I'm getting really stressed out looking at CW homer/diogenes!

[jenniferlee]

We have been using MCT this year. Like it a lot. Planned on sticking with it. But I have just now been looking at CW for the first time. I don't know what to do.

I swear I'm going to to go crazy with some of these decisions. This used to be fun, but it's gotten to be grueling.

my kids will be 4th, 6th and 8th next year.

any help?

 

thanks

Jen

[chai]

I'm a CW user and really like it. BUT if you have a program you enjoy and it works, why change anything?

[whitestavern]

I hit the "order now" button on CW Homer yesterday. I've been using MCT as well, but it's not enough for me to teach writing. So I'll continue using it for grammar, vocab and poetry, and maybe give my dd a few of the assignments from MCT, but we'll begin w/Homer in the fall.

[jenniferlee]

This is my main concern about MCT as well:

 

but it's not enough for me to teach writing

 

The trouble is, I just don't know, and I hate to get further in with MCT and realize its not working, and I hate to switch now and regret it later. Can you tell I am paralyzed:D

 

Are there any huge drawbacks to CW?

 

What do you all think about writing in MCT in the later stages? We've done essay voyage and it hasn't overwhelmed me with "greatness":001_smile: but I've been assuming it would get better as we go up...

 

thanks for any more feedback

Jen

[Lovin Learnin]

I'm in the same boat. We used Island and Town this year and while dd learned a lot, especially in grammar, we are moving on. This year we will continue with CE for vocab (LOVED it) but I've decided to use R&S English. For writing we'll try CW Homer and I'm two seconds from purchasing Classical Compositions, too. I really like the looks of the progym and want to compare the two programs before we commit long term. Truthfully, I'm a "grass is always greener" person so I struggle with saying anything is perfect or even good enough. Plus I read these boards too much. If CW or CC are not what they're cracked up to be we will likely return to MCT next year. Maybe. :)

[Melissa in CA]

 

Are there any huge drawbacks to CW?

 

 

Yes! It's time consuming and oftentimes confusing. Many, many, many parents purchase it and drop it for something easier to implement. CW drove me and my son crazy. I finally gave up and got a writing tutor...he is doing SO MUCH BETTER in his writing. You couldn't pay me enough to use CW again. In my opinion, the authors took something relatively simple, and made it far too complicated.

 

Some love CW though!!...and you could be one of those....so take my ramblings with a grain of salt. ;):D

[Lovin Learnin]

Yes! It's time consuming and oftentimes confusing. Many, many, many parents purchase it and drop it for something easier to implement.

 

 

Precisely why I'm going broke. Even though we liked MCT writing I just have to try CW for myself to see if it's better.

[AuntPol]

I'm in same boat.

 

I am about to order Older Beginners. I have tried IEW but didn't like the models they began with (THough I loved the videos). I tried MCT. I liked the Grammar but would like to move into diagramming. I didn't like the vocabulary (Too much extra stuff in there). The poetry is just okay. While I like the actual writing story, I felt the instruction was lacking.

 

I am not too worried about the ease of use. Everyone says TOG was hard to figure out. I had no trouble figuring out how to implement it. It was the pace that killed us!

[Melissa in CA]

I'm in same boat.

 

I am about to order Older Beginners. I have tried IEW but didn't like the models they began with (THough I loved the videos). I tried MCT. I liked the Grammar but would like to move into diagramming. I didn't like the vocabulary (Too much extra stuff in there). The poetry is just okay. While I like the actual writing story, I felt the instruction was lacking.

 

I am not too worried about the ease of use. Everyone says TOG was hard to figure out. I had no trouble figuring out how to implement it. It was the pace that killed us!

 

I had zero problems with TOG either...loved it!

 

CW can be figured out, it's not like it can't, but every day I kept asking myself 'WHY, did they insist on making writing so complicated!' We had far too many other subjects to cover every day...with writing assignments attached...to spend sooo much time on CW. ;)

 

I'm sure it was just a 'me' thing...but I do know that I'm not alone.

[jenniferlee]

well at least I have good company:D

 

Oh man, maybe I will just have to get CW and see for myself. I just don't have a lot of money right now, kwim?

 

anybody else want to persuade/dissuade me?

 

Any other extremely compelling LA/writing I should be considering?:D

 

I need help

[WishboneDawn]

I've been torturing myself over this. Diogenes is trying to seduce me but I know I am not good with a program that expects too much extra work out of me. The Elegant Essay looks good but my daughter has picked up my atheist husband's filters and bristles at too much reference to religion. The Killagon materials look interesting but not exactly like the essay writing thing I need.

 

I do, however, have The Lively Art of Writing sitting on one of my bookshelves. I keep hearing how wonderful it is but somehow can't believe that a book that looks nothing like a textbook or workbooks, wasn't written for homeschoolers and only cost me a couple of bucks at the used book store could do the job. :)

[Narrow Gate Academy]

I've used CW with my oldest through Homer so far, and we really like the program. I personally don't find it that complicated or difficult to use. It takes time yes, but I consider it time well spent (especially when I see the improvements in her writing in other subjects as a result). HTH

[elegantlion]

Yes! It's time consuming and oftentimes confusing. Many, many, many parents purchase it and drop it for something easier to implement. CW drove me and my son crazy. I finally gave up and got a writing tutor...he is doing SO MUCH BETTER in his writing. You couldn't pay me enough to use CW again. In my opinion, the authors took something relatively simple, and made it far too complicated.

 

Some love CW though!!...and you could be one of those....so take my ramblings with a grain of salt. ;):D

 

You're not alone. We did Aesop without issue. Homer threw us. About the time I had it figured out, ds would need something tweaked for his ability. Bam, it would throw me off kilter.

 

I liked the models in Aesop, but in Homer I felt some of them were too long. The sentences were too archaic to be relevant to our needs. I love rich language in literature. However, to teach some of the more complicated sentences made it too hard for my ds. We dropped it.

 

We've opted to take a different route with writing.

[PeterPan]

Ok y'all, I may have had an epiphany here. What if we buy the CW level to use with *ourselves* and then teach it to our kids our own way? I mean seriously, there is a sense in which that's the problem. Don't know why I never thought of it. I'm going back and doing some Homer-inspired work our own way, and we're having SO much more fun than we ever had with the workbooks. We can't custom-tailor what we don't know.

[PeterPan]

Your not alone. We did Aesop without issue. Home threw us. About the time I had it figured out, ds would need something tweaked for his ability. Bam, it would throw me off kilter.

 

I liked the models in Aesop, but in Homer I felt some of them were too long. The sentences were too archaic to be relevant to our needs. I love rich language in literature. However, to teach some of the more complicated sentences made it too hard for my ds. We dropped it.

 

We've opted to take a different route with writing.

 

Paula--I had posted something to that effect ("My dyslexic can't do your stinkin' writing program cuz it's not flexible") about CW, and some people challenged me that they had gotten through it. What I decided to do, which you're welcome to watch the progress on and sneer about if it flops, is to go BACK and re-do those levels. I thought I was just going to pull out my WT1 stuff, but turns out I sold it off. Humbug. So I pulled up the toc and models used for WT1, WT2, CW Aesop A and B, and started playing around. What I finally figured out is that, now that I've been through most of Homer A and B, I get where it's going and can do it our own way. As I pulled up models, I found multiple versions. What I'm thinking now is we'll use them comparatively, analyzing a fresh version each day for grammar and working up the levels of imitation. So first day, straight retelling. 2nd day, change something (narrator, starting point). 3rd day do a more creative change or addition (setting, time period, whatever) to make it your own. Final day edit and type.

 

We started that today, and I have to tell you it was so interesting to my dd to see different tellings of the same story. She started to realize that *her* voice could have validity, that it wasn't about one right or wrong. And now that I've been through most of Homer myself, I'm not at all timid about applying those skills to these new models. What I think will be really interesting is to compare the new tellings to her old work from a few years before and see how she has matured. I think that will please her.

 

I really don't think CW's workbooks are the *only* or even most interesting way to approach imitation. WT certainly taught us that. I'll have to see if it's possible to dissociate the method from the materials for Diogenes. I don't know why it had never occurred to me first to work through the levels myself. That alone would make a huge difference. But oh yeah, one more thing to do in all our free time, right? :)

[elegantlion]

Paula--I had posted something to that effect ("My dyslexic can't do your stinkin' writing program cuz it's not flexible") about CW, and some people challenged me that they had gotten through it. What I decided to do, which you're welcome to watch the progress on and sneer about if it flops, is to go BACK and re-do those levels. I thought I was just going to pull out my WT1 stuff, but turns out I sold it off. Humbug. So I pulled up the toc and models used for WT1, WT2, CW Aesop A and B, and started playing around. What I finally figured out is that, now that I've been through most of Homer A and B, I get where it's going and can do it our own way. As I pulled up models, I found multiple versions. What I'm thinking now is we'll use them comparatively, analyzing a fresh version each day for grammar and working up the levels of imitation. So first day, straight retelling. 2nd day, change something (narrator, starting point). 3rd day do a more creative change or addition (setting, time period, whatever) to make it your own. Final day edit and type.

 

We started that today, and I have to tell you it was so interesting to my dd to see different tellings of the same story. She started to realize that *her* voice could have validity, that it wasn't about one right or wrong. And now that I've been through most of Homer myself, I'm not at all timid about applying those skills to these new models. What I think will be really interesting is to compare the new tellings to her old work from a few years before and see how she has matured. I think that will please her.

 

I really don't think CW's workbooks are the *only* or even most interesting way to approach imitation. WT certainly taught us that. I'll have to see if it's possible to dissociate the method from the materials for Diogenes. I don't know why it had never occurred to me first to work through the levels myself. That alone would make a huge difference. But oh yeah, one more thing to do in all our free time, right? :)

 

I did buy a workbook to go through on my own. It did help, but I think we needed different models to be effective for us. The free time was also an issue, surprise. I did recently unpack Homer and plan to read through it again this summer. I've been reading through Corbett's Classical Rhetoric which has also been helpful in understanding CW.

 

CW was hard for me because I wasn't always sure the point of each lesson. If I needed to tweak it was hard to know what to skip and what was pertinent without going back through the books again. After reading Corbett I might be able to see that now.

 

But I still think CW is more complicated than it needs to be. I haven't yet made the determination if I want to revisit it, or spend my teacher intensive time elsewhere.

 

We did go back and do some remedial work with WWE, which was most helpful. I'm still stuck with a reluctant writer, however. With that and a teacher intensive curriculum like CW, I wanted to pull my hair out.

 

Thanks for sharing your experience, that gives me hope. Part of me still wants to use Homer in some capacity. It was a large portion of our budget for one subject, hate that it is sitting around half-used.

[Capt_Uhura]

Can someone summarize for me what is covered in Homer? I'm trying to understand what you all are talking about. Not that I will let you seduce me down a different path...;)

[Lovin Learnin]

Can someone summarize for me what is covered in Homer? I'm trying to understand what you all are talking about. Not that I will let you seduce me down a different path...;)

 

From their website: http://www.classicalwriting.com/ScopeSequenceHomer.pdf

[Narrow Gate Academy]

Ok y'all, I may have had an epiphany here. What if we buy the CW level to use with *ourselves* and then teach it to our kids our own way? I mean seriously, there is a sense in which that's the problem. Don't know why I never thought of it. I'm going back and doing some Homer-inspired work our own way, and we're having SO much more fun than we ever had with the workbooks. We can't custom-tailor what we don't know.

 

This is one reason we just use the core without the instructor or student guide. I was free to substitute a few models, spend more time on skills that needed work, and move on to the next level early if I felt the skills were well mastered. There were portions of the core that I taught straight from the examples in the book. There were also lots of times when I looked at the core to see the point of the lesson and then put it away and worked straight from our model. I personally find the core easy to understand and like the flexibility it offers.

[Pata]

This is one reason we just use the core without the instructor or student guide. I was free to substitute a few models, spend more time on skills that needed work, and move on to the next level early if I felt the skills were well mastered. There were portions of the core that I taught straight from the examples in the book. There were also lots of times when I looked at the core to see the point of the lesson and then put it away and worked straight from our model. I personally find the core easy to understand and like the flexibility it offers.

 

Just curious, I noticed in your siggy that you are doing Diogenes, are you able to continue with the same flexibility you used in Aesop and Homer? What are your thoughts on Diogenes after having done Aesop & Homer with only the core book? And did you get the student book for Diogenes? Thanks!

[chai]

For us, Homer was by far the most difficult level to implement. I did my own thing for Aesop and that went really well. I don't think that I could have done Homer without the workbooks. (Perhaps I could, but it would have been considerably more work.) On the other hand, it was very effective. Maxim has actually been quite easy to implement and fun. It looks like Chreia will be more of the same.

[PeterPan]

I did buy a workbook to go through on my own. It did help, but I think we needed different models to be effective for us. The free time was also an issue, surprise. I did recently unpack Homer and plan to read through it again this summer. I've been reading through Corbett's Classical Rhetoric which has also been helpful in understanding CW.

 

CW was hard for me because I wasn't always sure the point of each lesson. If I needed to tweak it was hard to know what to skip and what was pertinent without going back through the books again. After reading Corbett I might be able to see that now.

 

But I still think CW is more complicated than it needs to be. I haven't yet made the determination if I want to revisit it, or spend my teacher intensive time elsewhere.

 

We did go back and do some remedial work with WWE, which was most helpful. I'm still stuck with a reluctant writer, however. With that and a teacher intensive curriculum like CW, I wanted to pull my hair out.

 

Thanks for sharing your experience, that gives me hope. Part of me still wants to use Homer in some capacity. It was a large portion of our budget for one subject, hate that it is sitting around half-used.

 

Paula, I totally hear you. In a way, there really ISN'T a point to CW Homer. I mean I'm glad it's all revelatory to other people, but it's the kind of word play and rethinking that some people do naturally. I mean there was never a point, on ANY of the steps of analysis that I tried with my dd, that she stumbled on. That type of analysis was all easy and natural for her. She just plain has the dysgraphia and dyslexia and trouble getting it out. (Pick your label, any label.) I finally realized if you skipped every other lesson it helped a bit. I basically went back (following some comments Siloam had made) and wrote out what new thing each of those lessons covered. Then I had an outline of it. No, it's not rocket science.

 

Someone recently told me I have an "impatience with incremental instruction" and I think she was right. Can't get much more annoyingly incremental than CW, mercy. That's an interesting point from the other poster to use just the core book. You know the trouble is we hear this advice on the boards about how we're going to fail (don't try Maxim too early, you'll flop if you do xyz without this guide, blah blah), that we get intimidated. Once you get the big picture, I don't think these levels are hard. They just make it hard for big picture learners because the materials are so incremental. And when we have a big gap between what our kids can comfortably DO and what they can THINK, it gets even harder. You really don't know when to go forward and when to go back. For me, if I see fluency applying the Homer skills to shorter models, then I'll be happy. And yes, I've said repeatedly how much the models of CW sucked for us. Probably even Maxim will suck. That's why I'm thinking I'm going to need to do it myself and go back and rethink it another way to do with dd. I have no clue if it's taste or brains or what causing it, but I definitely hear you. I just then get beat up on by the people who say their kids have no beef with the models. Oh well.

 

So NarrowGate, are you doing Diogenes just with the core?

[jenniferlee]

wow - this conversation has gotten very interesting. I'm wanting to hear more about just using the core book (saves $ as well). I find that my kids move through things pretty quickly, but sometimes if we don't have a specific "page to fill out" or "assignment to do" then it doesn't get done.

 

I hate this feeling of second guessing all the time. Tell me it will be easier by the time my younger two are to this stage, please. I can't keep going through this every year or so...

[elegantlion]

Paula, I totally hear you. In a way, there really ISN'T a point to CW Homer. I mean I'm glad it's all revelatory to other people, but it's the kind of word play and rethinking that some people do naturally. I mean there was never a point, on ANY of the steps of analysis that I tried with my dd, that she stumbled on. That type of analysis was all easy and natural for her. She just plain has the dysgraphia and dyslexia and trouble getting it out. (Pick your label, any label.) I finally realized if you skipped every other lesson it helped a bit. I basically went back (following some comments Siloam had made) and wrote out what new thing each of those lessons covered. Then I had an outline of it. No, it's not rocket science.

 

Someone recently told me I have an "impatience with incremental instruction" and I think she was right. Can't get much more annoyingly incremental than CW, mercy. That's an interesting point from the other poster to use just the core book. You know the trouble is we hear this advice on the boards about how we're going to fail (don't try Maxim too early, you'll flop if you do xyz without this guide, blah blah), that we get intimidated. Once you get the big picture, I don't think these levels are hard. They just make it hard for big picture learners because the materials are so incremental. And when we have a big gap between what our kids can comfortably DO and what they can THINK, it gets even harder. You really don't know when to go forward and when to go back. For me, if I see fluency applying the Homer skills to shorter models, then I'll be happy. And yes, I've said repeatedly how much the models of CW sucked for us. Probably even Maxim will suck. That's why I'm thinking I'm going to need to do it myself and go back and rethink it another way to do with dd. I have no clue if it's taste or brains or what causing it, but I definitely hear you. I just then get beat up on by the people who say their kids have no beef with the models. Oh well.

 

So NarrowGate, are you doing Diogenes just with the core?

 

Wow, thanks for sharing this. I listened to SWB talk on the real child, mine is the purposeful child. Throw that and some reading delays and sheer stubborness and CW was more frustrating than it needed to be.

 

I think the idea of going through it myself, completely, might be the most helpful. It's staring at me from the bookshelf right now.

 

The the OP, I hope we're not scaring you too badly. :D I feel like CW can be a great program. Perhaps they need to use the motto, "Homer will either kill you or make you stronger." :tongue_smilie:

[Pata]

Wow, thanks for sharing this. I listened to SWB talk on the real child, mine is the purposeful child. Throw that and some reading delays and sheer stubborness and CW was more frustrating than it needed to be.

 

I think the idea of going through it myself, completely, might be the most helpful. It's staring at me from the bookshelf right now.

 

The the OP, I hope we're not scaring you too badly. :D I feel like CW can be a great program. Perhaps they need to use the motto, "Homer will either kill you or make you stronger." :tongue_smilie:

 

:lol: I absolutely love this!!

 

Ok, now I'm curious, what do you two (Elizabeth and Paula) think about SWB style of writing? Do you feel that the two (CW & WWE/WWS) will eventually lead to the same place?

 

Jennifer, sorry to hijack, but this thread has been very interesting to me, so thanks for starting it!

[Cleopatra]

CW scared me at first too, but I plunged in and, 3 years later, am thrilled with the results. Honestly, it took me a good 6 months to even begin to comprehend where the program was going, but I knew in my gut that it was a good program and just trusted it would work out. I think that's why you see so many people re-visiting it. They have that "feeling" that it is beneficial but can't quite put their finger on why it is, yet.

 

It really isn't hard to implement, once you get your head around it (the learning curve :001_smile:). Homer, I've heard, is by far the most difficult (we're in Homer B). The longer we use CW, the easier it seems to get.

 

I agree with OhElizabeth, in that, if you try to do EVERYTHING, for some children it could certainly be overkill, but the beauty of CW is that, once you get in the groove, it is very flexible, in that you can chop and change quite easily. For example, you could use different models, choose to analyze only one scene in the model, drop the grammar exercises, do only one 6-sentence-shuffle instead of two, move skill levels when the student is ready and don't feel like you have to do all the projects, etc. ... But the program does have to be comprehensive, for children who may not get it quite as easily. It is work, but it does pay off.

 

For Capt Uhura, for example, in Homer A, using a model narrative, the student learns:

 

1. Theon's 6 Components: analyzing scenes and finding the author's emphasis by answering questions on person, action, place, time, manner & cause (also helps with lit. analysis!)

2. Identifying essential and accidental components

3. Composing summary sentences

4. Multi-level outline using "Acts" and "Scenes"

 

As far as the writing portion, this is the meat of the program. Within that framework, they talk about fiction/non-fiction, poetic truth, etc., etc.

 

As far as the weekly exercises go, the most important is the six-sentence-shuffle. They take two model sentences and have the student:

1. Diagram sentence

2. Do a synonym substitution

3. Do a grammar change (tense, opening word, etc.)

4. Condense the sentence

5. Expand/amplify the sentence

6. Same diagram with new idea

 

Otherwise there are grammar exercises on parsing.

 

The student applies the above skills to their writing project (I break each lesson into two weeks for my dd: the first week for the exercises and the second for the writing project)

 

I hope I've given you some useful information! :001_smile: I was hoping there would be some upper level CW users around to chime in but I haven't seen them yet. There are a few with students using Herodotus and Plutarch; it might be useful to search around and PM one of them with some questions.

 

Oh, and if any of you are interested ..... CW is offering a one-month course on Diogenes in July. http://www.classicalwritingtutorials.com/CWT/CourseMaximChreiaInAMonth.htm It's for students who want to zip through it but it's also for anyone who is planning to teach it. It might be helpful and I'm thinking about it myself! :D

[elegantlion]

:lol: I absolutely love this!!

 

Ok, now I'm curious, what do you two (Elizabeth and Paula) think about SWB style of writing? Do you feel that the two (CW & WWE/WWS) will eventually lead to the same place?

 

Jennifer, sorry to hijack, but this thread has been very interesting to me, so thanks for starting it!

 

I am no expert, I feel in the midst of the writing fog. However, we went from CW to WTM style writing. We went back to WWE and started to implement WTM writing as suggested in the MP3 lectures. Unfortunately, my son doesn't organize information well in outline form. He did great with narrations and dictations from WWE, but outlining messed him up. He did it, but we also realized his brain doesn't organize information in that manner, so we tweaked.

 

I stumbled upon a cheap first edition of Corbett's Classical Rhetoric and I'm reading through it now. It's been a breath of fresh air. I can see how WTM writing and CW fit into the overall picture of rhetoric. I can also see how they might not be the only path up the mountain, the peak being Corbett.

 

I would feel comfortable using either path. I've found it helpful to understand the larger picture of rhetoric. We've been working with Shakespearean sonnets in a CW manner in the last few weeks.

 

Here's a great site to read up on rhetoric.http://humanities.byu.edu/rhetoric/silva.htm

 

Cleopatra, thanks for your post as well. That's a great summary of Homer!

[prairiegirl]

:iagree: with Cleopatra. I had this gut feeling that if I stuck with Homer it would lead me to where I wanted to go. I just wasn't sure where that was. I just had to trust. CW is very flexible but the key here is knowing what you can change and what you should keep. I learned through trial and error what is important to keep. This knowledge will be helpful when I grow through it a second and third time with my youngers.

 

I have been going through Diogenes Maxim on my own in preparation for next year and it looks to be much easier than Homer. Whew!:001_smile:

[Lostinabook]

I have been going through Diogenes Maxim on my own in preparation for next year and it looks to be much easier than Homer. Whew!:001_smile:

 

 

Do you think Diogenes could be used even if the student has not gone through Homer?

[PeterPan]

Do you think Diogenes could be used even if the student has not gone through Homer?

 

Diogenes continues a lot of skills begun in Homer.

 

Notice all that, in general, the recommend Maxim not be started before 7th, even with the very bright. It's a transition in thought process, where the student starts to contribute his own thoughts. If the student doesn't yet have anything to say (a maturity point), then you're going to get some blank looks. At least that has been the warning from Amy Olsen of WT. I don't think I'd get blank looks from my dd *now*, but I definitely think I would have earlier.

[PeterPan]

Paula--I totally agree with you on the outlining thing. It's almost like these kids aren't LOGICAL. They just don't think that way. And you ought to see the way my husband writes. There was a category of speech in competitions, I forget what it was called, where they started off at one place, ended up at another, and you wondered how they got there. That's my dh, lol. All good stuff along the way, but mercy! I was just helping him edit a speech, and we had to go back and develop an outline for him so he could prune and get his points more clear. They were there, but they kept getting lost without the aid of structure (an outline). And there are some people who naturally write, think, and speak in outlines. Just a different type of brain.

 

So to me the scary thing is to make dd *too* outline dependent, almost as a crutch, and not have her start with the content first. Have you looked at the Inspiration software? It uses graphic organizers and can turn them into an outline for the student. Then it becomes a word processor to let them finish it out. I haven't tried it yet with my dd. It was Ria who mentioned it on the boards ages ago.

[bugs]

My dd is finishing up Cheria this year. She began with Homer for Older Beginners in 7th grade. Maxim and Cheria have both been less teacher intensive than Homer (much less). The very cool thing is that at the end of Cheria the curriculum calls for timed writing. Whoa! So cool that my dd can write a well organized essay in less than 45 min.

[elegantlion]

Paula--I totally agree with you on the outlining thing. It's almost like these kids aren't LOGICAL. They just don't think that way. And you ought to see the way my husband writes. There was a category of speech in competitions, I forget what it was called, where they started off at one place, ended up at another, and you wondered how they got there. That's my dh, lol. All good stuff along the way, but mercy! I was just helping him edit a speech, and we had to go back and develop an outline for him so he could prune and get his points more clear. They were there, but they kept getting lost without the aid of structure (an outline). And there are some people who naturally write, think, and speak in outlines. Just a different type of brain.

 

So to me the scary thing is to make dd *too* outline dependent, almost as a crutch, and not have her start with the content first. Have you looked at the Inspiration software? It uses graphic organizers and can turn them into an outline for the student. Then it becomes a word processor to let them finish it out. I haven't tried it yet with my dd. It was Ria who mentioned it on the boards ages ago.

 

Nan's posts have been helpful to me. We've been using spider diagrams with better results. An outline is just foreign to him. He's pretty stubborn, but will do what is necessary when pushed. With outlines, he pushed back. :glare: I started to see it not as defiance, but sheer frustration because his brain doesn't work that way.

 

 

Two books that really helped me understand ds are Strong Willed child or Dreamer and The Edison Trait (it's been retitled). I need to revisit these books.

 

Sorry for the hijack.

 

 

I'll have to look into that software, thanks.

[PeterPan]

That's interesting! More to read about! I'll have to ponder that. I know I myself don't outline. I just throw everything down on the paper in bubbles and draw lines to show relationships. Is that like your spider diagrams? But I *can* translate that into an outline. Like you say, some kids just aren't the same. I'm sure dh knows what an outline is, but he sure can't do that for himself. I actually went through his paper writing in the outline so he could see it! Hmmm, spider diagrams. See he was taught in school, so there was *one* way, whatever the curriculum said. His teachers tried to work with him, but I don't think there was the understanding that there is now. They just took everyone and made them work hard to fit in the box. There were no other boxes.

 

I'm trying to think of the ramifications of this though... How do you fit your spider diagrams into a beginning essay program like Maxim? I need to go read Nan's posts. I have in the past. She must have made some new ones that I missed. I've spent many a happy Friday night reading Nan.

 

Well thanks for sharing that. My mind is whirling with the idea that I need to fundamentally re-approach how we conceptualize and organize writing. Hmmm. I could be happy with spider diagrams. And btw, I have Corbett, and like you had a "this would work and get me to the mountain" experience. I also liked the clarity of Cothran's logic series for how it naturally applies over to writing. I thought between the two we'd have a lot of tools. I think in our case we're going to do better to know where we're going and take them along, rather than hoping a curriculum will do it.

 

Ps. I can get both of those books through the library! Thanks! :)

Edited May 25, 2011 by OhElizabeth

[PeterPan]

Hey Paula, I'm reading those Nan spider posts right now, and I'm seeing discussion of turning the spider webs into outlines. So you still have to do that? And you were saying in one of the posts that it's hard for your ds to figure out where things go in the outline. Someone else was just telling me the same thing about their dc. I was looking through the writing packets from AG (yes, Analytical Grammar), and Robin and Erin have made the process surprisingly hands-on. They had this method of using a page per source, making columns, skipping lines between notes, and then CUTTING THEM UP to rearrange and play with on a magnetic board. Maybe something like that would work? I thought it was so interesting, it is something I want to try with dd. She really enjoys the research stage, and I thought that physical rearranging of her ideas might help.

[elegantlion]

Hey Paula, I'm reading those Nan spider posts right now, and I'm seeing discussion of turning the spider webs into outlines. So you still have to do that? And you were saying in one of the posts that it's hard for your ds to figure out where things go in the outline. Someone else was just telling me the same thing about their dc. I was looking through the writing packets from AG (yes, Analytical Grammar), and Robin and Erin have made the process surprisingly hands-on. They had this method of using a page per source, making columns, skipping lines between notes, and then CUTTING THEM UP to rearrange and play with on a magnetic board. Maybe something like that would work? I thought it was so interesting, it is something I want to try with dd. She really enjoys the research stage, and I thought that physical rearranging of her ideas might help.

 

Oh, cutting them up, I like that. We are still doing the spider-to-outline form, although not as much as I had hoped. We've had a year of chaos outside of school, so none of our writing has had an organized focus. Right now I'm making a list of resources I already own to revisit over the summer. Between the stack and Corbett, I'm hoping to form my own game plan and have written & trackable goals for next year.

[jenniferlee]

I was always one to write out the paper first, then go back and make an outline to turn in to fulfill the "outline requirement". I never used brainstorming or bubbles or anything. My thoughts just came out naturally in order, usually, and the outlines and such always seemed SO pointless. So it's hard for me to make my daughter do them. I tend to just say things like, "here, write a couple of pages about this." And then wonder why her ideas are all over the place:D

Seriously though, I have her (my oldest -13) enrolled in the alexandria tutorial on essay writing this next year, so I'm not planning on getting anything extra for her. But I'm wanting to get a better foundation for my 10 and 11yo this next year. Which would possibly be Homer...and yes, you all are scaring me:001_smile:

 

But I still have all my MCT materials...up through voyage anyway.

Is magic lens going to cut it for writing in the upper levels? I need to know.

 

And I'm still waiting to hear about only using the CW core text....

[Lostinabook]

Diogenes continues a lot of skills begun in Homer.

 

Notice all that, in general, the recommend Maxim not be started before 7th, even with the very bright. It's a transition in thought process, where the student starts to contribute his own thoughts. If the student doesn't yet have anything to say (a maturity point), then you're going to get some blank looks. At least that has been the warning from Amy Olsen of WT. I don't think I'd get blank looks from my dd *now*, but I definitely think I would have earlier.

 

I'm not entirely sure I even want to do CW, but I already have Homer & it seems wasteful not to use it, plus I keep feeling like I'm shortchanging my kids if I don't teach them to write via CW. I just don't think I can do the same things over & over for 2 entire years! I do have Heather's chart though so maybe I could run through that, pull out the skills *I* think are important, and then move on to Maxim.

[Melissa in CA]

I'm not entirely sure I even want to do CW, but I already have Homer & it seems wasteful not to use it, plus I keep feeling like I'm shortchanging my kids if I don't teach them to write via CW. I just don't think I can do the same things over & over for 2 entire years! I do have Heather's chart though so maybe I could run through that, pull out the skills *I* think are important, and then move on to Maxim.

 

I tried to get through Homer. Twice. I started with OB, but felt it moved too quickly. Then bought Homer, and felt it was more of a torture device than a teaching technique...the complaining from my ds about what a waste of time he felt it was got overwhelming, so we dropped it. I honestly saw no fruit from our labors...considering other programs can get one where one needs to be less painfully...but perhaps we didn't give it enough time. I don't know, and it's too late to go back and revisit it a 3rd time. :tongue_smilie:

 

I can't help but wonder why a student can't skip Homer and go right to Maxim. What specific skills taught in Homer are must-knows for Maxim? Has anyone jumped into Maxim without ever using Homer? Just curious. I know that Maxim beings essay writing, and many, many children learn to write essays without having gone through Homer...so why the Homer prereq, I wonder.

[Melissa in CA]

Wow! Just looked at Classical Composition for the first time and am wondering why I didn't look into that years ago! From the samples, I like it MUCH better than CW!! It appears not only easier to follow and execute, but a lot less tedious.

[Create Your Ritual]

Hi Melissa.. yes I just posted about that very thing somewhere else. We are coming from WT and planning on using CC this coming year. According to Jim Selby, the author, we are supposed to work through the first half of both Fable and Narrative then continue on with the second half of each. With all of the recent inquiry into CW though I had to go back today and just relook at all the samples. There are a lot of things I like about CW as far as adding in the literature selections, etc. Perhaps they have just done a more thorough job of showing everything than CC on their website, I am not sure. I am just VERY reluctant to step into Homer though after WT and then fail because it is not clear enough for me to teach or the kids to grasp. I would think even IF one wanted to use CW, if Homer was tripping them up they could at least try CCs Fable & Narrative. By the time you were done, you might even be sold on CC and stay with them... who knows. I know that 1Togo (Bonita.. I hope you don't mind that I keep using you as a resource!) is using CC primarily and loves the direction it is heading.

 

I just wish someone could clearly lay out what is covered in Homer vs CC's Fable/Narrative. Other than grammar concepts not being in CC, are the writing exercises the same? I look at CWs table of contents for Homer and it talks of copywork, dictation, what is a paragraph, descriptive, narrative, expository, and persuasive styles. I know they both deal with elocution and style as well as retelling the story in reverse. I am not sure about the main differences though, and are they enough that I would consider walking what appears to be a difficult path through Homer for them?

[Narrow Gate Academy]

Just curious, I noticed in your siggy that you are doing Diogenes, are you able to continue with the same flexibility you used in Aesop and Homer? What are your thoughts on Diogenes after having done Aesop & Homer with only the core book? And did you get the student book for Diogenes? Thanks!

 

So NarrowGate, are you doing Diogenes just with the core?

 

My siggy is actually updated for the fall already, so I haven't started actually teaching Diogenes yet. I have sat down a few times and read through the intro and several lessons.

 

Yes, I only bought the core book. Honestly, it's the most open and go format I've seen yet in the CW series. It's written to work through the core from beginning to end. For each lesson, there's a lesson number and title, a written goal, an introduction section to teach from, and an exercise section for the assignment. (Dare I say, it looks easy.)

 

Yes, I would still consider it to be flexible. There are portions that I can read ahead and then just teach using a model or a handful of maxims. We'll most likely stick to the models in the book for the analysis segments. (I think she'll enjoy Benjamin Franklin and Shakespeare.) Certainly, I can vary the pace to combine or spread out lessons as needed. The writing projects have more freedom of choice. The first three units let the student choose any Aesop fable to use as a base. Unit 4 suggests two possible maxims, but you could easily substitute another if desired. Unit 5 is completely open ended letting the student pick the topic from history, science, or literature.

 

Hopefully that makes sense. I have a non-napping toddler standing behind me in the chair, peeking around my shoulder, and shrieking with laughter in my ear. HTH

[Melissa in CA]

Hi Melissa.. yes I just posted about that very thing somewhere else. We are coming from WT and planning on using CC this coming year. According to Jim Selby, the author, we are supposed to work through the first half of both Fable and Narrative then continue on with the second half of each. With all of the recent inquiry into CW though I had to go back today and just relook at all the samples. There are a lot of things I like about CW as far as adding in the literature selections, etc. Perhaps they have just done a more thorough job of showing everything than CC on their website, I am not sure. I am just VERY reluctant to step into Homer though after WT and then fail because it is not clear enough for me to teach or the kids to grasp. I would think even IF one wanted to use CW, if Homer was tripping them up they could at least try CCs Fable & Narrative. By the time you were done, you might even be sold on CC and stay with them... who knows. I know that 1Togo (Bonita.. I hope you don't mind that I keep using you as a resource!) is using CC primarily and loves the direction it is heading.

 

I just wish someone could clearly lay out what is covered in Homer vs CC's Fable/Narrative. Other than grammar concepts not being in CC, are the writing exercises the same? I look at CWs table of contents for Homer and it talks of copywork, dictation, what is a paragraph, descriptive, narrative, expository, and persuasive styles. I know they both deal with elocution and style as well as retelling the story in reverse. I am not sure about the main differences though, and are they enough that I would consider walking what appears to be a difficult path through Homer for them?

 

We used WT before going to Homer. I know some transition quite well, but going from the lovely simplicity of WT to the convoluted quagmire of Homer, left us quite dismayed. WT is wonderful. WT is lovely. WT is simple to follow, and simply laid out...and it's FUN! Homer, in my notsohumble opinion (haha), is none of those things. It took the delight of writing we had discovered with WT and sucked the life right out of it. I tried SO HARD to like Homer. I didn't. Not ever. I'm a total CW failure. :D

 

In looking at the brief samples of CC, I think we would have transitioned into that much more easily...but having not used it, or had it in my greedy little hands...I cannot say that with any certainty. It makes me want to try it though. I read that in higher grades one should still begin at the beginning, but work more quickly. That to do all the CC levels for high school would take approx two years. So, even though I am currently happy with our writing tutor and plan to continue using her expertise, I'm tempted to try it. ;)

 

So, one should begin with the first half of the first two books? I wonder if I began with them, if I could then skip the 2nd half and go on to the next book.

[Create Your Ritual]

I believe 1Togo has moved her dd through the lower levels fairly quickly, so she would most likely be able to answer that. Also, Jim Selby does answer questions about it as well. For us, I am looking forward to CC next year. If it seems a bit advanced for my younger ds (8) who has done very well with WT1, then I will back up and complete WT2 with them first. WT HAS been a lot of fun. Oftentimes the dc will be so proud of their retellings and all they have done in the week's time. I occasionally would have my older dd retell the story from another point of view for practice. (Ex: On the assignment with Alexander the Great, I had dd retell it from the perspective of Beucephalus (his horse). I enjoy having them do the oral retellings as well, as that has been helpful for ds8 who needed more confidence in his speaking ability. If I can remotely enjoy CC as much as WT then I think we are on the right track!

[Melissa in CA]

I believe 1Togo has moved her dd through the lower levels fairly quickly, so she would most likely be able to answer that. Also, Jim Selby does answer questions about it as well. For us, I am looking forward to CC next year. If it seems a bit advanced for my younger ds (8) who has done very well with WT1, then I will back up and complete WT2 with them first. WT HAS been a lot of fun. Oftentimes the dc will be so proud of their retellings and all they have done in the week's time. I occasionally would have my older dd retell the story from another point of view for practice. (Ex: On the assignment with Alexander the Great, I had dd retell it from the perspective of Beucephalus (his horse). I enjoy having them do the oral retellings as well, as that has been helpful for ds8 who needed more confidence in his speaking ability. If I can remotely enjoy CC as much as WT then I think we are on the right track!

 

If you have not completed WT2 with your oldest, I would do that before jumping into Homer (or was it CW Aesop you were considering?). Perhaps you would be OK with CC, but most people that transition into Homer from WT have used WT2 first. I personally wouldn't go from WT1 to Homer. No way, Jose. :tongue_smilie:

[Create Your Ritual]

Got it! No.. I am contemplating moving through WT2 (they did WT1 in three months.. so I presume WT2 is about the same time frame??) before we start CC. I am very curious about the differences between Fable/Narrative in CC and Homer in CW, but not enough yet to push the button on CW. ;-) I can see that neither of my dc are ready for higher order thinking yet in the upper progym. exercises, so I am in no hurry to rush through it. The other day my ds8 had written 3 solid pages (double spaced.. front only) of a retelling and came up to me and said, "You know mom, I look at all that work and I feel proud of my story and what I did." That to me is priceless. This was a kid that started the year in tears. He didn't like creative stories or journaling that he had to make up. The progym. exercises took all the stress out and gave him the content and he LOVES it. I just hope the transition to CC feels as good as WT... (crossing my fingers!)

[Pata]

My siggy is actually updated for the fall already, so I haven't started actually teaching Diogenes yet. I have sat down a few times and read through the intro and several lessons.

 

Yes, I only bought the core book. Honestly, it's the most open and go format I've seen yet in the CW series. It's written to work through the core from beginning to end. For each lesson, there's a lesson number and title, a written goal, an introduction section to teach from, and an exercise section for the assignment. (Dare I say, it looks easy.)

 

Yes, I would still consider it to be flexible. There are portions that I can read ahead and then just teach using a model or a handful of maxims. We'll most likely stick to the models in the book for the analysis segments. (I think she'll enjoy Benjamin Franklin and Shakespeare.) Certainly, I can vary the pace to combine or spread out lessons as needed. The writing projects have more freedom of choice. The first three units let the student choose any Aesop fable to use as a base. Unit 4 suggests two possible maxims, but you could easily substitute another if desired. Unit 5 is completely open ended letting the student pick the topic from history, science, or literature.

 

Hopefully that makes sense. I have a non-napping toddler standing behind me in the chair, peeking around my shoulder, and shrieking with laughter in my ear. HTH

 

Thank Deanna for taking the time to reply! I've learned so much about using CW from your posts and blog. Hope your little guy isn't really giving up his naps yet :).

[Cleopatra]

 

Cleopatra, thanks for your post as well. That's a great summary of Homer!

 

You're very welcome. After breaking it down, it made me realize that the main part of the program is actually quite simple, and it's the extras that make it appear so complicated. :tongue_smilie:

 

Got it! No.. I am contemplating moving through WT2 (they did WT1 in three months.. so I presume WT2 is about the same time frame??) before we start CC. I am very curious about the differences between Fable/Narrative in CC and Homer in CW, but not enough yet to push the button on CW. ;-) I can see that neither of my dc are ready for higher order thinking yet in the upper progym. exercises, so I am in no hurry to rush through it. The other day my ds8 had written 3 solid pages (double spaced.. front only) of a retelling and came up to me and said, "You know mom, I look at all that work and I feel proud of my story and what I did." That to me is priceless. This was a kid that started the year in tears. He didn't like creative stories or journaling that he had to make up. The progym. exercises took all the stress out and gave him the content and he LOVES it. I just hope the transition to CC feels as good as WT... (crossing my fingers!)

 

I looked at both CW & CC before choosing to use CW. At the time, I made my choice simply because there was more information about CW, they had more levels and looked more "professional". I went on the CC website today and they've added more materials and helps than when I first checked them out.

 

After looking at the CC samples, from first glance, CC, more of less, follows the same pattern as CW for their narrative book (= Homer). Each have a slightly different method for certain areas but overall, they are quite similar. As for a quick comparison I found:

 

Positives:

The layout is certainly easier to get your head around.

 

I really like that they use a short model (some of the models can get quite long in Homer) so the student is really able to concentrate on the skills they are learning.

 

Negatives:

They do seem to throw around many big words that I have not encountered in CW yet. This is not necessarily a drawback but at the target age, I wonder if it's necessary....??

 

In CW, they provide sentences from the model to practice your skill development. In CC you use the complete model. Even though the CC model is short, I would imagine it would get tiring for a student to go over the same complete model, day after day, even if they are using different skills for each exercise.

 

His time estimates seem over the top to me. 110 minutes for one exercise?!! :w00t: .... Perhaps because the curriculum is targeted at a classroom .....??? We hope .... ! :tongue_smilie:

 

Whereas CW is criticized for having too much instruction, CC's instruction seems a little sparse. It makes it easier to understand, of course, but it does not appear to have the depth of CW. CW includes so much in their curriculum. There are certainly things that I've skipped over, or we've only discussed once (such as Poetic Truth), but at least it's there if we ever want to go deeper.

 

Keep in mind, this comparison is only based on the CC sample and not the complete curriculum. Either way, I think CW or CC would be an excellent choice for a writing program.

[gswhitfield21]

Thank you for posting this! We are in the middle of OB and reading this thread was clouding my mind about CW.

 

However, in thinking back over the first half of OB, I have been amazed to watch my ds12 learn to distinguish the author's emphasis and essential components along the way. He can write a decent summary sentence for long passages and is growing more and more adept at multi-scene outlining and identifying Acts.

 

We were feeling bogged down, so as CW recommends, we took a break to study Poetry for Beginners. At the end of week 3, my ds commented that, though he struggled getting started, his heart was always glad at the end of the poetry lesson. Sigh... It has been the respite we needed, and I think we will be refreshed going forward.

 

I rely enormously on the Student books, and when the model is long, I have my ds only use a portion of it for imitation. Otherwise, we'd be spending half the day on CW. As long as I feel he understands the technique, I don't see the need on making him trudge through what might be an overwhelming amount of work just for the sake of completing the assigned material in the guide.

 

We often only do one of the six-sentence shuffles and I reduce the amount of copywork. We have 11 more weeks of OB before Maxim, and I am encouraged to hear Diogenes is easier to implement. Homer hasn't been difficult, just a bit time consuming. Well worth it IMVHO. It's like picking away at a piece of marble hoping, at the end, a beautiful sculpture will appear!