Will someone please explain to me why a 3rd grader should study formal grammar?...sm

[Allison TX]

After using a hodgepodge of things for Language Arts the past three years, I finally decided to try R&S English. We are only 3 weeks into the book, but I can't stand it. My ds doesn't mind it too much, but I keep wondering why he needs to learn this at such an early age. I have read the WTM and listened to SWB Writing Without Fear cd, but I still can't figure out why diagramming is necessary at this age. What will happen if I put it on hold until 7th grade? Will it be harder to understand? Please advise.:confused:

 

Allison

[NicksMama-Zack's Mama Too]

All I can tell you is that after a year of R&S, both my children are writing full and complete sentences. We have just started IEW and I rarely have to make any corrections related to poor grammar. They know where commas go and how to punctuate dialog etc. I've compared their writing with a ps kid that gets no grammar instruction beyond identifying nouns and verbs.

 

It makes a difference.

 

BTW, we didn't do any copywork, so I can't attribute their sentence composing to copywork.

 

It only takes 20-30 minutes a day to do grammar (we do odds only, white board diagramming and workbook). It's not that painful!!

 

Just my .02

k

[LG Gone Wild]

Go figure.:confused: He really enjoyed FLL 1&2. We are doing a creative writing this time and he isn't so hot on it. I am looking forward to FLL 3. BTW, Latin is a big hit here too. :confused:

 

Have you tried either of those programs for grammar studies?

[Kate in VA]

We just started R & S English grade 2 for a couple of weeks or so and evern though I find it boring at times my dd loves it. We do it orally and then at the end of the unit we do the test.

 

I think grammar is incredibly important on learning to write properly and reading. If you wait to 7th grade my opinion that your dc will be way behind and frustrated. There written work will suffer as well

Just my opinion

[Michelle T]

but I DON'T think such advanced grammar is necessary in early elementary grades. Just the basics are fine.

Michelle T

[Karen in CO]

without getting bogged down in the mechanics of writing. I think of it as the same as learning math facts before learning to do word problems. You could do them without knowing the facts, but it makes it easier.

 

I don't think you will ruin your child if you don't learn to diagram in third grade, but learning to write will be easier if your child understands basic grammar.

[Heather in VA]

but I DON'T think such advanced grammar is necessary in early elementary grades. Just the basics are fine.

Michelle T

 

I'm going to agree here and even if you do more advanced grammar there are far less painful ways to do it than R&S - which frankly put me in a coma and really didn't help my dd internalize the grammar anyway.

 

There are lots of other ways to approach it. For a traditional grammar program that is way less painful - look at FLL3. For grammar incorporated with writing, which is really where the focus should be, look at Writing Tales. It's a wonderful program that focuses on writing and adds the necessary grammar for this age to ensure proper sentence structure and syntax. For a more Charlotte Mason approach look at English for the Thoughtful Child or Primary Language Lessons where you learn grammar in context.

 

Hope this helps some

[PariSarah]

Seventh and eight grade is probably just the right time to get things really drilled into them, so that they're prepared for high school-level writing. But exposure to basic grammatical terms and ideas before then is helpful to get them used to the idea that studying grammar isn't that bad. (I didn't find R&S burdensome or overly technical, but I was an English major, so I just love this stuff anyway.)

 

It's definitely worth trying to find a program that "clicks" with your kids, even if it doesn't work for you. The goal is for them to hit eighth grade grammar with the idea, "Oh, grammar. Yeah, that's not so bad. I can do that." (The goal of eighth grade grammar is for them to enter ninth grade thinking, "I have conquered the Grammar Beast and made it my plaything!!")

 

One other reason: if you plan to study a foreign language before then, they need to know the basics of their own language. It's almost impossible to understand that French puts indirect and direct object pronouns before the verb if you are fuzzy on how those things function in English. If you're planning on holding off foreign languages until high school, that's not such a biggie, though.

[Allison TX]

Thank you for the advice. I will probably continue with R&S for the remainder of the year and then re-evaluate. I guess if ds doesn't mind it, then I shouldn't either!:)

[Rhondabee]

until he came home. I mean, when we started he didn't even know the difference between a noun and a verb. NO grammar!

 

Starting it at that point was *so* not fun! Not a great analogy, but - starting that late was rather like letting dc have as much chocolate cake as he wanted every day of his life; and then, suddenly, deciding dc must start eating peas daily instead. Whereas, if he had just always eaten peas, peas would be no big deal, and chocolate would be a reward rather than an expectation.

 

My 2nd ds (who started hs'ing in 2nd when my older was in 5th) is learning this stuff SO MUCH EASIER!!!! It is nothing to him (in comparison) - just not a big deal at all. A couple of peas a day vs. the huge mouthfuls my older ds had to swallow trying to "catch up".

 

I wish I could wax more eloquent and help you see how much, *much* easier it has been (and will be) for my younger son because he has such a firm foundation. It is heart-breaking for me to see my older ds STILL struggle in his writing because bad habits were allowed to develop early on, and it is hard - oh, so hard - to rebuild! So much better (and much fewer tears!) to start early and build slow.

 

MHO and, of course, YMMV!

Rhonda

[C_l_e_0..Q_c]

In other languages, (at least in French, that's the one I'm familiar with) such knowledge is necessary to write properly. In second grade, a child is expected to find verb, subject, direct object, indirect object, sentence object ( a new beast, there was none of those when I was a kid! :confused1: ) and something called 'complement of the noun' . That's on top of knowing verb, nouns, adjectives, adverbs and determinants.

Without those concepts, a child cannot write proper French, even the most basic sentences.

[Mabelen]

I know I was taught grammar in school from an early age. I remember parsing and diagramming in 4th grade and I absolutely loved it!

 

I agree with PariSarah. A sound understanding of grammar is essential to learn foreign languages, unless you are learning by total immersion.

[Stacy in NJ]

it's easier for the child to generalize later. I think this really has an effect on their ability to write clearly as the need to write with more complexity increases.

 

That last sentence probably wasn't all that clear. I blame it on the complete lack of formal grammer in my ps education.:D

[Beth in Central TX]

That last sentence probably wasn't all that clear. I blame it on the complete lack of formal grammer in my ps education.:D

 

I know that somewhere along the way, I was taught grammar. However, it was obviously not systematic because I remember very little of it. I remember more about grammar from my German classes than anything else.

 

I want my boys to know grammar. We've been doing R&S grammar since 3rd grade, and my oldest is just about to finish up the 6th grade books. They know the grammar they've learned, and they can use it in their writing. My goal is to have them well-grounded in grammar concepts; R&S is doing just that. A year or two exposure didn't work for me, so I'm not going to rely on that for my boys.

[rafiki]

.

[BarbinTN]

You should join the yahoo group for IEW and you will get a more varied opinion.

Blessings,

Barb

[PeterPan]

You do want to do a little bit, because you're going to want to refer to it when you start a writing program. Some people even use their grammar time as writing, which I don't. If it feels like too much, cut back on it, set a timer. 5-10 minutes is not too much and is still enough to get done the basics. You could use the workbooks R&S puts out (They're cheap, only $2.50!) and just do part of the problems, not all. It doesn't have to be a heavy-handed study. Yes, you could skip the diagramming. It's a bit much for the age and some kids get it, some kids don't. Just do it lightly this year and do a little more the next. If you're considering Writing Tales (you'll love this!), they don't need a ton of grammar to do WT1. The grammar picks up in WT2, but even then is nicely complemented by just a light touch in your separate grammar time. So do it, but don't make it such a labor-intensive thing, not unless you're also using it as your writing time, in which case you'll need to spend more time. But if you're doing a separate writing course, you can keep the grammar light. :)

[Trivium Academy]

I agree. We'll use Junior Analytical Grammar probably 5th or 6th, otherwise we're just using Primary Language Lessons which has varied lessons in all areas of language arts.

 

From the research I've done and other veterans' opinions, it's a waste of time to feed children too much grammar before they are able to apply it. Why teach grammar every single year as a formal subject when children are still digesting how to read and understand what they reading? The basics are needed so that they can form sentences, I've taught my 2nd grader about subjects and predicates without a curriculum. I think others choose to do formal grammar from the beginning due to fear, lack of research as to why they are teaching formal grammar or their educational goals involve early grammar such as for foreign languages.

 

I used FLL for first grade and then it became stagnant this year in 2nd. I looked at R&S and it was just not what I would consider for my own children to promote a love of learning in our home. I've tried many things this year (in 2nd) to satisfy the ideas that WTM put in my head about grammar early and continuous, it wasn't until I let go that my dd7 really blossomed. She wants to write now and looks forward to our language arts lessons. She's continuously asking me how to spell words that she wants to include in her own sentences done on her own accord.

 

Relaxed is going very well for us.

 

3/17 update: Although it doesn't bother me that others wish apply negative rep points to a post, I do wish that if you choose to do so, to identify yourself. It does bother me that I have been criticized within the reputation area as being insulting to others when I was only attempting to share my opinion. If you feel I was insulting in this post, I apologize for that was not my intent at all, but of course I have no idea to whom I'm apologizing for voicing my opinion.

 

As for the criticism that I do not have a 3rd grader, our 3rd grade curriculum has been chosen, bought and assessed and my post above reflects my research and decisions regarding 3rd grade. As a two year participant of these boards, Aristotle's quote comes to mind. "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." So, whenever I post, my intention is only to make my opinion available for those who ask for other's opinions/experiences, the end process of gathering opinions and assessing what is best for that individual, is up to the individual.

[Jill- OK]

I think of it as the same as learning math facts before learning to do word problems. You could do them without knowing the facts, but it makes it easier.

 

I don't think you will ruin your child if you don't learn to diagram in third grade, but learning to write will be easier if your child understands basic grammar.

 

I completely agree, and I'm getting ready to start my second batch of kids on Rod and Staff grammar, next year, Lord Willing. :-)

 

I firmly believe that we've avoided a lot of writing angst in later years because of the understanding that Rod and Staff gives about grammar, and sentence structure.

 

Now, I do it orally, for quite a while, and don't assign *all* of the exercises, so I'm not a purist, lol, but it doesn't have to be difficult or boring. (For the kids, that is. ;-) You can scan the lesson, and implement what's being taught through conversation, copywork, or diagramming on a whiteboard. (Or on the driveway with sidewalk chalk.)

 

Five or ten minutes a day of teaching basic grammar is a great investment, IME.

[BarbinTN]

Well said!

[gandpsmommy]

I agree. We'll use Junior Analytical Grammar probably 5th or 6th, otherwise we're just using Primary Language Lessons which has varied lessons in all areas of language arts.

 

From the research I've done and other veterans' opinions, it's a waste of time to feed children too much grammar before they are able to apply it. Why teach grammar every single year as a formal subject when children are still digesting how to read and understand what they reading? The basics are needed so that they can form sentences, I've taught my 2nd grader about subjects and predicates without a curriculum. I think others choose to do formal grammar from the beginning due to fear, lack of research as to why they are teaching formal grammar or their educational goals involve early grammar such as for foreign languages.

 

I used FLL for first grade and then it became stagnant this year in 2nd. I looked at R&S and it was just not what I would consider for my own children to promote a love of learning in our home. I've tried many things this year (in 2nd) to satisfy the ideas that WTM put in my head about grammar early and continuous, it wasn't until I let go that my dd7 really blossomed. She wants to write now and looks forward to our language arts lessons. She's continuously asking me how to spell words that she wants to include in her own sentences done on her own accord.

 

Relaxed is going very well for us.

 

Jessica, while I have been very excited to see your evolution over the past few months and the resulting joy that is clearly communicated in your posts, I have to disagree with you about this. Some children are very ready for formal grammar at this age. My dd was ready for FLL in K5 and is finishing up the second grade work this year. She will definitely be ready to move onto something more challenging next year. I agree that formal grammar might seem irrelevant with a child who is still mastering basic phonics and reading comprehension skills, but many children this age are already reading fluently. My dd, for example, was reading on a second grade level halfway through K5, and is reading on a fourth to fifth grade level halway through first grade. I don't think most people choose to do formal grammar in early elementary out of fear or ignorance, but because they see it as laying a great foundation for writing. :001_smile:

[Kelli in TN]

From the research I've done and other veterans' opinions, it's a waste of time to feed children too much grammar before they are able to apply it. Why teach grammar every single year as a formal subject when children are still digesting how to read and understand what they reading? The basics are needed so that they can form sentences, I've taught my 2nd grader about subjects and predicates without a curriculum. I think others choose to do formal grammar from the beginning due to fear, lack of research as to why they are teaching formal grammar....

 

 

 

I am not exactly a veteran, but I started out homeschooling with a very laid back approach and very light grammar in the early years. Now I homeschool with a great deal more structure and I find that the mental exercise of daily grammar lessons, including a good bit of diagramming, has been very good for my kids. I really do not believe I am doing this out of fear. I am not afraid of elementary school.

 

Ssshhhhh, don't tell my 11th grader, but I am terrified of 12th grade!!!:willy_nilly:

 

Anyway, I just wanted to give another perspective to this. I really don't think I have laid out the gameplan for my 7th, 4th and 1st grader based on fear. I also do not think I suffer from a lack of research and in fact my decision to use a structured grammar course beginning in 1st grade is based on my research.:)

[Kelli in TN]

. I agree that formal grammar might seem irrelevant with a child who is still mastering basic phonics and reading comprehension skills, but many children this age are already reading fluently.

 

 

:iagree: with the bulk of your post! The only thing I would add is that even my special needs 8 year old, who is most definately NOT reading fluently, benefits from his daily grammar lesson using FLL.

 

He can quote you the definition of a noun and give you examples of proper and common nouns! No need to wait for reading comprehension, we can be laying the foundation now. We just keep it light and keep it fun and the work gets done in mere minutes per day.

[Kelli in TN]

I completely agree, and I'm getting ready to start my second batch of kids on Rod and Staff grammar, next year, Lord Willing. :-)

 

I firmly believe that we've avoided a lot of writing angst in later years because of the understanding that Rod and Staff gives about grammar, and sentence structure.

 

Now, I do it orally, for quite a while, and don't assign *all* of the exercises, so I'm not a purist, lol, but it doesn't have to be difficult or boring. (For the kids, that is. ;-) You can scan the lesson, and implement what's being taught through conversation, copywork, or diagramming on a whiteboard. (Or on the driveway with sidewalk chalk.)

 

Five or ten minutes a day of teaching basic grammar is a great investment, IME.

 

 

I am on my second batch of Rod and Staffers, too!!

 

We also do a great deal of it orally, I only assign as much written work as I feel the child needs to cement it in his or her brain and we diagram at the whiteboard.

 

We have NEVER diagrammed on the driveway, though! That is brilliant! I am so picking up a fresh box of sidewalk chalk next week just for this purpose. You are a flippin genius! My kids will be stoked by this!

[mcconnellboys]

I do think that studying grammar throughout the elementary years helps to ingrain the rules and concepts so that they become second nature by the time a child is in middle school and should be ready to do more hefty writing assignments. Waiting until that time to begin to learn grammar seems to me that it would cause one to have to put off writing, to some extent, until high school. I mean, of course they can still write, but I'm just not sure that they can write lengthier things or more complex things as well as they might be able to if they were already comfortable with how to put their sentences together. Grammar gives them the basis for writing. That's why I think it's good to have a sound base in grammar by the time one gets into middle school writing.

 

I still believe in continuing grammar right through middle school, but it begins to give way to more intense writing and literary analysis by high school.

 

Regena

[gandpsmommy]

:iagree: with the bulk of your post! The only thing I would add is that even my special needs 8 year old, who is most definately NOT reading fluently, benefits from his daily grammar lesson using FLL.

 

He can quote you the definition of a noun and give you examples of proper and common nouns! No need to wait for reading comprehension, we can be laying the foundation now. We just keep it light and keep it fun and the work gets done in mere minutes per day.

 

I actually was re-thinking that statement and wishing I hadn't made it. I (happily) stand corrected!:iagree:

[C_l_e_0..Q_c]

We have NEVER diagrammed on the driveway, though! That is brilliant! I am so picking up a fresh box of sidewalk chalk next week just for this purpose. You are a flippin genius! My kids will be stoked by this!

 

oh! We've done Latin declensions on the driveway.

I would write the endings in a totally random manner, mixing up 1st, 2nd and 3rd declensions. Then my son would 'hopscotch' from one ending to another, and recite his endings that way. I'd give him a word ,and he would decline it properly, jumping from one ending to the other.

 

Great game, except this winter... Where's my driveway again?

[Trivium Academy]

Terri,

I didn't just say it was out of fear, I said:

I think others choose to do formal grammar from the beginning due to fear, lack of research as to why they are teaching formal grammar or their educational goals involve early grammar such as for foreign languages.

 

I should have said, "...educational goals involve early formal grammar..."

 

I've always felt this way but I also felt convicted by WTM when I read it and now after researching and reading more widely, I understand why it is not necessary.

 

Isn't it beautiful to be able to choose the educational path we wish to lead our children down? We don't have to agree, I just stated my opinion and you stated yours. ;)

[Trivium Academy]

I am not exactly a veteran, but I started out homeschooling with a very laid back approach and very light grammar in the early years. Now I homeschool with a great deal more structure and I find that the mental exercise of daily grammar lessons, including a good bit of diagramming, has been very good for my kids. I really do not believe I am doing this out of fear. I am not afraid of elementary school.

 

Ssshhhhh, don't tell my 11th grader, but I am terrified of 12th grade!!!:willy_nilly:

 

Anyway, I just wanted to give another perspective to this. I really don't think I have laid out the gameplan for my 7th, 4th and 1st grader based on fear. I also do not think I suffer from a lack of research and in fact my decision to use a structured grammar course beginning in 1st grade is based on my research.:)

 

My bad. I used a generalization, I thought I had gotten better at that! Lol. I will say that most homeschoolers I know, do not research the 'whys' of learning subjects at certain times/ages and 'how' to teach it the most effective way, outside of their chosen learning approach. On this board, that is certainly not the case, thankfully. I was on the grammar every year route but then I realized I wanted to know why. My goals for my children also changed as I was reading about the 'whys'.

[siloam]

I agree here too.

 

My dd has covered some of the parts of speech in 3rd (Aesop A), now half way through 4th she is just starting JAG (maybe I should put that in my sig line? LOL!).

 

Heather

 

p.s. She also covered some in 3rd doing Spectrum practice tests because we are required here to test at the end of 3rd grade. She passed with flying colors. She really only needed to know subject and verb.

 

[Jill- OK]

...yet. :-)

 

But I know from experience that a whiteboard or anything else that isn't a piece of paper, lol, for some reason, seems to make things much easier.

[Janet in WA]

I taught my sons formal grammar (or tried to) from the very beginning. It was a waste of time in the elementary years. They weren't ready for it, an they didn't need it. If I had it to do over again, we wouldn't begin a formal study of grammar until 6th or 7th grade. Before that, we'd address writing mechanics and only very basic grammar (usage issues) that was needed to get them writing.

[BarbinTN]

Ahhh, VETERAN advice; I LIKE IT!!!!!!

Thanks for sharing Janet!

Barb

[Jackie in AR]

I do think that studying grammar throughout the elementary years helps to ingrain the rules and concepts so that they become second nature by the time a child is in middle school and should be ready to do more hefty writing assignments. Waiting until that time to begin to learn grammar seems to me that it would cause one to have to put off writing, to some extent, until high school. I mean, of course they can still write, but I'm just not sure that they can write lengthier things or more complex things as well as they might be able to if they were already comfortable with how to put their sentences together. Grammar gives them the basis for writing. That's why I think it's good to have a sound base in grammar by the time one gets into middle school writing.

 

I still believe in continuing grammar right through middle school, but it begins to give way to more intense writing and literary analysis by high school.

 

Regena

 

These are my thoughts, too.

 

If a child knows the basic parts of speech and how they work together to form a sentence, you can jump right into the more complex grammar topics / writing in middle school without having to get up to speed. As the mother of two 7th graders, I have been very happy that they had that grammar basis as they've progressed.

 

The early years are great for memorization, so IMO you should put that ability to good use! 10 to 15 minutes per day can make a huge difference and I really think you'll be glad you did.

 

ONE MORE THOUGHT: If you plan to do any foreign language prior to middle school, it will be vital to have a knowledge of grammar.

[Jackie in AR]

From the research I've done and other veterans' opinions, it's a waste of time to feed children too much grammar before they are able to apply it. Why teach grammar every single year as a formal subject when children are still digesting how to read and understand what they reading? The basics are needed so that they can form sentences, I've taught my 2nd grader about subjects and predicates without a curriculum. I think others choose to do formal grammar from the beginning due to fear, lack of research as to why they are teaching formal grammar or their educational goals involve early grammar such as for foreign languages.

 

 

 

Not all veterans have that opinion, Jessica.

 

My oldest two are 7th graders, which doesn't really qualify me as a veteran, but I'm far enough down the path to realize that early grammar instruction has been wonderful for our family. There are plenty of other things to focus on when your child gets to middle school. It has been so nice to be able to move on to those and not be learning the definition of a noun.

 

Our choosing to learn grammar in the grammar stage years has nothing to do with fear or lack of research. It has to do with my opinion that the grammar stage is for learning the grammar (elementary knowledge) of each subject. Children's minds absorb things so easily at that stage, so I choose to take full advantage. Not just in grammar, but in other subjects as well.

 

 

In our family, it is time very well spent.

[Jackie in AR]

After using a hodgepodge of things for Language Arts the past three years, I finally decided to try R&S English. We are only 3 weeks into the book, but I can't stand it. My ds doesn't mind it too much, but I keep wondering why he needs to learn this at such an early age. I have read the WTM and listened to SWB Writing Without Fear cd, but I still can't figure out why diagramming is necessary at this age. What will happen if I put it on hold until 7th grade? Will it be harder to understand? Please advise.:confused:

 

Allison

 

Allison, there have been some great points made in this thread about why to go ahead and study that grammar now.

 

After I posted, I went and watched parts of Janice in NJ's video on the curriculum board; you should go watch that and make sure to read the post I've linked below. She demonstrates very well why it is great for your dc to learn grammar at an early age!

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?p=107387#poststop

[Trivium Academy]

I thought we were talking about formal grammar, and I've posted numerous posts (unfortunately unable to be linked from the old boards) where I struggled with whether we should be doing so much grammar at an early age. A good many veterans on this board helped me see that so much isn't really necessary and as well as other homeschool veterans on other boards and IRL.

 

I didn't just take their word for it though, I read about the teaching of grammar in many texts, including ones outside of the homeschooling scope. I made a decision based on my instincts and what I read, as well as what the veterans who had a different opinion shared. We are studying French, so I also researched the importance of learning grammar early for foreign language studies. I was very concerned about laying a foundation so that we wouldn't be spinning our wheels in a few years learning about french grammar.

 

My main point is no matter what you decide for your own- early formal grammar or informal grammar now with formal grammar later- make sure you're not doing it out of fear, or because you don't really understand the why/how/when and that you have clear educational goals to follow. Isn't that the best that any of us can do? It's completely individual whether you feel formal grammar is needed in K-3, I voiced my opinion as wanted by the OP.

 

I'm grateful that I have done my research and found our path because if I wasn't comfortable, I would be panicking :willy_nilly: right now about doing formal grammar with my dd7 and that would kill the love of learning we're enjoying right now. Right now, dd7 is learning grammar through doing and it that is our experience and joy. She's learning more than she did with FLL but I can't fully attribute that to just relaxing in the grammar department. I've equipped myself with knowledge of what I need to teach her, and it's going very well for us.

 

 

So again, I'm sorry I used generalizations and apparently some buzz words that prompted attention. The only reason I responded was to offer our experience, not to debate early formal grammar vs. later.

 

:auto: Moving along,

[Rhondabee]

I will admit that both dh and I come from families whose speak is salted and peppered with such phrases as "we ain't got no" (and other, less obvious phrases which I'm finding out in R&S-7 are not correct :confused: - as my ds says, "curse our southern ways!")

 

I suppose if your family naturally speaks in "the King's English" even in informal conversation, then formal grammar would be a bunch of "well, duh!" moments and essentially unnecessary.

 

But, OTOH, we find a way to make R&S fun. (People who can say, "we ain't got no" have a way of making anything fun!) The curriculum is simply a guide book. We aren't interacting with it - we're interacting with each other, and can insert ourselves into it.

[Jill- OK]

...about 'early' vs. 'late' (and forgive me if someone else has said this, and I haven't seen it); since the OP said "third grade" in her post, that's why I responded in the positive...because that's when we *begin* formal grammar study.

 

I don't start before then (apart from "Sentences and names of people and things start with capital letters, and you end sentences with one of these marks...") because we're focusing on reading, and reading well.

 

If we're speaking of ages earlier than that, I might agree with someone who pooh-poohs 'early' grammar study, but third grade is sort of a benchmark for us.

 

By then, we've been doing copywork for handwriting, and getting familiar with simple, basic sentences (I don't give them copywork too far above their current reading level), and they're ready to move on to writing on their own, necessitating (imo) an understanding of what makes a 'complete' sentence. Hence, Rod and Staff. (I use R&S because it goes so perfectly with the writing goals I have for various stages, and it's so easy to translate it directly into the type of writing I want from them).

 

Anyway, just another pair of pennies, but I did want to clarify what I mean, *personally* when I say 'early grammar study'; about third grade. (Kids who read extremely well and show a desire to do it before then might get a chance even earlier, here, but I tend to be on the conservative side, about early formal work. The reverse might also be true if I had a child who wasn't ready fluently by third grade.)

[Allison TX]

Wow! Thank you everyone for all the responses. You have given me a lot to think about.:)

[Laura Corin]

All I can tell you is that after a year of R&S' date=' both my children are writing full and complete sentences. We have just started IEW and I rarely have to make any corrections related to poor grammar. They know where commas go and how to punctuate dialog etc. I've compared their writing with a ps kid that gets no grammar instruction beyond identifying nouns and verbs.

[/quote']

 

Both my boys write in complete sentences and punctuate well. For example, my 2nd grader can punctuate dialogue and spot a misplaced colon. They have had minimal grammar training: parts of speech and punctuation have been lightly touched on. They are, however, voracious readers who have just absorbed decent style.

 

My current thought is that intensive, formal grammar is necessary for some children who don't pick it up through reading. For others, it's just not needed.

 

Best wishes

 

Laura

[Kelli in TN]

...about 'early' vs. 'late' (and forgive me if someone else has said this, and I haven't seen it); since the OP said "third grade" in her post, that's why I responded in the positive...because that's when we *begin* formal grammar study.

 

I don't start before then (apart from "Sentences and names of people and things start with capital letters, and you end sentences with one of these marks...") because we're focusing on reading, and reading well.

 

If we're speaking of ages earlier than that, I might agree with someone who pooh-poohs 'early' grammar study, but third grade is sort of a benchmark for us.

 

 

 

Anyway, just another pair of pennies, but I did want to clarify what I mean, *personally* when I say 'early grammar study'; about third grade. (Kids who read extremely well and show a desire to do it before then might get a chance even earlier, here, but I tend to be on the conservative side, about early formal work. The reverse might also be true if I had a child who wasn't ready fluently by third grade.)

 

Jill, I will just follow you around and wave this :iagree: sign, okay?

 

I do start grammar earlier than Jill does, but we use FLL and come on, it's like 5 minutes of "What is a noun? Is your name a noun? Do you remember that poem about the caterpillar? Why don't we recite the caterpillar poem together now? Good job. Now tell me one more time the defintion of a noun. Great job. Give me a high five. Okay, go play."

 

Because we do a bit each day while they are young, when they get older we might be able to skip entire lessons of grammar. It is not unusual for Gabriel, my 7th grader, to hold up his grammar book and have me say, "Oh, you have been doing that since 2nd grade, haven't you? Well, read it for review and then move on." This is a nice contrast to the days when he gets. totally. stuck. and. mired. down. in the difference between attributive and restrictive adjectives.

[Kelli in TN]

I will admit that both dh and I come from families whose speak is salted and peppered with such phrases as "we ain't got no" (and other, less obvious phrases which I'm finding out in R&S-7 are not correct :confused: - as my ds says, "curse our southern ways!")

 

I suppose if your family naturally speaks in "the King's English" even in informal conversation, then formal grammar would be a bunch of "well, duh!" moments and essentially unnecessary.

 

But, OTOH, we find a way to make R&S fun. (People who can say, "we ain't got no" have a way of making anything fun!) The curriculum is simply a guide book. We aren't interacting with it - we're interacting with each other, and can insert ourselves into it.

 

:lol:

 

I am not southern by birth, I am a dang yankee. But my husband is very, very southern.

 

I received the highest compliment from a retired "old school" English teacher. She was talking with my college age daughter and my high school daughter. Out of the blue she said "Your English is perfect. Who taught you to speak like that, you do not speak like your dad." :lol:

 

I leaned over to my husband and said "See, ain't you glad you married this here dang yankee so she could learn your girls to talk real good?"

[Janet in WA]

I'd like to add that our 22 yos is about to earn a degree in journalism with a minor in English. 20 yos is a junior majoring in psychology with a minor in communcations. Both speak and write beautifully. I primarily credit their reading and conversation for that, and give only secondary (if that much) credit to their formal study of grammar. A formal grammar study fine-tuned their speaking and writing, but it definitely wasn't funamental to it.

 

I also want to make it clear that we did study grammar intensively and thoroughly (not an Easy Grammar fan here), but it wasn't until the jr. high and early high school years that our sons were really ready for that study. If others' children are ready for formal grammar in the elementary years, I'm all for it. But for those who, for whatever reason, are grappling with the decision to delay a formal study of grammar until later, I'm here to tell you that your children will do fine -- and possibly better than fine.

[Annie Laurie]

I taught my sons formal grammar (or tried to) from the very beginning. It was a waste of time in the elementary years. They weren't ready for it, an they didn't need it. If I had it to do over again, we wouldn't begin a formal study of grammar until 6th or 7th grade. Before that, we'd address writing mechanics and only very basic grammar (usage issues) that was needed to get them writing.

 

I agree with this approach. I think grammar is often too abstract for some young kids to grasp and retain.

[Janet in WA]

In my opinion, a formal study of grammar when our children are in their elementary years may have some real benefit if the parent is weak in grammar. My comments about delaying formal grammar instruction assume a parent who is comfortable with the principles of grammar that an elementary aged child needs for speaking and writing.

[nmoira]

My current thought is that intensive, formal grammar is necessary for some children who don't pick it up through reading. For others, it's just not needed.

I think it depends both on the child and the approach. My advanced 6yo loves Michael Clay Thompson's grammar series which deals with only the nuts and bolts of the language. It's amusing and engaging in a way I haven't seen in other programs. I like that his system doesn't use stick diagramming, but rather emphasizes how the elements of grammar and integrated and multi-layered. I may be in the minority here, but I think that when breaking down sentences functionally in stick diagrams, it is easy to forget the fact that the beauty of language should be paramount. She'll probably continue to use one book per year -- they are designed to be done with quickly, in the first couple months of the school year. DD did do one level of GWG, but I now accept that she will indeed learn everything she needs to know about punctuation, etc. through reading and having her work corrected (which of course means I have to bone up, and what does that say about my argument?). GWG was painless, but not necessary at her stage; if she needs something later on, we'll worry about incidentals then.

 

One could say that she doesn't really NEED the grammar, but rather is drawn to it. I don't have a good sense of how it may help her with other languages, but it seems easier to have the framework already in place for discussion. I will probably start formal grammar with my youngest when she reaches the stage her sister's at now (which will probably be 3 years later chronologically), perhaps through Latin.

[Testimony]

I did not read the other posts, but I started teaching my older son formal grammar this year (fourth grade). In the past, I taught him by reading a book and we would look up words we did not know and figure out the part of speech to find the definition. That was how I taught grammar for the last three years. I told him what a noun was by using Mad Libs. I think grammar is very hard.

 

Grammar really is a logic stage lesson in my opinion. There is a lot of thinking skill that take place when teaching grammar and helping the child to sort it out. That is why I only taught my son basic what is a noun, verb, adjective, etc (or the 8 parts of speech). He started this year learning about prepositional phrases. They can be like an adjective or adverb. There is a great deal of critical thinking skill that are taking place.

 

Grammar stage is a perfect stage to expose the child to each part of speech and their function, but that is all I think a child should know. That's just my 2 cents.

 

:lurk5:

[michaeljenn]

Allison,

 

I understand your doubt in teaching grammar at a young age. I truly think grammar is tough!! I am currently using Rod and Staff 3 with my 8yo, and if there is something that is hard for her to get, but I know we will get back to in later years of Rod and Staff, then I just try to help her "get" it and then move on.

 

I do have to say though, that she has really learned alot this year, which shows in her writing. For example, proper capitalization, periods, commas... that kind of thing. She feels confident in her writing. I also make her write out her answers on paper... which I think has really helped her cement the concepts. I think of it as more handwriting/copywork practice. I do have to admit that this particular dd enjoys Rod and Staff... But my 12yo son HATES it... too bad... still gotta do it!:tongue_smilie:

 

This is the first year we have done formal grammar too. I had her do copywork/dictation for k-2nd, and we just discussed things.

 

So I guess what I am saying is yes, I do believe it is important. However, you can mold and shape any grammar program to meet your specific needs for each particular child that year.

[Rhondabee]

whenever we came home from college for any extended family event. :lol:

 

And, I have to say, I am *so* thankful to be homeschooling and learning - and knowing that my dc are learning. DC have even started correcting their father, though I don't think I'll ever purge them of the dreaded, "Me and my friend."

 

(I had read that about you on the general board awhile back. And, though I do like your new sig line, I miss the old one! :D)