so incredibly worth it. I still recommend it, and I'd use it again if I had another little one to start on primer. Because my older dd, by the time she was finished with OPG, was reading at a significantly advanced level. I can see now, how my younger dd will be at the same place in another 6 months or so. And I don't worry about their reading at all.

 

Not having to worry about their reading is really worth all the patience required with OPG.

 

HTH.

Edited July 2, 2009 by RegularMom

[Pamela H in Texas]

Thanks for the opinions. I wonder if doing the dolce words simultaneously would help me feel better about it....

[wildflower]

Thanks for the opinions. I wonder if doing the dolce words simultaneously would help me feel better about it....

 

i could be very, very wrong. couldn't that be confusing?

 

personally, i would rather take our time-- have you read swb & jw's opinions on this in wtm?

as i say to my dd's 'slow and steady wins the race' ( in turtle voice of course!)

[RegularMom]

I agree. I didn't teach the Dolce words as a concept. OPG provides some sight words along the way to get the kids reading one syllable word stories quickly and it seemed to work fine. What I had to do was read library books along with my kids and when we came to Dolce words, I'd simply tell them what the word was and move on, saying only that "we'd be getting to that in primer pretty soon."

 

My frustration with the delay in two syllable words was simply my own. In the long run, I think we did better by following OPG as closely as possible.

 

This has been the case for me in more than one subject. I may find certain things slow and tedious and wish it was moving faster, but in the end, following the recommended guidelines was better for my kids.

[radiobrain]

I couldn't deal with OPG AT ALL!

 

I thought that by having all the parent text on the page was intimidating to my son, and was frustrating as he could then see just how much work he would have to do, and how poorly he was doing. Also the font that was chosen really made me angry (really!) as it had the capital I that looked like a lower case L. My son would ALWAYS read it as an L and would get angry at it too (I guess the apple doesn't fall far from the tree) I am not sure if I would've noticed it if he didn't have the problem. I just thought it was a bit careless on the editor's part.

 

I still think that it is a good and thorough program, we just couldn't do it.

 

And thanks for reminding me that I need to sell it!

 

We ended up using "The Reading Lesson" that was totally excellent then after that just read Magic school bus books.

 

my whiny two cents.

 

Korin

[Oak Knoll Mom]

Also the font that was chosen really made me angry (really!) as it had the capital I that looked like a lower case L. My son would ALWAYS read it as an L and would get angry at it too (I guess the apple doesn't fall far from the tree)

 

I just used a pencil to turn every l into an I. Annoying, yes, but easy to solve.

[Oak Knoll Mom]

Can someone who has used this help me out?

 

Is it a bit slow for the first year's worth of lessons? And have you found that slowness to really help in solidifying things for ease of gaining skill?

 

I was just looking at the sample pages and it seemed that the first 173 lessons are a bit slow and yet it covers everything by the end. So maybe there is benefit in going slow?

 

Or maybe because I only had a sampling of lessons, I got the wrong idea altogether?

 

I've used OPG with two students now. The first was very quick to catch on and the second was slower. I discovered with both of them that they could handle about 15 minutes of direct instruction at a time. The first one would make it through about 3-4+ lessons each day and the second one might finish 1/2 a lesson. It really is all about the kid and how much he can take at a time--don't worry about getting through X number of lessons in X number of days.

 

I do use Dolch words, but not in Dolch order. I go through the list every so often and pick out words that my son can read phonetically and we work on those to help build speed and fluentcy.

[radiobrain]

That is a simple solution, but you shouldn't have had to do it.

 

That should have been considered by the people picking the font, I forget if it had the fancy Gs and As....

 

It is just an oversight/lack of consideration that made me question other parts of it. I really don't like to write in my books if I can help it.

 

All the text on the page was the other big issue. Like I said, my son (uber smart, but generally against reading as it doesn't follow consistent rules) didn't like seeing what I was reading, on the page, smaller, etc etc. it made him feel worse about his struggle with reading, by seeing how far he would have to go. Also, it didn't appeal too much to me either.

 

But We are weird anyway. :D

 

k.

[RegularMom]

Yes, we struggled with this too.

 

For the first year, with my older dd, I actually wrote what she needed to read on a white board. After the first year, she was able to sit with me and read the larger Arial font words without difficulty. But that first year was certainly confusing for her. And with my younger dd, we went through a similar thing, but it didn't last as long. At first, I wrote on the white board exclusively, then we graduated to me asking her what she preferred: reading from the book, or reading from the white board. Now, she reads directly from the book.

 

Still, I'd use it again.

[skaterbabs]

Thanks for the opinions. I wonder if doing the dolce words simultaneously would help me feel better about it....

 

 

There's no reason why you can't combine two (or more) lessons. I would skip the Dolce words completely - the majority of them CAN be learned phonetically. I think the only sight words Dot learned are words like "the" that simply appear so often that while she can sound them out, she doesn't need to do so.

 

We're not doing OPG any longer, but when we did we combined similar lessons and simply read a LOT. This served to introduce new vocabulary, which she learned to sound out phonetically, and increase fluency.

[lionfamily1999]

They do cover print I and A. Perhaps, the reason they used the print I and A on the cover was because of the A and I lessons wherein the child sees the print I and A. Since part of the lesson is to tell them, these are the letters you will see used in print, in books, it makes sense that they would use them on the cover. It's the first and third lesson, they should have an idea by the end of week one.