Why is R&S better then...

[katemary63]

Why is R&S English better then Abeka or BJU for high school? Can someone compare the three. Our goal is a great ACT score. (of course, learning English is the primary goal.) Thanks!

[mjbucks1]

I can't compare, because I have not used any other curriculum except First Language Lesson for K-3, and then R&S (my oldest is currently in 8th grade). My children have also studis Latin from fourth grade on. They KNOW grammar, which has also helped greatly with their writing. My ds took the ACT at the end of 7th grade last year (and he is very young for his grade as his birthday is the end of September) and he scored a 28 on the English section :D. I was shocked because he is my math/science child (he did very well on those sections as well). Now, I can't say he would not have scored equally well with other programs, of course. And I do think that Latin has greatly helped our children's language scores. I think R&S is tedious :tongue_smilie:, but it works. I also like the writing instruction (we also use IEW, but R&S is great for teaching outling, organization, unity, etc). One think that is wonderful about R&S is that is "open and go". Even though it is written for a classroom, the teacher's manual is VERY easy to use, and the tests are thorough (I am not sure how easy it is to implement the others). Hopefully someone who has used both can give you some more insight :). Blessings!

[MGK]

I can reply as someone who has used Abeka in elementary and high school personally. I found Abeka to be very thorough in grammar instruction. (FWIW, I scored very high on the ACT:001_smile:)

 

In my opinion, after using Abeka your students will have a masterful command of the English language. However, I found Abeka's creative writing to be very sub-par. I think there are much better programs available for writing instruction. I can't compare Abeka with the other programs listed since I have no experience with them. The biggest complaint I've heard about Abeka is that it is very tedious, and I would have to agree with that.

HTH,

 

Melanie

[plansrme]

I have taught R&S through eighth grade and was taught in high school using Abeka. I would not use Abeka or BJU now because, other than grammar, I had a fairly sub-par high school education, but I recognize that that is a personal issue. In fact, I even bought a used copy of my high school grammar handbook (after my brother borrowed and lost my actual high school copy, which I kept for 15 years after high school) and keep it in my office for reference.

 

My bitterness aside, however, both R&S and Abeka (at least the Abeka I knew, and I cannot imagine that they have changed it much) will give your students an excellent background in grammar.

 

R&S is open-and-go, as someone else pointed out, and I think I did more diagramming in high school than my students did in R&S, but both programs are solid. They are actually fairly similar in their approach, relying on direct instruction and mastery of a bunch of seemingly-arcane rules, which is just how I like it.

 

My R&S-educated daughter made a perfect 80 on the critical reading section of the PSAT, at age 12, so she has clearly learned a lot of grammar. Before she takes the actual SAT, we just might do a year of Abeka grammar (though it pains me to admit that), or do R&S again, just to refresh her skills.

 

Terri