Literary Analysis - Phonics Road vs SWB - a little long

[abrightmom]

:glare: I had decided to use The Phonics Road and purchased Level One. Now I am listening to SWB's lectures (they're all wonderful!!) and this one

 

"What is Literary Analysis? When, Why, and How Should I Teach it?"

( http://www.welltrainedmind.com/store/audio-products.html )

 

is ROCKING MY LA WORLD. I looked ahead to PR 2 and realize now that literature study (I assume this is the same thing as analysis) is an integral part of PR in Levels 2 - 4!!! Initially the rigor appealed to me but NOW I'm thinking that it will be too much for my kids and perhaps completely unnecessary. While I would like to use PR for the spelling and grammar I don't think using it makes sense if one leaves off the reading/composition portion which is tied to the lit study.

 

SWB's views on lit analysis make sense to me. For K-4 she says that kids need to READ and enjoy reading, summarize (this is accomplished through narration), and learning basic terms of reference (mainly genres and differentiating between fiction/non-fiction).

 

She also says, " I cannot think of a single literature curriculum targeted to elementary students that I would recommend. It is developmentally inappropriate to subject them to questions and discussion. If you’re doing a language arts program that is doing those elements I would highly recommend you skip them."

 

SO, now what? SWB's *plan* is definitely more gentle and sensible (and easy :D). She tackles literary analysis in the logic stage which seems developmentally appropriate (critical thinking skills).

 

I do have to say that in looking at other curricula I passed it over precisely because of "reading comprehension" activities and "lit guides" (i.e. Veritas Press lit guides for 2nd grade DO NOT appeal to me. Narration make sense to me and will reveal understanding. All of that written work seems useless.)

 

Can anyone chime in here? PR users who are beyond Level One or who have looked ahead and have some input. Who do I listen to here?

 

Hmmmmm. I am stumped and super frustrated. SWB's lectures are all excellent and I am learning from them. She has challenged me on many levels and really simplified the foundation laying process in K-4. If I ONLY want to use PR for the spelling and grammar portions I think it is more sensible to pick a different path :confused:. More money wasted too! I can return my package as it is unused but will lose shipping and 10% of the purchase price.

[PeterPan]

Katrina, the REAL point of the lit guides and stuff in PR is NOT to do literary analysis but to give them more writing practice. WTM/SWB wants you to do this with narrations. How about if we flip that? I can't think of a single time my child has opened up or loved writing narrations the way she does with creative or more interesting, purposed assignments, and I highly recommend you skip all narration. Well obviously that would be overkill and throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

 

If the writing in PR *fits* your dc and you think it would be beneficial, DO it! It doesn't always fit all kids. Sometimes you'll have a kid who's very advanced in one area and weaker in another. When you have a kid who is balanced and can find a LA program that just fits her, by all means use it. It's just some writing. It can be mind-numbing narrations, interesting comparison and contrast and dictation sentences in PR, anything you want. It's a tool, and *you* decide if it's valuable.

 

And just by way of contrast, you should consider that two children might interact very differently with the same materials. You get my dd in lit guides and she's bored stiff, doesn't want to do the worksheets, just wants to read the books and move on. But some kids LOVE those things. I know a dc like that, and it still amazes me, because I'm so used to my anti-worksheet dd. Some kids really enjoy them, open up with them. You can't take the principles SWB outlines in WTM and turn them into some one-size fits all paradigm that has to fit all kids. The WTM recs are NOT going to fit all kids. They're inherently NOT flexible or multi-modal. WTM insistently turns off and shies you away from things (creative options, more hands-on, etc.) that some kids really, really need. It's not like SWB taught a hundred kids, pooled those experiences, and then created lists of options (80% of the kids do this, 20% do this, 10% do this). No, they took their experiences, created a paradigm that fits what they knew. You have to translate that into YOUR kid and YOUR reality.

 

Well I must be getting onto a soap box, lol. I'm all for avoiding wasting time on stuff that is more efficiently taught later. But if the exercises are good writing practice, enjoyable to your dc, and fit the dc, they're worthwhile, even if they happen to sneak in a few lit terms or something. It WON'T kill your dc.

[PeterPan]

Katrina, the REAL point of the lit guides and stuff in PR is NOT to do literary analysis but to give them more writing practice. WTM/SWB wants you to do this with narrations. How about if we flip that? I can't think of a single time my child has opened up or loved writing narrations the way she does with creative or more interesting, purposed assignments, and I highly recommend you skip all narration. Well obviously that would be overkill and throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

 

If the writing in PR *fits* your dc and you think it would be beneficial, DO it! It doesn't always fit all kids. Sometimes you'll have a kid who's very advanced in one area and weaker in another. When you have a kid who is balanced and can find a LA program that just fits her, by all means use it. It's just some writing. It can be mind-numbing narrations, interesting comparison and contrast and dictation sentences in PR, anything you want. It's a tool, and *you* decide if it's valuable.

 

And just by way of contrast, you should consider that two children might interact very differently with the same materials. You get my dd in lit guides and she's bored stiff, doesn't want to do the worksheets, just wants to read the books and move on. But some kids LOVE those things. I know a dc like that, and it still amazes me, because I'm so used to my anti-worksheet dd. Some kids really enjoy them, open up with them. You can't take the principles SWB outlines in WTM and turn them into some one-size fits all paradigm that has to fit all kids. The WTM recs are NOT going to fit all kids. They're inherently NOT flexible or multi-modal. WTM insistently turns off and shies you away from things (creative options, more hands-on, etc.) that some kids really, really need. It's not like SWB taught a hundred kids, pooled those experiences, and then created lists of options (80% of the kids do this, 20% do this, 10% do this). No, they took their experiences, created a paradigm that fits what they knew. You have to translate that into YOUR kid and YOUR reality.

 

Well I must be getting onto a soap box, lol. I'm all for avoiding wasting time on stuff that is more efficiently taught later. But if the exercises are good writing practice, enjoyable to your dc, and fit the dc, they're worthwhile, even if they happen to sneak in a few lit terms or something. It WON'T kill your dc.

[LibraryLover]

Yes! "What is developmentally appropriate practice for small children?" is a question hsing mothers/parents need to honestly confront as they plan 'rigour' for young children. (Not talking about the gifted tots who love writing etc rigour).

 

How can we get our kids excited about literature and books and ideas and the stories of history? Who is my particular child? Does banging one's heads again the wall long enough and hard enough help small children learn?

 

 

 

 

:glare:

 

SO, now what? SWB's *plan* is definitely more gentle and sensible (and easy :D). She tackles literary analysis in the logic stage which seems developmentally appropriate (critical thinking skills).

 

QUOTE]

Edited April 29, 2010 by LibraryLover

[HappyGrace]

Hopefully someone else will chime in because I'm not the voice of experience-lol! I haven't heard the SWB audios, but I am familiar with her philosophy. I personally think it really really depends on the child, and it is hard to generalize. My dd10 is very advanced and has asked the type of questions typical for logic stage lit analysis for years, and thrives on that type of discussion/analysis. She does the same thing with the Bible. My ds is not naturally like that, but he has surprisingly been of his own accord getting in on my impromptu lit discussions with older dd, and has a lot to offer and is enjoying it and learning a lot. So I think they can do a LOT more than we give them credit for. That being said, I wouldn't want to kill their love of reading by bogging them down with looking up lots of vocab from the reading to define, etc. It's hard for me to comment, not having heard that particular audio, but that's my own general philosophy on it. Marva Collins' and also Rafe Esquith and some others' work with younger inner city kids doing high level analysis, plus my own experience, has been the basis for my philosophy on this. But like I said, I'm no expert!

 

I just wanted to say that we use PR1 and will go on to PR2 because I *love* the spelling-it is the easier-to-teach alternative to SWR that I've been praying for! I plan to use the grammar in PR2 too. For me, that is worth the purchase price. It remains to be seen whether or not we will use the lit analysis-I am leaning against it at this point, and I don't think it's integral to the spelling/grammar. I haven't seen PR2 yet, but I don't like the idea of taking that long to do *one* book. Plus we are doing TOG next year and will get a lot in that.

 

I am a tweaker and tweak everything, so it doesn't bother me to leave out that part of PR2 if it won't work for us. But that is because I personally am so sold on the other parts of the program.

[johnandtinagilbert]

Katrina,

No doubt SWB's lectures are amazing. They always are. She is a true asset to the home schooling community as a neo-classical educator. Having used the PR2 literature study (a classical approach to language arts), completed it, using it again, and currently using the PR3 lit. study, let me help you out. PR is not a lit. study like lightening lit. or anything....the lit. portion of the program has multiple intent that goes beyond lit. analysis.

 

I'll start by saying...God love you...you're freaking out about nothing. :grouphug: Rather common for home schoolers :) We tend to do that! I could go as far as to say...welcome to my world! lol!

 

The lit. study goes beyond lit analysis. I mean really, how much lit analysis can you accomplish with a 2nd grader? The entire lit. portion is not about lit. analysis, that is simply one aspect. The lit. studies are used to reinforce the spelling and grammar by including sentence writing, dictation, and copywork. The lit. study teaches writing, via what I just mentioned and also by introducing outlining and paragraph formation, and eventually, towards the end of the year, summarization.

 

The lit. analysis portion includes character study. You and your student will do what we call "research" whereby the two of you will go to pg. 25 together and read about a character there, say Pa, read the page again and then write down in an outline form what you just revisited about Pa. This will come after you have told your student the definition of character.

 

On another day, you'll define setting, and figure out where the week's reading took place....say Grandpa's house for a dance. It's nothing profound, but it gets the children thinking about books for more than pure entertainment. They start to see there are many aspects to books and that author's have intent behind how they write a story --- and so far, all 3 students who have used or completed the lit. program think it's pretty cool.

 

On another day you may work with sequence of events as the workbook provides several events and you'll put them in order. It may do so by cutting or pasting or by copying from a list. This is simply introduced as rising action, but it's not like the children are expected to write a dissertation, they will simply hit the "rise in action" again for another chapter.

 

The design of the workbook is such that you work through writing, lit. analysis, summarization, plain fun (wordsearch, recipes, illustrations), etc. with variety and ease. You will watch your child remember what they've been taught and tell you....Mom, the setting of this chapter is the Big Woods. I've said it before, PR IS SO GENTLE! I am always shocked at what they retain b/c I always think rigor helps with memory, but truth is....I have used PR2 with 3 dc, whose learning styles are different, whose preferences are different, and all 3 truly enjoy the program and the gentle, effective approach.

 

The most time intensive project of PR2 is teaching and working through outlines, which begins by you writing the outline on the board for copywork or completing it for dictation. IF you use the same method in other areas (apply the outlining to science and history), you will be amazed at how quickly they get the point. From the beginning of one school year to the end, your student will learn about outlines and they be able to complete them on their own. I am certain any average 2nd grader can ABSOLUTELY handle PR2's lit study. My son is not a lover of LA, loves PR, loves the lit. study the best, despite the writing. I am also using PR2 with an advanced 1st grader (advanced in LA) and he is able to write an outline and identify the character, plot, setting, and rise in action. Honestly, it's not hard to assertain...give a kid a lil' credit! They get it! They understand they can take a sentence like "Uncle George has blue eyes" and put it together with the other sentences about how Uncle George looks and make a paragraph. The lit. analysis is transformed into a writing lesson.

 

The character studies ("researches") increase in PR3 where you and your student will begin to compare 2 different characters. Again, you walk through the process with Mrs. Beers, so you know exactly how to teach it, then you walk through it with your student. By the 2nd character study, my dd told me she could handle it without me.

 

I'm all for gentle, Charlotte Mason style school in K-3, with a bit more pick up in grade 4......PR Totally fits the bill! It is gentle, effective, well designed and worth every penny. You will Not need any further writing program, you will not need additional practice in spelling, grammar, lit analysis or anything. You won't need additional copywork for handwriting. The only thing you'll need is to read, read, read outside of PR as MRs. Beers does not intend your child to only read the one book for an entire year! The use of the book is as a Tool. Using the book you'll do all the things I mentioned, at a pace that is ideal when you're trying to incorporate the new skills of writing, dictation, copywork, outlining, etc. The pace is perfect and flexible. Remember, when you get to PR3, you'll be using 2 books, not one!

 

Also, remember that there is a lot of dictation used in grammar as your student will use those sentences to review spelling words and learn how to mark parts of speech in a sentence. Everything is solid, rich and with purpose....no busywork!

 

Read my review again....I know you don't "know" me....but I've been home schooling for a long time, and I can tell you, this program is fantastic, complete, easy to use and hands down the last language arts program I will ever use....and fwiw, I'm picky, finicky, frugal, academic, but still gentle, and absolutely, positively bent on providing an outstanding education to my children. PR Totally fits the bill!

[johnandtinagilbert]

I just wanted to add....think of much of the lit. study as a variety of ways to cover reading comprehension :)

[Heather in VA]

Katrina,

 

I'll start by saying...God love you...you're freaking out about nothing. :grouphug: Rather common for home schoolers :) We tend to do that! I could go as far as to say...welcome to my world! lol!

 

 

 

Since Tina did such a great job of explaining, I'll just echo this part. You are really going to be fine. Seriously - you are doing great and you are going to be just fine. If someday you end up decided that what PR has is no longer what you want, then that does not in any way mean you wasted your time doing PR when it was what you wanted. In other words, if you pick a curriculum today, and it fits, and it works, and it's going great... then someday you decide you need to do something else (and believe me this will happen) that is fine and normal - it doesn't mean you picked wrong in the first place.

 

Heather

[abrightmom]

You can't take the principles SWB outlines in WTM and turn them into some one-size fits all paradigm that has to fit all kids. The WTM recs are NOT going to fit all kids. They're inherently NOT flexible or multi-modal. WTM insistently turns off and shies you away from things (creative options, more hands-on, etc.) that some kids really, really need. It's not like SWB taught a hundred kids, pooled those experiences, and then created lists of options (80% of the kids do this, 20% do this, 10% do this). No, they took their experiences, created a paradigm that fits what they knew. You have to translate that into YOUR kid and YOUR reality.

 

I like your soap boxes . . . :D You think through things well and of course you are right on what is written above. I realize SWB isn't the goddess of home schooling. Perhaps the things she says resonate with me so I am inclined to listen to her. I also see the fruit borne in her own life and take note. It's awesome (at least from an academic stand point).

 

In other words, if you pick a curriculum today, and it fits, and it works, and it's going great... then someday you decide you need to do something else (and believe me this will happen) that is fine and normal - it doesn't mean you picked wrong in the first place.

Heather, at what point will you veer from the Phonics Road? CW is on your agenda and you are already diving into Writing Tales (I have this strong desire to use this as well). I'd LOVE to see/hear your plan (realizing, as you have wisely stated, that it is subject to change! :001_smile:) Will you do the lit portions or skip those or . . . ?

[abrightmom]

I'll start by saying...God love you...you're freaking out about nothing. :grouphug: Rather common for home schoolers :) We tend to do that! I could go as far as to say...welcome to my world! lol!

 

:iagree: and :lol:!! I do think this is a common phenomenon and I need a daily dose of :chillpill:. But sometimes these questions are so so so big!!! My word. I am ready to Be an Ostrich and bury my head! No more home school decisions for crying out loud! :auto:

 

Tina thanks for spelling it out for me! I can think about it more clearly with that description . . . I am beginning to see my oldest son as fitting into a certain "group" of kids and I think he would do swimmingly with Phonetic Zoo and MCT LA (not ME at all!). Those approaches are so very different from PR. But, he is definitely "there" and I wonder if I need to go with my gut in this regard. OR just take him through PR 1 and 2 (getting him into 3rd grade somewhere) and then shift over if I still see him there. He's too young for PZ or MCT anyway:001_smile:.

 

Can't it be simpler than this, I ask? Tina would say, "Yes! Use the Phonics Road!" :tongue_smilie:

[johnandtinagilbert]

and !! I do think this is a common phenomenon and I need a daily dose of :chillpill:. But sometimes these questions are so so so big!!! My word. I am ready to Be an Ostrich and bury my head! No more home school decisions for crying out loud!

 

Tina thanks for spelling it out for me! I can think about it more clearly with that description . . . I am beginning to see my oldest son as fitting into a certain "group" of kids and I think he would do swimmingly with Phonetic Zoo and MCT LA (not ME at all!). Those approaches are so very different from PR. But, he is definitely "there" and I wonder if I need to go with my gut in this regard. OR just take him through PR 1 and 2 (getting him into 3rd grade somewhere) and then shift over if I still see him there. He's too young for PZ or MCT anyway.

 

Can't it be simpler than this, I ask? Tina would say, "Yes! Use the Phonics Road!"

:lol: I almost suggested not making any more decisions or listening to another thing for several days :) Sometimes, I really need to Step Away From the Forum!

 

I'd say your gut is good. Only you really know your dc! I would also say, I was unsure if PR would work for my current 2nd grader and I am pleasantly surprised. Finally, I would say that 1st and 2nd grade are foundation laying years...so use what is easiest and gets the job done. For me...PR no doubt....for you, maybe not :)

 

 

And yes....it's simple! Use PR :lol::lol::lol::lol:

[Heather in VA]

Let's see if I can explain my road plan.

 

I plan to do PR all the way through. Since I haven't seen every level in depth, and don't know what my daughter will be like when she hits 3rd and 4th grade, that is subject to change but I see nothing in it so far that makes me think I won't continue. I am currently using CW Primary and WT1 in addition. Not at the same time. We finished CW Spring and now we are working in WT1. We are not doing the writing projects. She's not ready for that but she's very much ready for the grammar work, the copywork, the dictionary stuff. This kid is just going to be like that. We'll probably keep working on WT and do CW Fall in there some where. Just keep working those skills. PR is a great compliment to this. She's learned things in PR that I see her apply in WT/CW and things in WT/CW that I see her apply in PR - especially in the building codes. I anticipate this just increasing as the levels go up.

 

It's hard to anticipate yet whether my dd will be ready for Aesop A in 3rd grade. I plan to continue CW Primary/WT 1 and maybe into WT 2 until she's ready for the writing projects. At that point we'll start the CW progression - whether that's 3rd or 4th (or somewhere during one of those years) I don't know yet. Along side whatever CW or WT we are doing, we'll do PR 1 (currently slated to finish in August) through PR4 (in grades 1 - 4).

 

I like the layered approach - both with different focus but complimenting each other. Grammar/writing/spelling/reading is a foundational subject. It warrants the focus of your school day (along with math and if you are our family - Latin). I wouldn't do this kind of layered approach with something like History. That isn't a foundational subject. But for something this important - I like this. Any really - it doesn't take a ton of time at all. Even my seriously ADHD daughter has no trouble with the work and that's saying something. She is not a long lesson girl.

 

Heather

[Colleen in NS]

Now I am listening to SWB's lectures (they're all wonderful!!) and this one

 

"What is Literary Analysis? When, Why, and How Should I Teach it?"

( http://www.welltrainedmind.com/store/audio-products.html )

 

is ROCKING MY LA WORLD.

 

SWB's views on lit analysis make sense to me.

 

SO, now what? SWB's *plan* is definitely more gentle and sensible (and easy :D). She tackles literary analysis in the logic stage which seems developmentally appropriate (critical thinking skills).

 

Narration make sense to me and will reveal understanding. All of that written work seems useless.)

 

SWB's lectures are all excellent and I am learning from them. She has challenged me on many levels and really simplified the foundation laying process in K-4. If I ONLY want to use PR for the spelling and grammar portions I think it is more sensible to pick a different path :confused:. More money wasted too! I can return my package as it is unused but will lose shipping and 10% of the purchase price.

 

If her suggestions resonate with you and make sense to you, and you can see that narration will reveal comprehension as well as teach writing skills, then I say stay with them. Her overview lectures were the first thing that showed me the entire grade 1-12 scope of writing/lit analysis skills from beginning to end, in an efficient and gentle way that made sense to me. "Literature programs" really turned me off and I couldn't pinpoint why until I read WTM and esp. heard that lit. lecture. At that conf., she even did another workshop where she led a group of 12-18 year olds in a literature analysis discussion and it was sooooo interesting to watch. It made lit. analysis look like fun, not worksheet/exercises-filled drudgery. It was talking and communicating!

 

Also - the lit. analysis model set out in WWE, and then in logic stage WTM lit. section (the questions set), and then in WEM really appeals to me. This is because for each stage of four years (or so), there is ONE set of questions to apply to many books. This makes things so much simpler around here, than looking at individual lit. anal. books with story-specific questions. I can take these WTM sets of questions and apply them to most lit. books, adapting to the story. They are designed to give us teaching skills, rather than to prompt us through someone else's questions for a particular book.

 

Money wasted? Well, we've all done that - it's part of *our* learning curve. Consider it just another inexpensive payment for your teacher education or something like that. :lol: It's cheaper than teacher's college, right?

 

They're inherently NOT flexible or multi-modal. WTM insistently turns off and shies you away from things (creative options, more hands-on, etc.) that some kids really, really need. It's not like SWB taught a hundred kids, pooled those experiences, and then created lists of options (80% of the kids do this, 20% do this, 10% do this). No, they took their experiences, created a paradigm that fits what they knew. You have to translate that into YOUR kid and YOUR reality.

 

I think the principles of study in WTM are flexible. For example, the logic stage lit. analysis questions - you don't have to use them all, you can diverge from them, you can adapt them to your current book...WTM even says that you will come up with your own questions as you get used to the teaching process. I also see plenty of hands-on activities in WTM - mapwork, colouring, drawing, sky-watching, science fair projects, games, SOTW AG, and even creative writing. She doesn't discourage creative writers, only the pushing of creative writing on kids who are not inclined to it. There are also plenty of workbooks for various ages/subjects mentioned in WTM. WTM source recommendations are just a sampling of what's out there to fill out the principles suggested. And, that workshop I mentioned above was VERY hands-on - she talked, she asked, kids answered, she sketched out maps for the kids to look at as they talked about Beowulf, she had them figuring out things to put on the maps; I think she even mentioned or demonstrated about looking up events going on around the time a book was written. This is mentioned in WTM, and it is hands-on. I find that as I get going with a principle for teaching, I start thinking of my own ways to cement things for my kids. My kids, do, too. Right now, they are on a Harry Potter kick, and their Lego play is reflecting this, big time. This always happens here - new interest, new lit. book, whatever; gets reflected in Legos, dress-up basket, playacting, drawing, etc..

 

And I think at first they created a plan from their own experience and desires, but they did research classical education before writing WTM. SWB has also taught probably hundreds of college kids. She sees what is the end product of the first 12 years of education, which is why she continues to advocate the methods she does. Her mother was also a teacher before she homeschooled, and I believe she has continued to consult with parents about teaching academic skills to their kids. I do believe WTM/audio recordings are a result of YEARS of experience with hundreds, if not thousands of kids and young adults.

 

HappyGrace: what you said about just using PR for spelling is what I do with WRTR. I don't use the grammar/writing/lit. analysis parts. abrightmom, you could do this, or you could return it, take the loss, and find a plain old spelling program, if it works out to be more economic AND it works for your child.

 

Also, in reading about PR in this thread - it just seems like so much work to me, and I would much rather have a teaching "pattern" to use for lit. analysis/writing. From what I can tell, SWB's methods (incl. WWE as a beginning) will accomplish the same goals, just over a longer period of time, giving students a nice long time to practice skills. I'm sure that a Mom could adapt PR to her kids because she knows her kids, but abrightmom, if you are not comfortable with it, don't feel guilty about changing your spelling and grammar route to something else!

[Heather in VA]

\

And I think at first they created a plan from their own experience and desires, but they did research classical education before writing WTM. SWB has also taught probably hundreds of college kids. She sees what is the end product of the first 12 years of education, which is why she continues to advocate the methods she does. Her mother was also a teacher before she homeschooled, and I believe she has continued to consult with parents about teaching academic skills to their kids. I do believe WTM/audio recordings are a result of YEARS of experience with hundreds, if not thousands of kids and young adults.

 

 

 

I agree with this. SWB isn't just another homeschooling mom who developed a program. Interestingly, I do not find that I can effectively use her techniques for the outcome I desire. This is a criticism of me, not SWB. I know I'm a consistent advocate for CW on this board. The most important component for me is that it doesn't focus on style and structure. It focuses on content. It teaches the students what kind of information really supports an argument. How to structure that argument intelligently. It incorporates logic and rhetoric studies. I know that SWB's plan does that. I just can't do it myself. CW is set up step by step to bring my children to that mature writing stage. I am seeing the results with my oldest. And I have been blessed to be able to afford letting the authors of CW do the upper-most levels for me by means of the online class. BUT (there is a point to this ramble) I say this for Katrina - just because I am a big fan of CW and believe it to be a truly excellent program, does not in any way imply that SWB's program wouldn't be just as good. In fact it's one of the few plans that I think will get you to the same place. If she had something laid out in the 'gee the math major mom is now teaching writing' way that WWE is for the logic and rhetoric years - maybe I could do that too. If you are listening to her tapes and it's meaning something to you and you are one of the moms like Colleen who can make it happen... then by all means. That's great. With writing, more than most subjects, you really have to understand and believe in your plan to teach it effectively - especially in the upper years. If you don't, then you'll run into those hard days and say 'ugh there has to be something better.' That used to happen to me all the time. Now when we have a rough day or the kids are whining that they don't want to do something, I don't have a roving eye. I know we are doing what needs to be done and sometimes it takes work. It takes a while to get to that stage so don't worry if you aren't there yet. But listening to what makes sense to you and what you think is the right approach is the fastest way to get there. Every woman on this board who is giving you advice wants the best for you but none of us know what that is better than you do. It's a fine line between listening to more experienced moms and having the confidence in yourself to know what's best even if some of those moms are doing something different.

:grouphug:

 

Heather

[abrightmom]

Now when we have a rough day or the kids are whining that they don't want to do something, I don't have a roving eye. I know we are doing what needs to be done and sometimes it takes work. It takes a while to get to that stage so don't worry if you aren't there yet. But listening to what makes sense to you and what you think is the right approach is the fastest way to get there. Every woman on this board who is giving you advice wants the best for you but none of us know what that is better than you do. It's a fine line between listening to more experienced moms and having the confidence in yourself to know what's best even if some of those moms are doing something different. :grouphug: Heather

Recently, as I was talking to DH about the choosing struggles I told him that home schooling is messy! It is NOT objective and it does NOT come in a neat/tidy box (kind like my PR materials :001_smile:). There is a lot of gray, trial/error, finding one's way, back tracking, starting over, etc. It has rocked my Type A personality . . . not to mention that God has given me loud, rowdy, night/day different kids and a son who is ADD to the maximum. He is nothing like me and I am struggling with trying to figure out how to achieve the goals/hopes/dreams I have for them while enjoying the journey (for the most part).

 

Heather's "fine line" is so true! I am in the learning curve with this and it is painful . . . truly truly painful. I intend to stick it out (I can hear Dory singing, "just keep swimming, just keep swimming . . .") but I am TOTALLY uncomfortable in this process.

 

Thanks Heather :D.

[abrightmom]

If her suggestions resonate with you and make sense to you, and you can see that narration will reveal comprehension as well as teach writing skills, then I say stay with them. Her overview lectures were the first thing that showed me the entire grade 1-12 scope of writing/lit analysis skills from beginning to end, in an efficient and gentle way that made sense to me. "Literature programs" really turned me off and I couldn't pinpoint why until I read WTM and esp. heard that lit. lecture. At that conf., she even did another workshop where she led a group of 12-18 year olds in a literature analysis discussion and it was sooooo interesting to watch. It made lit. analysis look like fun, not worksheet/exercises-filled drudgery. It was talking and communicating!

 

Also - the lit. analysis model set out in WWE, and then in logic stage WTM lit. section (the questions set), and then in WEM really appeals to me. This is because for each stage of four years (or so), there is ONE set of questions to apply to many books. This makes things so much simpler around here, than looking at individual lit. anal. books with story-specific questions. I can take these WTM sets of questions and apply them to most lit. books, adapting to the story. They are designed to give us teaching skills, rather than to prompt us through someone else's questions for a particular book.

 

Money wasted? Well, we've all done that - it's part of *our* learning curve. Consider it just another inexpensive payment for your teacher education or something like that. :lol: It's cheaper than teacher's college, right?

 

 

 

I think the principles of study in WTM are flexible. For example, the logic stage lit. analysis questions - you don't have to use them all, you can diverge from them, you can adapt them to your current book...WTM even says that you will come up with your own questions as you get used to the teaching process. I also see plenty of hands-on activities in WTM - mapwork, colouring, drawing, sky-watching, science fair projects, games, SOTW AG, and even creative writing. She doesn't discourage creative writers, only the pushing of creative writing on kids who are not inclined to it. There are also plenty of workbooks for various ages/subjects mentioned in WTM. WTM source recommendations are just a sampling of what's out there to fill out the principles suggested. And, that workshop I mentioned above was VERY hands-on - she talked, she asked, kids answered, she sketched out maps for the kids to look at as they talked about Beowulf, she had them figuring out things to put on the maps; I think she even mentioned or demonstrated about looking up events going on around the time a book was written. This is mentioned in WTM, and it is hands-on. I find that as I get going with a principle for teaching, I start thinking of my own ways to cement things for my kids. My kids, do, too. Right now, they are on a Harry Potter kick, and their Lego play is reflecting this, big time. This always happens here - new interest, new lit. book, whatever; gets reflected in Legos, dress-up basket, playacting, drawing, etc..

 

And I think at first they created a plan from their own experience and desires, but they did research classical education before writing WTM. SWB has also taught probably hundreds of college kids. She sees what is the end product of the first 12 years of education, which is why she continues to advocate the methods she does. Her mother was also a teacher before she homeschooled, and I believe she has continued to consult with parents about teaching academic skills to their kids. I do believe WTM/audio recordings are a result of YEARS of experience with hundreds, if not thousands of kids and young adults.

 

HappyGrace: what you said about just using PR for spelling is what I do with WRTR. I don't use the grammar/writing/lit. analysis parts. abrightmom, you could do this, or you could return it, take the loss, and find a plain old spelling program, if it works out to be more economic AND it works for your child.

 

Also, in reading about PR in this thread - it just seems like so much work to me, and I would much rather have a teaching "pattern" to use for lit. analysis/writing. From what I can tell, SWB's methods (incl. WWE as a beginning) will accomplish the same goals, just over a longer period of time, giving students a nice long time to practice skills. I'm sure that a Mom could adapt PR to her kids because she knows her kids, but abrightmom, if you are not comfortable with it, don't feel guilty about changing your spelling and grammar route to something else!

 

Colleen,

 

I appreciate how you think through things and the time you spend fleshing it out for me! You are right about SWB/WTM as far as I am concerned. While she does lay out her plans/ideas there is room to maneuver. Quite honestly, earlier on I had a panic attack USING SWB's methods because I thought they were too gentle in the early years. I questioned whether or not so little effort would lead to real results over time. I don't think that now (because I'm seeing good fruit with small, day by day efforts).

 

Choosing PR was to help me in implementing spelling the way I'd prefer to teach it and also having something so organized. I like how PR helps me to understand the English language and how it is a step by step progression. I am also drawn to the way the LA subjects seem integrated.

 

Now, however, I see that doing LA the WTM way (or something similar) would result in those subjects integrating and coming together. It just seems to come together in the logic stage (or thereabouts).

 

I may do what Heather is doing and start down the Phonics Road (Year One is mainly spelling so that is a bonus - no lit analysis to contend with for now) with some of the "layering" I had planned (that is a great descriptor Heather :001_smile:). I can then re-assess and I'll grow some as a Mom/Teacher. I'll see my kiddos in a new light after another year (or half year in the case of my 2nd grader) of growth. I'll be better equipped to make a decision for the next level. Then again . . . maybe not. :confused:

[johnandtinagilbert]

 

Also, in reading about PR in this thread - it just seems like so much work to me, and I would much rather have a teaching "pattern" to use for lit. analysis/writing. From what I can tell, SWB's methods (incl. WWE as a beginning) will accomplish the same goals, just over a longer period of time, giving students a nice long time to practice skills. I'm sure that a Mom could adapt PR to her kids because she knows her kids, but abrightmom, if you are not comfortable with it, don't feel guilty about changing your spelling and grammar route to something else!

There is a pattern, I guess I explained it poorly, and enough practice to have results returned. I've mentioned before, if there was one thing I could shout from the roof tops is this is NOT an teacher intensive program....it's so easy to use and so.very.effective :)

 

You are so right though, as children grow, you'll see what their needs are and so long as you're doing your best to meet those needs, you'll be successful and grow as a teacher! No matter what you use :)

[abrightmom]

There is a pattern, I guess I explained it poorly, and enough practice to have results returned. I've mentioned before, if there was one thing I could shout from the roof tops is this is NOT an teacher intensive program....it's so easy to use and so.very.effective :)

Tina, I do believe you here . . . and I'm not at all concerned about that (well I have had my moments but those have passed! :D). It's always good to re-state it "for the record" though!

 

It's just that whole lit analysis thing that got me thinking . . . and we all know what happens when a home school Mama starts "thinking"! :D The planets re-align or the earth flies off its orbit or something like that!:lol:

[johnandtinagilbert]

 

It's just that whole lit analysis thing that got me thinking . . . and we all know what happens when a home school Mama starts "thinking"! :D The planets re-align or the earth flies off its orbit or something like that!:lol:

:lol: No. Joke. I have thought myself in circles :willy_nilly: Just wait until high school planning....WOWZA!

[Colleen in NS]

I'm a consistent advocate for CW on this board. ...I know that SWB's plan does that. I just can't do it myself.

 

I totally hear you. Some of us say, "Got a plan to teach me? Bring it on." and others say, "Got a plan? Got a planned curriculum to flesh out that plan? Bring it on." (although I confess to still hoping that WWSkill will be out before too much longer! Not so hopeful about her third book by the time ds would need it....I worry, sometimes, too, about if I'm doing a good enough job fleshing out the "plan." :D) Homeschooling is just plain old worrisome at times!!!!!!!!!!

 

But listening to what makes sense to you and what you think is the right approach is the fastest way to get there.

 

:iagree: heartily. I mainly piped up on this thread, because it seemed to me like abrightmom was drawn to SWB's methods and that they made sense to her, not because it was the latest trend, but because she said they resonated with her.

 

I am in the learning curve with this and it is painful . . . truly truly painful. I intend to stick it out (I can hear Dory singing, "just keep swimming, just keep swimming . . .") but I am TOTALLY uncomfortable in this process.

 

That learning curve gets straight for awhile, but, I hate to tell ya, it CURVES again, REGULARLY!!!!!!!! :D In different subjects! At different ages! I have been obsessing over high school physics this past week, and you can see my umpteen questions on the high school board. Oy! I sure didn't know there were differences in high school physics courses until recently, which threw off my thinking. So, my curve is really bendy right now.

 

Quite honestly, earlier on I had a panic attack USING SWB's methods because I thought they were too gentle in the early years. I questioned whether or not so little effort would lead to real results over time. I don't think that now (because I'm seeing good fruit with small, day by day efforts).

 

It just seems to come together in the logic stage (or thereabouts).

 

I'll be better equipped to make a decision for the next level. Then again . . . maybe not. :confused:

 

Yes, you will be better equipped/experienced to make the next decision! :). And you know, if you want to make PR lit. analysis work for your kids, you certainly can tweak it. I agree with your statement that WTM LA methods start to come together around logic stage - I've seen it happen. And that appeals to me - the slow but effective method. Others like to see things happen more quickly, or their kids can *do* skills more quickly.

 

For us, my oldest was one of those VERY reluctant boy-writers, and the WTM way just worked, esp. after I heard SWB's older, initial writing audio (Writing Without Fear). On it, she told us Moms with boys that if our boys could write two or three grammatically correct, correctly spelled, and correctly punctuated sentences in a narration by the end of 4th grade, then he was doing well. This was different from what I read in WTM (several paragraphs in 4th grade?? I don't think so!) and from some of what I was reading here, and so I latched on. This was a plan I could work with, so when I read of others who seem to be having the same reaction, I encourage them.

 

Results so far? That writing-phobic boy did manage to be able to write two to three sentences in a narration by the end of 4th grade. Then I let him learn to type, then I started teaching him to do one level outlining, as well as had him keep up 2-3 sentence narrations. Those short narrations got easier and easier for him, and I gradually brought him up to 5-7 sentences now in grade 6. He still mostly writes one paragraph, but they are good summaries of his reading. It is clear to me that most of the time, he grasps and communicates the important info. or the gist of the storyline. We use these short narrations to work on paragraph structure, grammar, spelling, mechanics, and he *is* incorporating his grammar/mechanics/paragraph/spelling lessons into his writing. My dd is doing WWE 3 right now, and her skills are coming along quite nicely, too.

 

You are abrightmom, heh heh, so I am SURE you will learn within your current curve. You actually sound pretty confident.

[sleepymommy]

 

It's just that whole lit analysis thing that got me thinking . . . and we all know what happens when a home school Mama starts "thinking"! :D The planets re-align or the earth flies off its orbit or something like that!:lol:

 

:lol::lol: :lol:

[Colleen in NS]

There is a pattern, I guess I explained it poorly,

 

No, you explained it well. And probably every "program" out there has some sort of pattern to it. It's just that having SWB's pattern explained to me appealed to me, as did the slower progression. And the descriptions of what PR has young kids doing seemed like more than what I would want my kids doing, at those ages. I like the slower progression. But yes, you explained it just fine, and I did recognize that there is a pattern.:)

[Colleen in NS]

and we all know what happens when a home school Mama starts "thinking"! :D

 

:lol: No. Joke. I have thought myself in circles :willy_nilly:

 

Yep. Oh, yeah.

 

You know, I read some books recently, written by doctors, describing their first year internships after medical school, and med school experiences (cadavers, anyone?). The way they described these years of their lives reminded me SO much of being a homeschooling Mom. They were in these super-intense learning situations, learning to assess, make decisions, react quickly, and sometimes felt isolated. They also described how sometimes their friends/family didn't understand what they were going through - lack of time, lack of sleep, always thinking about interning/med school. I thought, "Wow, I can totally relate to these people!"

Edited April 30, 2010 by Colleen in NS

[PeterPan]

Katrina, I got PR3 a few years ago, when I was burnt out and needed a break from SWR. At that point we had years of WTM-style narrations under our belts and were in the middle of the WTM-style writing method approach (sans WWE, which of course wasn't out then). My dd was way beyond the reading comprehension part, was good with the spelling, and needed the contextualized practice the extra assignments would have provided, if we had done them. So I really think it's one of those things where you could go either way. If you get there and realize the stuff is busywork for *your* kid (not beneficial even as writing practice, not on-level or stimulating), then skip it. I think it's wise, as Heather is saying, to do WTM-style writing in other subjects. We were also doing a full writing program (WT2? Wow time flies and I forget).

 

All I'm saying is if you ENJOY the structure of PR, you're going to find your own groove in how you use it. You'll decide for yourself whether to use those exercises or not. And I think, as I said in my initial response, you're going to find that their value as writing exercises outweighs any qualms you might have about their necessity. I DON'T think they're necessary from a literature standpoint. But I DO think they have value as writing exercises. They're interesting, well-conceived, and worthwhile. There's just no harm. There are a lot of things WTM doesn't necessarily encourage or require that can be good when you know why you're doing them. I've dabbled in numerous lit guides over the years with my dd, and I almost always did them as an easy way to increase her writing and spelling practice. Might sound heartless, but in our house, where spelling goes in one eyeball and out the other, some drone level, easy to implement options that don't require mom are a blessing! So if I do a lit guide with questions she has to answer with complete sentences for the SPELLING and writing value, not the lit itself, it's sort of my pragmatic decision, kwim?

 

You're the boss here, the president. Feel free to make those kinds of decisions. :)

[PeterPan]

Katrina, I got PR3 a few years ago, when I was burnt out and needed a break from SWR. At that point we had years of WTM-style narrations under our belts and were in the middle of the WTM-style writing method approach (sans WWE, which of course wasn't out then). My dd was way beyond the reading comprehension part, was good with the spelling, and needed the contextualized practice the extra assignments would have provided, if we had done them. So I really think it's one of those things where you could go either way. If you get there and realize the stuff is busywork for *your* kid (not beneficial even as writing practice, not on-level or stimulating), then skip it. I think it's wise, as Heather is saying, to do WTM-style writing in other subjects. We were also doing a full writing program (WT2? Wow time flies and I forget).

 

All I'm saying is if you ENJOY the structure of PR, you're going to find your own groove in how you use it. You'll decide for yourself whether to use those exercises or not. And I think, as I said in my initial response, you're going to find that their value as writing exercises outweighs any qualms you might have about their necessity. I DON'T think they're necessary from a literature standpoint. But I DO think they have value as writing exercises. They're interesting, well-conceived, and worthwhile. There's just no harm. There are a lot of things WTM doesn't necessarily encourage or require that can be good when you know why you're doing them. I've dabbled in numerous lit guides over the years with my dd, and I almost always did them as an easy way to increase her writing and spelling practice. Might sound heartless, but in our house, where spelling goes in one eyeball and out the other, some drone level, easy to implement options that don't require mom are a blessing! So if I do a lit guide with questions she has to answer with complete sentences for the SPELLING and writing value, not the lit itself, it's sort of my pragmatic decision, kwim?

 

You're the boss here, the president. Feel free to make those kinds of decisions. :)

[Maisy]

:iagree:

 

I used Level 2 twice. The lit study was really gentle and mostly fun. I might skip the outlining because I just don't think it's necessary at this age. Also, I think I recall (though it's been years since we've used PR) that some of the copywork might contain sentence fragments. I'd fix these or skip them. What's the sense in copying a fragment?

 

 

 

Katrina,

No doubt SWB's lectures are amazing. They always are. She is a true asset to the home schooling community as a neo-classical educator. Having used the PR2 literature study (a classical approach to language arts), completed it, using it again, and currently using the PR3 lit. study, let me help you out. PR is not a lit. study like lightening lit. or anything....the lit. portion of the program has multiple intent that goes beyond lit. analysis.

 

I'll start by saying...God love you...you're freaking out about nothing. :grouphug: Rather common for home schoolers :) We tend to do that! I could go as far as to say...welcome to my world! lol!

 

The lit. study goes beyond lit analysis. I mean really, how much lit analysis can you accomplish with a 2nd grader? The entire lit. portion is not about lit. analysis, that is simply one aspect. The lit. studies are used to reinforce the spelling and grammar by including sentence writing, dictation, and copywork. The lit. study teaches writing, via what I just mentioned and also by introducing outlining and paragraph formation, and eventually, towards the end of the year, summarization.

 

The lit. analysis portion includes character study. You and your student will do what we call "research" whereby the two of you will go to pg. 25 together and read about a character there, say Pa, read the page again and then write down in an outline form what you just revisited about Pa. This will come after you have told your student the definition of character.

 

On another day, you'll define setting, and figure out where the week's reading took place....say Grandpa's house for a dance. It's nothing profound, but it gets the children thinking about books for more than pure entertainment. They start to see there are many aspects to books and that author's have intent behind how they write a story --- and so far, all 3 students who have used or completed the lit. program think it's pretty cool.

 

On another day you may work with sequence of events as the workbook provides several events and you'll put them in order. It may do so by cutting or pasting or by copying from a list. This is simply introduced as rising action, but it's not like the children are expected to write a dissertation, they will simply hit the "rise in action" again for another chapter.

 

The design of the workbook is such that you work through writing, lit. analysis, summarization, plain fun (wordsearch, recipes, illustrations), etc. with variety and ease. You will watch your child remember what they've been taught and tell you....Mom, the setting of this chapter is the Big Woods. I've said it before, PR IS SO GENTLE! I am always shocked at what they retain b/c I always think rigor helps with memory, but truth is....I have used PR2 with 3 dc, whose learning styles are different, whose preferences are different, and all 3 truly enjoy the program and the gentle, effective approach.

 

The most time intensive project of PR2 is teaching and working through outlines, which begins by you writing the outline on the board for copywork or completing it for dictation. IF you use the same method in other areas (apply the outlining to science and history), you will be amazed at how quickly they get the point. From the beginning of one school year to the end, your student will learn about outlines and they be able to complete them on their own. I am certain any average 2nd grader can ABSOLUTELY handle PR2's lit study. My son is not a lover of LA, loves PR, loves the lit. study the best, despite the writing. I am also using PR2 with an advanced 1st grader (advanced in LA) and he is able to write an outline and identify the character, plot, setting, and rise in action. Honestly, it's not hard to assertain...give a kid a lil' credit! They get it! They understand they can take a sentence like "Uncle George has blue eyes" and put it together with the other sentences about how Uncle George looks and make a paragraph. The lit. analysis is transformed into a writing lesson.

 

The character studies ("researches") increase in PR3 where you and your student will begin to compare 2 different characters. Again, you walk through the process with Mrs. Beers, so you know exactly how to teach it, then you walk through it with your student. By the 2nd character study, my dd told me she could handle it without me.

 

I'm all for gentle, Charlotte Mason style school in K-3, with a bit more pick up in grade 4......PR Totally fits the bill! It is gentle, effective, well designed and worth every penny. You will Not need any further writing program, you will not need additional practice in spelling, grammar, lit analysis or anything. You won't need additional copywork for handwriting. The only thing you'll need is to read, read, read outside of PR as MRs. Beers does not intend your child to only read the one book for an entire year! The use of the book is as a Tool. Using the book you'll do all the things I mentioned, at a pace that is ideal when you're trying to incorporate the new skills of writing, dictation, copywork, outlining, etc. The pace is perfect and flexible. Remember, when you get to PR3, you'll be using 2 books, not one!

 

Also, remember that there is a lot of dictation used in grammar as your student will use those sentences to review spelling words and learn how to mark parts of speech in a sentence. Everything is solid, rich and with purpose....no busywork!

 

Read my review again....I know you don't "know" me....but I've been home schooling for a long time, and I can tell you, this program is fantastic, complete, easy to use and hands down the last language arts program I will ever use....and fwiw, I'm picky, finicky, frugal, academic, but still gentle, and absolutely, positively bent on providing an outstanding education to my children. PR Totally fits the bill!

[abrightmom]

:iagree:

 

I used Level 2 twice. The lit study was really gentle and mostly fun. I might skip the outlining because I just don't think it's necessary at this age. Also, I think I recall (though it's been years since we've used PR) that some of the copywork might contain sentence fragments. I'd fix these or skip them. What's the sense in copying a fragment?

Lisa,

Thanks for sharing the experience you had with Level 2. I'd forgotten about the outlining and I'm glad you mentioned it. That is something I'd rather tackle in Logic stage (I think . . . this is based upon SWB's lectures which made sense to me).

 

Why are you no longer using PR 2? Just curious :D. Hearing how others have fleshed out their plan is so helpful! Did you use any Level beyond 2?

[Maisy]

 

Why are you no longer using PR 2? Just curious :D. Hearing how others have fleshed out their plan is so helpful! Did you use any Level beyond 2?

 

I liked the lit study pretty well, but I felt I needed to (and couldn't) break apart some of the other subjects. DD needed to move more slowly with spelling, but she was a very good reader, so stopping after just a few pages was frustrating for her. I did really like the grammar rule tunes. We still sing those! :lol:

 

We didn't do PR beyond Level 2. Ultimately it was easier and cheaper to buy separately for spelling, grammar, etc., especially when I started combining kiddos.

[johnandtinagilbert]

I was thinking about this thread and how funny it was to me in hindsight...I remember when I first read WTM (original edition) and now I've read the most recent. I imagine there are just so many more options, but I found the new edition to be much more hands on and lots more gentle in the early years :) The first time I read it....I thought it was the most rigorous thing I had ever seen! Kinda glad either way, cuz I've gone to more gentle early on too...so I still feel very WTM :D

[Colleen in NS]

I found the new edition to be much more hands on and lots more gentle in the early years :) The first time I read it....I thought it was the most rigorous thing I had ever seen!

 

Hey, now I'm curious. When I first read WTM (first edition) around 2002 or so, I had just been reading tons of unschooling homeschool books, so I thought, "How could anyone do this much reading and writing??" Then, I re-read the first edition in 2004, and because I wanted more of a plan to follow than just the "whatever" I'd been happy to do up until ds' grade 1 year, I bought WTM. Amazon sent me the 2004 (second) edition - I didn't realize there'd been a followup edition. Anyway, it's what I've been using and enjoying. I also read the newest edition from our library, but our library got rid of the first edition, so now I can't go back and look. What do you think has changed? You've got me thinking that maybe my initial reaction was because there was more work involved than in later editions, not so much because of the unschooling mentality I was coming out of...

[Heather in VA]

You know, one other thing that struck me in terms of WTM, PR etc... I'm really more of an LCC type girl so intensive phonics and the "layering" of writing seems natural and makes sense to me. If WTM makes sense to you, then you may find a different way to approach things. I know when I finally (and believe me - I mean FINALLY - it took me several years) started to understand what my priorities were, what I thought could be less emphasized, and saw where I wanted to head, I could then start using those ideas and priorities to choose curriculum, rather than choosing a curriculum that was good and trying to make it fit my goals. There are just too many good curriculum out there to do it that way because there can be very good curriculum that won't be right for you because of your goals and perspective.

 

Heather