Is SWR an O/G program?

[Paisley Hedgehog]

nm

[peacefully]

.

[merry gardens]

I'm asking here rather than the regular board because I'm really looking for how SWR might work with a SN student. I have heard of a 'learning curve' with SWR (with any Spalding materials actually) but beyond that I don't know much about it. Their website leaves a lot to be desired.

 

Has anyone done SWR with a dyslexic student? Is it O/G based? Does it move faster than AAS? or can anyone directly compare SWR with AAS?

 

I'll say up front that we have not had success with those programs that want you to mark a word to pieces (like REWARDS or Saxon Phonics Intervention), so if SWR is like that then that's a big "no thanks" right up front. :glare: AAS with its colorful tiles and cards and rules has been great, but it is not really transferring to his day-to-day work. He wrote a composition this week that was littered with errors -- even after using the spell check!! (One that sticks out was 'pupes' for 'puppies.' It was All. Over. The. Paper. There were lots more.) Ds does well on his word lists each week, but the words don't stick in his head long after moving on to the next concept. We are constantly reviewing but still ... I can see us spending another four years on AAS and still being pretty much where we are now :crying:

 

I'm looking for a spelling program that will actually move us forward. Is that too much to ask? :willy_nilly::confused1::crying:

 

 

(btw I miss Siloam. Is she here any more?)

I bought SWR and tried it without getting the training. Normally, I just open a curriculum and figure it out easily, but I couldn't with that one. It was one of the most frustrating experiences I ever had. If you decide to try it, get the training!

 

I never fully implemented the program, but I did learn some helpful information and techniques, (some that I still use.) The year we tried it, two of my children learned English phonograms great, but it expected too much from my ds--and too much from me! From what I can remember, I wouldn't call it exactly an Orton-Gillingham program--but it's sort of based on O-G. Perhaps it's more like "O-G lite" It might be good for children with fewer problems. I can't compare it to AAS because I've never done that program, but compared to Barton, (which I bought the next year) SWR tried to move my child at the speed of light!

[LizzyBee]

SWR isn't OG. Spalding trained with Orton and Gillingham (or maybe just Gillingham?). She created WRTR to use some OG elements but at a faster pace that would be suitable for neurotypical children. SWR is another step removed from OG. It moves way faster and in a less logical sequence than an OG program. Siloam can explain it much better than I, but I haven't seen her here in awhile.

 

I tried SWR with my middle dd, who is mildly dyslexic. It was beyond frustrating. That was the year she began pulling her hair while calling herself stupid, and she made no progress in spelling that year.

 

We are using Barton with my youngest dd, and I am amazed at her progress. She is not on grade level, but I am very pleased with her spelling considering the severity of her LDs.

[VinNY]

I used Spalding with my oldest 5 children successfully. The 5th child was a late reader and this program helped him immensely. My more severe language impaired child (#6) couldn't do this program. We used LiPs and now Recipe for Reading (OG manual) with Apple and Pears Spelling. Some programs just move too fast for some kids. I anticipate using Spalding for her spelling program when she is in middle school to help solidify some rules etc.

[Paisley Hedgehog]

nm

[HiddenJewel]

SWR is based off Spalding which is based off OG. So I'm not sure why it wouldn't be considered OG.

 

If you do use Spalding or SWR, find someone who has successfully used it for a bit to help you walk through the learning curve. It helps tremendously.

 

I think SWR accomplishes The Spelling Lesson part of Writing Road to Reading well but not so much The Writing Lesson and The Reading Lesson. I have not had Spalding training so I can only make that determination based on reading the WRTR book. I have my head wrapped around SWR but am drawn to parts of WRTR too.

 

However, both SWR and Spalding use word markings. I'm not familiar with the word markings in the programs you have mentioned. But the markings in SWR actually help the 29 spelling rules become second nature.

Edited September 4, 2011 by HiddenJewel

[Renee in NC]

SWR is based off Spalding which is based off OG. So I'm not sure why it wouldn't be considered OG.

 

If you do use Spalding or SWR, find someone who has successfully used it for a bit to help you walk through the learning curve. It helps tremendously.

 

I think SWR accomplishes The Spelling Lesson part of Writing Road to Reading well but not so much The Writing Lesson and The Reading Lesson. I have not had Spalding training so I can only make that determination based on reading the WRTR book. I have my head wrapped around SWR but am drawn to parts of WRTR too.

 

However, both SWR and Spalding use word markings. I'm not familiar with the word markings in the programs you have mentioned. But the markings in SWR actually help the 29 spelling rules become second nature.

 

It is pretty far removed from O-G. Basically, it is based on the phonograms and uses multisensory methods, but does not follow O-G methodology or sequencing.

 

O-G is more explicit, more mastery based, and more sequential. My dyslexic child who used SWR was not able to progress well enough. The systematic sequencing and explicit teaching of Barton *is* working.

 

Using nonsense words as an assessment of true mastery has been very important here. Mastering one rule at a time has also been necessary - SWR throws so many rules into the mix (and so many different sounds for phonograms) all at once that it is frustrating.

 

Having said that, I *do* like SWR for neurotypical kids or those with mild reading and spelling issues.

[HiddenJewel]

It is pretty far removed from O-G. Basically, it is based on the phonograms and uses multisensory methods, but does not follow O-G methodology or sequencing.

 

O-G is more explicit, more mastery based, and more sequential. My dyslexic child who used SWR was not able to progress well enough. The systematic sequencing and explicit teaching of Barton *is* working.

 

Using nonsense words as an assessment of true mastery has been very important here. Mastering one rule at a time has also been necessary - SWR throws so many rules into the mix (and so many different sounds for phonograms) all at once that it is frustrating.

 

Having said that, I *do* like SWR for neurotypical kids or those with mild reading and spelling issues.

 

There is definitely a lot of information going at one time.

 

Glad Barton's is working for your student.

[FO4UR]

SWR was too much too fast...and not enough "in context" for my ds8. I like Recipe for Reading better for "spell to read" lessons.

 

I am currently using Apples and Pears Spelling. Visual imprinting. Morphemes instead of phonograms. This just fits better...and maybe partly b/c he still remembers those phonograms, and we still fingerspell when needed.

[farmwife]

I have a dyslexic. I bought and used AAS with him. He did great with the program with almost no retention at. all.

 

I have found SWR to be fantastic with the multi-sensory approach to learning the phonograms. You still will need to do seperate reading with your child but this approach is what finally made some sense for my child, who could "do" other programs but not retain anything.

 

I just gave him a diagnostic test today, he made some obvious errors but overall kept his grade average from the end of last year. Fantastic!!

 

It is the one thing that has "worked" for him, meaning, he "gets" it, and retains it. I'll get off my soap box now. ;)

 

You will need the training, it is worth the time and money, in my book.

Edited September 6, 2011 by farmwife
grammer

[PeterPan]

Shari, there's a difference between understanding rules and having it actually all come together when they sit down to write. My dd missed a spelling word on her recent WJIII (which is done orally, with a tester) that I KNEW she knew. It was an utterly easy word, and any other day of the week she would know it. It's just that particular day there was a tree trimmer outside making noise, and she didn't know it. ;)

 

I had this love/hate relationship with SWR for years and years with my dd. Yes, it left her feeling utterly stupid until I changed how I was using it. No, she wouldn't nail the words, even if we worked on them tons, 3 times (years) through the list in a row. It was infuriating. But because she's bright, she would grasp the concepts. I'm trying to think about Renee's comment about dictating non-sense syllables. In my dd's case I think, just thinking here, that the issue is that things don't connect. It's like that rule about F, L, and S doubling after a single vowel at the end of a base word is *there* somewhere in the brain, but it doesn't connect to anything else. Barton sounds pretty amazing, and personally I wish it weren't so imposingly expensive so more people could have a chance to try it. There's a sense in which making lots of modifications to SWR to get it to work for our kids is probably inching it towards (what I've seen of) Barton. I'm not saying it's equivalent, but just that that's probably why we have to modify and take such a machete to SWR.

 

So no, SWR as written, used with some trusting blanket application, might not fit your child and might be disastrous. It could backfire and make them feel dumb. It could leave you doing lots of stuff and still seeing no retention. BUT if you look at it as a tool and pull out the things that *will* help, it's a very powerful tool. For instance I like using the sentences in the Wise Guide for dictation. Nobody says to do that, certainly not Sanseri, but I did. Sometimes we would go through seasons where we would alternate, doing say a month of SWR and then a month of lots and lots of dictation. Somebody on the boards recently suggested alternating doing the lists one week and dictating the sentences the next week.

 

For my dd it was the application that made the words stick. She needed to understand the whys, but she also needed to SEE them correctly. In fact, if you ask her, she would say she remembers the words visually. Freed has a technique of visualization and backward spelling. It's sort of the great irony to ponder a dyslexic with problems processing visually who also has visual learning as their preferred method, kwim? Pudewa uses the auditory channel in his Phonetic Zoo. In other words, I'm distinguishing what you use to cover spelling conceptually (where SWR is a powerful, powerful tool) vs. what you use to practice the words or get them to actually stick and carry over.

 

As Renee says, SWR doesn't build carefully. It just throws them into the middle of it. For my dd that particular aspect wasn't an issue, but that makes perfect sense that it would be for some kids.

 

So anyways, if all you're wanting to do is speed up his conceptual coverage and the concepts are actually STICKING with AAS, then you just go faster. If it's not carrying over, you need more dictation, more visualization, more use through other channels. Have you looked at the Spelling Dictation Resource book from Susan Anthony? Dictation at a nice level with sentences that spiral to keep everything fresh. It uses words he'll find useful.

 

Have you tried incentivizing spelling? I went through a period of time where I worked hard to "turn on" dd's brain. I wanted her to ponder when she knew the word vs. when she didn't. Do your dictation or whatever and REWARD him for asking how to spell the word. Put out a bowl of M&Ms and he gets one every time he asks. Seriously. See if my dd doesn't know the spelling and knows she doesn't, I can work with that. She has spelling dictionaries, the computer to look it up on, etc. But if she just writes and writes and doesn't even CARE that words are wrong, then it's horrendous, kwim? So we spent a lot of time nurturing that sense. I would actually ask her during dictation: Do you know how to spell this word?

[Paisley Hedgehog]

nm

[LizzyBee]

I dunno .... but I had to try something before dh opened up the credit card statement and found a $3000 charge for Barton ;):tongue_smilie:

 

I know you were being tongue in cheek here. :001_smile: But I had to pipe in and say that Barton can be purchased one module at a time, then re-sold for about 75% of the new price. For levels 2-10, the tiles are cumulative, so I buy 2 extra sets of tiles to sell so that my buyer has a set to sell and a set to keep. Since the entire curriculum takes 2-5 years depending on the severity of your dc's dyslexia, the cost is spread out over a long period of time.

 

I hope modified-SWR works out for you, but if it doesn't, the cost of Barton can work out to much less than the purchase price. :001_smile:

[merry gardens]

...Barton sounds pretty amazing, and personally I wish it weren't so imposingly expensive so more people could have a chance to try it. ...

 

.... but I had to try something before dh opened up the credit card statement and found a $3000 charge for Barton ;):tongue_smilie:

I don't want to derail this thread, but I paid less for the first level of Barton than the cost of one of our vt evaluation. :tongue_smilie:

 

Barton is not unreasonably expensive to try. I've used Barton for two years now. Shari, with all the O-G you've done with your ds, he'd probably test into one the higher levels of Barton--if you wanted to try it. If you are interested, you should talk to the people there and ask for their placement test for students who have had previous O-G experience. I'm not saying that Barton is the answer to all your son's problems. With all that we've done my ds still reads slowly and has trouble spelling, but at least he reads now.

 

Maybe SWR (with some training and perhaps some modification) would be a good fit for you, Shari. It wasn't a good fit for my ds, but it could have been fine for my other children if I had gotten the training. The cost of SWR is cheaper than the total cost of all 10 levels Barton, but I spent a fair amount of money to try SWR. The cost of training plus materials to "try" SWR is close to the cost to "try" one level of Barton. (And both are cheaper to "try" than just a few hours of vt. ;) )

[PeterPan]

Shari, your logic is correct that you can take the strengths of AAS and use them with SWR. Whether that eliminates the need for Barton is another story. Like I said, Barton fascinates me, and I know nothing about it save what I've seen online. Your approach for SWR with AAS manips is solid, so I guess just try that and see where it gets you. Remember though, SWR has enrichments for application but doesn't specify much more. You really need to USE those words, see those words. For us dictation helped. Freed in his "Right-Brained Child in a Left-Brained World" specifies a visualization approach to spelling (visualize then spell it backwards aloud). You want to keep trying different outputs like that till you find one that results in carryover.

 

And yes, you're correct that the SWR word lists go farther. I was pumping up the AAS lists with words from HTTS. Even then she typically knew all of them. We were just in this odd spot where we had done VT and *needed* to go back through everything but were too burnt out on SWR to go back to it again. I'm sure you've had that experience. I LOVED certain things about AAS, but I'm with you on the problems you're seeing (need more application to get it to carry over, not going high enough).

 

You might notice in my sig, I'm attempting to use the R&S7 spelling with her this year. She decries it as workbooky, but I'm trying anyway. I didn't want to drop spelling entirely, but I didn't want to slog through much either. I'm also trying to do (if we can get it done!) studied dictation. I prepped all the sources, but we've been busy doing the free trial of the history from VP, trying to get the entire course done in the 30 days, oy. Once that is over, things should settle down. I'm saying if your issue is carryover, not conceptual, then you just keep working on it in different ways. Someone recently suggested doing a week of SWR list dictation then a week of lit and sentence dictation using those words. I think that would be a GREAT idea and improve carryover. Or do a month of SWR, a month of dictation (what we did at once point). Or do both and burn yourselves out. :)

 

If you can't get SWR to be what you want, you can always resell, no biggee. But play with it. I love the sentences in the Wise Guide to use for dictation. You might be able to make it work for you. You could keep going with AAS and add in daily dictation from the sentences from the Wise Guide. Don't think too in the box, and don't let them make you think you have to do SWR perfectly or that you'll absolutely get those magical results if you do everything Sanseri says. I don't think there is a magic cure. I went through some of those word lists *3 times*, as in 3 years in a row, and STILL my dd would give me blank looks!! And then she'd know some other word she shouldn't know like "grouse" or something. You can whip yourself into a frenzy with this stuff.

 

When we were in the thickest slog of spelling with her, I wanted her to:

-be able to think through the spelling of a word if she slowed down and tried;

-be able to recognize when she knows a word, when she doesn't, and have the habit of looking for help (in a spelling dictionary, by asking, whatever) when she knows she doesn't;

-be able to write her most necessary, most needful, most common words pretty accurately most of the time on a good day.

 

If I have that, the rest is bonus. I find myself trying to combine issues with her spelling these days. For instance with the studied dictation, I've chosen a college level US history text that pushes her with paragraphing, sentence construction, more sophisticated grammar, words she won't know, etc. I need her to get OVER her fear of harder stuff, especially harder non-fiction. So I'm using that time as a vehicle to work on that goal. Do I *really* care if she can spell accommodation accurately the first time? Nope. But I sure care that she's willing to read it and can ponder whether she knows it accurately or not and will tackle words. Spelling and vocab merge at a point, so you're moving them forward in both. When the words were easy and more common, she would just learn them visually, as you'd expect with a VSL. (Kind of ironic, eh, a VSL dyslexic??) But then you get into these words that are less common, and she just locks up. I think it's why she avoids fiction.

 

Where I'm going with that, I don't know. I'm just saying it's *not* gonna be one magic bullet cure. Keep combining things till you get a mix that makes him functional.

[gardenmom5]

I'm looking for a spelling program that will actually move us forward. Is that too much to ask? :willy_nilly::confused1::crying:

 

 

on another list someone posted a comparison she did of SWR, WRR, and phonics road to reading. it gives some good details of how SWR works. If you would like, I'd be happy to forward a copy if you pm me.