plain jane Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 Reading through the last Shurley Grammar thread reminded me of how much I like the program. Grammar is not my forte, but despite this dd is doing very well with the program. I do have one nagging concern on my mind. I'm concerned about using it because it does not teach diagramming. After reading the WTM and talking with several friends who use R&S (:seeya: ladies if you're reading this :D) I'm feeling very unsettled about continuing with a program that won't teach my dd how to diagram sentences (especially with how SWB emphasizes diagramming). Again, grammar is not my strong suit and I never learned diagramming so adding in a supplemental program to teach it along side with Shurley would be difficult for me- I'd prefer to have it built into my main grammar text. I'm looking for either reassurance that dd will be alright in her grammatical skills if we follow through with Shurley all the way, or for someone to convince me that diagramming really is the way to go and that I should be looking at using R&S next year. :tongue_smilie: I guess the other option I have would be to use R&S for one year next year (grade 4) and then go back to Shurley after that if that is what we prefer. I really don't like switching around in programs and would prefer the continuitity of sticking with one, especially as we get into the older grades. Help! I'm not feeling very confident about my choices right now. :001_unsure: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tedearly Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 :lurk5: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlockOfSillies Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 You can use Shurley and then supplement with The First Whole Book of Diagrams (can't remember the author). Warriner's also has diagramming -- I'm using the Introductory Course (6th grade) with my oldest this year, right after FLL4. But in your shoes, I'd stick with Shurley since it's working, and then just fill in with the diagramming skills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tedearly Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Ordered my copy. I use the Rigg's Institute method of teaching phonics. Glad to see the diagramming program overlaps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ekarl2 Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Just my 2 cents. Diagraming is a means, not an end. Although I enjoy diagraming and thinks it's a good analytical skill to learn, learning to diagram is not the intended outcome. Diagraming is the only way I know to explain at a mastery level the complex structures of advanced sentences (those which contain verbal phrases and subordinate clauses like gerunds, participles, infinitives, etc.) Moreso than having a problem with a curriculum that doesn't have diagraming (or supplementing with a diagraming book), I have a problem with a grammar curriculum that doesn't cover advanced grammar. It is the phrases and clauses that come into play with learning punctuation and usage. Covering only basic grammar (parts of speech and basic sentence patterns) doesn't have a very big payoff when it comes to learning to punctuate or use the language correctly. It has been my experience that programs which don't incorporate diagraming don't MASTER the phrases and clauses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plain jane Posted August 28, 2009 Author Share Posted August 28, 2009 Just my 2 cents. Diagraming is a means, not an end. Although I enjoy diagraming and thinks it's a good analytical skill to learn, learning to diagram is not the intended outcome. Diagraming is the only way I know to explain at a mastery level the complex structures of advanced sentences (those which contain verbal phrases and subordinate clauses like gerunds, participles, infinitives, etc.) Moreso than having a problem with a curriculum that doesn't have diagraming (or supplementing with a diagraming book), I have a problem with a grammar curriculum that doesn't cover advanced grammar. It is the phrases and clauses that come into play with learning punctuation and usage. Covering only basic grammar (parts of speech and basic sentence patterns) doesn't have a very big payoff when it comes to learning to punctuate or use the language correctly. It has been my experience that programs which don't incorporate diagraming don't MASTER the phrases and clauses. Thank you for your post! Your thoughts mirror my sentiments, which is what prompted my OP. I'm wavering as to whether or not Shurley really is good enough through the higher levels. After reading your post, I guess what I should have asked specifically is if Shurley Grammar covers advanced grammatical concepts effectively despite not using diagramming? I like Shurley. I'm just a bit confused and scared that I'm making the wrong curriculum choice for the long run, kwim? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ekarl2 Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Thank you for your post! Your thoughts mirror my sentiments, which is what prompted my OP. I'm wavering as to whether or not Shurley really is good enough through the higher levels. After reading your post, I guess what I should have asked specifically is if Shurley Grammar covers advanced grammatical concepts effectively despite not using diagramming? I like Shurley. I'm just a bit confused and scared that I'm making the wrong curriculum choice for the long run, kwim? It has been my experience that, although Shurley does a good job of basic grammar, students who go all the way through Shurley 7 have not mastered the phrases and clauses. That's a lot of years of grammar to not have it mastered, IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.