I gotta ask again: FLL or R&S?

[KeriJ]

I just. can't. decide. :)

[Brenda in FL]

FLL. (And I've used both.)

[ABQmom]

FLL 1 and 2, then switch to Rod and Staff at level 3. I've used both too, but FLL 3 and 4 were annoying to ds and I. Both are really great programs--you probably should try to look at them both. Really they cover mostly the same info, but just in different ways.

[lionfamily1999]

FLL :D

[Kipling]

OK, I'll buck the trend. We like Rod & Staff

We tried FLL 1/2, but it was just too slow and repetitive. We switched to R&S 2 mid-year and it's a much better pace for us and includes a good combination of oral and written exercises. We don't do everything, but I like to have the options.

[kathkath]

we're doing R&S English with my 6yo and she is pretty independent with it, except when she comes across words like brethren. :tongue_smilie:

[SilverMoon]

Both! I'm on my fourth pass through FLL 1/2 right now. It's so enjoyable to do with little ones. ♥ The 3 and 4 levels didn't exist when my oldest could have used them. My second kidlet used FLL 3 and switched to R&S. She was d.o.n.e. needing me to do her grammar lesson, so it was a good time to switch.

 

With my next two, one about to finish FLL 1 and the other more than halfway through FLL 2, I'll decide which way to go when they get near the end of FLL 3. If they're ready to be independent I'll switch them to R&S for 4th grade; if they prefer the one on one I'll use FLL 4 before switching them.

 

 

I think the independence factor is the biggest question to ask yourself. FLL levels 1-4 absolutely require the parent for each lesson. I hear ALL, the next level, will be more independent, but it's not published yet. Any level of R&S English can be done largely independently, or you could do the lessons orally with diagrams on a whiteboard.

[VA6336]

I just bought R&S yesterday...I love FLL, but my eldest daughter cannot stand anything scripted. If we're sitting at the table and she's listening to me read, there has to be a story line there, if you know what I mean. :D

 

Also, we're doing CC Foundations with the intent to do their Essentials grammar program in the future and I'd rather not frustrate my kids and myself with two different lists to memorize.

 

My dear friend, however, has been using FLL 1/2 and was trying to decide between FLL 3 and R&S 3 this weekend. She went with FLL 3, because it was easier to use it with her age range of kids. Easier to adapt on the fly, if you will.

[SnMomof7]

We are doing Rod and Staff in a pretty FLL way because we do most of it orally - that way the lessons are short. (Brethren hung DD up too!) I really appreciate the Christian worldview built into the lessons. So gar, so good. I can't see us switching in the future, it's just too easy for me to use, and has enough of the other 'general LA' subjects for me to feel like it's my great gap-catcher! It teaches alphabetization for example - something I might not remember to do if left to my own devices!

[boscopup]

I was using R&S 2, but switched last week to FLL1. I am liking FLL much better so far. I like that it has more poetry memorization, picture study, story narrations, etc. It also involves things I might not think to teach, like address and phone number. :tongue_smilie:Now there *are* a lot of lessons on nouns, which we'll be combining a lot of lessons since my son understands nouns pretty well (we're speeding through FLL1). FLL2 (which I have also, but haven't used yet) looks like it moves a lot quicker than FLL1. There aren't a gazillion lessons on what a noun is. :D It seems to change topics pretty quickly.

 

What didn't I like about R&S? 1) The text was killing me. It made it sound like you were a sinner if you didn't use a complete sentence. :lol: I just could.not.handle.it. I'm a conservative Christian, but it was sometimes putting words in God's mouth that I didn't see any basis for doing. It also was using Bible verses out of context as a reason for writing better (like doing all things decently and in order... it used this to say your sentences should be decent and in order, which is a nice statement, but that verse in context applies to the assembly of the church, not how you write your sentences). 2) It's a textbook, and I just don't like the textbooky feel. 3) It was feeling very slow and repetitive. An entire week was devoted to learning a miniscule topic that could have been taught in one day easily. FLL1 actually moves a little faster with a lot of the topics. Yes, it has 45 lessons on nouns, but it introduces other things along with that. Really, most of the first unit of R&S 2 was about complete sentences vs phrases and coming up with words to make a phrase a complete sentence. They spent basically 6 weeks just focusing on complete sentence vs phrase. FLL1 moves faster than that! :tongue_smilie:

 

What I did like about R&S? 1) It was easy to use it orally (which I think is beneficial for first-second grade). 2) It was quick and easy - took about 5 minutes (so far, FLL1 is similar in this regard). 3) I like the exercises and their content, though some of them your kid needs to know the Bible stories (which mine does, so it wasn't a problem).

 

Now I haven't used upper grades of R&S. I've heard some say 2 is useless and 3 is much better. That may be the case. And obviously, I haven't used FLL for very long, so take my opinion with a grain of salt. ;) This is just what I've experienced so far, and looking ahead at FLL 3 and 4 (which I saw at convention this weekend), I really like what I see.

 

Either choice will give a good, solid grammar foundation. So it really comes down to personal preference for you and the child.

[Hedgehog]

We use R&S. Level 2 is a bit of a waste of time though, so you could easily start with level 3. We just found that it suited our style better. The grammar instruction is solid, and if there's anything Biblical that I don't agree with, I skip it.

[KeriJ]

I was using R&S 2, but switched last week to FLL1. I am liking FLL much better so far. I like that it has more poetry memorization, picture study, story narrations, etc. It also involves things I might not think to teach, like address and phone number. :tongue_smilie:Now there *are* a lot of lessons on nouns, which we'll be combining a lot of lessons since my son understands nouns pretty well (we're speeding through FLL1). FLL2 (which I have also, but haven't used yet) looks like it moves a lot quicker than FLL1. There aren't a gazillion lessons on what a noun is. :D It seems to change topics pretty quickly.

 

What didn't I like about R&S? 1) The text was killing me. It made it sound like you were a sinner if you didn't use a complete sentence. :lol: I just could.not.handle.it. I'm a conservative Christian, but it was sometimes putting words in God's mouth that I didn't see any basis for doing. It also was using Bible verses out of context as a reason for writing better (like doing all things decently and in order... it used this to say your sentences should be decent and in order, which is a nice statement, but that verse in context applies to the assembly of the church, not how you write your sentences). 2) It's a textbook, and I just don't like the textbooky feel. 3) It was feeling very slow and repetitive. An entire week was devoted to learning a miniscule topic that could have been taught in one day easily. FLL1 actually moves a little faster with a lot of the topics. Yes, it has 45 lessons on nouns, but it introduces other things along with that. Really, most of the first unit of R&S 2 was about complete sentences vs phrases and coming up with words to make a phrase a complete sentence. They spent basically 6 weeks just focusing on complete sentence vs phrase. FLL1 moves faster than that! :tongue_smilie:

 

What I did like about R&S? 1) It was easy to use it orally (which I think is beneficial for first-second grade). 2) It was quick and easy - took about 5 minutes (so far, FLL1 is similar in this regard). 3) I like the exercises and their content, though some of them your kid needs to know the Bible stories (which mine does, so it wasn't a problem).

 

Now I haven't used upper grades of R&S. I've heard some say 2 is useless and 3 is much better. That may be the case. And obviously, I haven't used FLL for very long, so take my opinion with a grain of salt. ;) This is just what I've experienced so far, and looking ahead at FLL 3 and 4 (which I saw at convention this weekend), I really like what I see.

 

Either choice will give a good, solid grammar foundation. So it really comes down to personal preference for you and the child.

 

I guess I should have mentioned that we are in the middle of R&S 2 right now because someone gave it to us. I've liked it fine, but I completely agree with all that you just said. I've been trying to decide whether to continue on or switch to FLL3 next year. I'll have a first grader next year as well and was really considering FLL1 for her. thinking, thinking.

[boscopup]

I guess I should have mentioned that we are in the middle of R&S 2 right now because someone gave it to us. I've liked it fine, but I completely agree with all that you just said. I've been trying to decide whether to continue on or switch to FLL3 next year. I'll have a first grader next year as well and was really considering FLL1 for her. thinking, thinking.

 

For the third grader, one consideration would be their ability to draw their own diagramming lines. In R&S, they'll have to draw them all themselves. In FLL, the lines will be there already, and they just fill in the words. Some kids might enjoy drawing their own lines (I did :D), and some may do better with the lines drawn for them (my oldest will definitely be one of those :tongue_smilie:).

[coffeefreak]

FLL 1 and 2, then switch to Rod and Staff at level 3. I've used both too, but FLL 3 and 4 were annoying to ds and I. Both are really great programs--you probably should try to look at them both. Really they cover mostly the same info, but just in different ways.

 

:iagree:

[3lilreds in NC]

FLL 1 and 2, then switch to Rod and Staff at level 3. I've used both too, but FLL 3 and 4 were annoying to ds and I. Both are really great programs--you probably should try to look at them both. Really they cover mostly the same info, but just in different ways.

 

:iagree:

 

I haven't used R&S, but I wanted to hurt someone when we were trying to use FLL 3. I thought I would be good with scripted, but it got annoying quickly, and I wish I had a picture of the looks my daughter would give me when I read the same thing over. and. over. and OVER. :lol: