Jump to content

Menu

Recommended Posts

I am interested in mothers who are combining CW with WWS. How are you doing this? Are your students doing all the anlalysis work in CW; i.e. Basic Questions, Theon's Six, hierarchical outlining, summary sentences, summary, precis, word analysis and imitation, sentence analysis and imitation, diagramming, etc.? If so, do you alternate all of this with WWS on the same day or do you have some other type of schedule?

 

Since WWS is a 4 day program, I plan to do the 6 sentence shuffle on Fridays. Word and sentence analysis and imitation I will do with Killgallon, also on Fridays but not at the same time. Diagramming we do with grammar.

 

I plan to use Theon's 6 questions when discussing literature and working on critical reading, but we will not be writing stories.

 

WWS has LOTS of summaries, precis, and outlining, so no need to add more of that.

 

Bitsy I know, but my ds(11) loves WWS and his writing is improving very quickly. We will not be switching off of it even though I really like CW.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 280
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It has been summer holidays here, so I have been reading, reading, reading about writing.   I have read 3 of the 4 recommendations from SWB for rhetoric: Corbett's Classical Rhetoric for the

Well, I wrote the first post in this thread when my older was 11.  Now he is a month shy of 16, and he is a good writer.  Unfortunately, for curriculum lovers his path veered off the original plan by

I just read them.  I know how to write, but I did not know 1) how to teach writing to a child who needs explicit teaching, and 2) what exactly a high school graduate is supposed to be able to write.

I was referring to the progym, which are pre-rhetoric exercises, not specific curriuclum when I mentioned comparing progym to a rhetoric text. CC is straight progym. CW incorporates modern writing beginning with Diogenes.

Edited by 1Togo
Link to post
Share on other sites
I am interested in mothers who are combining CW with WWS. How are you doing this? Are your students doing all the anlalysis work in CW; i.e. Basic Questions, Theon's Six, hierarchical outlining, summary sentences, summary, precis, word analysis and imitation, sentence analysis and imitation, diagramming, etc.? If so, do you alternate all of this with WWS on the same day or do you have some other type of schedule?

 

We were combining for a while, but we quit and have only been doing WWS for the last couple of weeks. We were doing all of WWS and then focusing on dictation, word analysis and imitation, and sentence analysis in CW. I think that in some areas, like outlining and summary, WWS is more efficient and dd likes the samples better. But for word analysis and sentence analysis, CW has a lot of depth. I wish I could see the end picture for WWS and WWStyle to know if that is the direction we want to take.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1Togo, I can't say specifically at the level that I am at with CC/CW and WWS why they are different, but they are. They don't teach the same things in the same way .. or maybe they teach the same things in two totally different ways.. lol. Regardless, they are processed differently by my children. When we do CC/CW work a different switch turns on and they get 'creative' in their writing. When we do WWS work they get 'methodical' in their writing. They love the excerpts in WWS and my dd10 can level 1 outline without much prompting from me at all.

 

I use them both right now .. along with Killgallon and MCTs CE for vocab. I don't get to both of them every week. During the first sections of WWS it was easier to do both as the time commitment of WWS was relatively low. Weeks 16-22 have been enough to keep up hopping though, so we have only completed 3 of our CC Narrative stories so far.

 

We move onto our literary analysis work in WWS next week and I expect that to take less time. Although I have plans to give them time in April to do Script Frenzy (from NaNoWriMo).

Link to post
Share on other sites

1Togo, I don't think the narrative work in WWS and the narrative work in CC Fable/Narrative or CW Homer is remotely the same. It's two different styles of narrative .. one fictional and one not. So.. it's like two different parts of their brain are engaged or something. I am not sure how to explain it. I think the job you are doing with your dd is awesome and clearly you are pleased with CW. I think Lewelma would agree with you to a point about CW, but her dc don't enjoy THAT particular style of writing, so they are using the WWS narratives instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was referring to the progym, which are pre-rhetoric exercises, not specific curriuclum when I mentioned comparing progym to a rhetoric text. CC is straight progym. CW incorporates modern writing, beginning in Diogenes.

 

:iagree: Sorry about the confusion.

 

I was really confused about the progym for a long time, and then when I first read Corbett, I was more confused really. But it is finally coming together. In case it is helpful to anyone, I've list of the progym and the Common Topics below so people can compare them. The overlap is what has confused me in the past. The progym studies the Common Topics through the progym exercises, which are done before Rhetoric is studied. Rhetoric is uses the Common Topics to develop arguments to support a thesis. It is assumed by the ancients who developed the progym, that studying the Common Topics separately first would make using them during Rhetoric easier. However, not all ancients used the progym, it was developed later than the Common Topics. You can study and use the Common Topics in persuasive writing without studying the progym (this is what LToW does).

 

the progym exercises as listed in D'angelo are:

Narrative

Description

Fable

proverb

anecdote

refutation/confirmation

Commonplace

praising/blaming

comparison

speech-in-character

thesis

Law

 

And the Common Topics as listed in Corbett are

Definition:

Genus and

division

Comparison:

Similarity,

difference

degree

Relationship:

Cause and Effect

Antecedent/ consequence

contradictions

Circumstance:

possible/impossible,

past/future fact

testimony:

authority

testimonial

statistics

maxims

law

precedents

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to say yes, that would be the primary focus that I am seeing. At least within the writing sections of the first 22 weeks. There are fictional stories that we have summarized, but when it comes time to actually WRITE something it is more about real events in history, or scientific discoveries, or biographical sketches of Shakespeare, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lewelma, your list is a good reference, but can you specifically point out where one equates to another. You mention that the progym studies the Common Topics through the progym exercises .. but which Common Topics in which exercises.. lol

 

And .. does that question even matter. ha. I can't be sure. I am just wondering how they relate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
my original quote: Some I really like but find it impossible to incorporate solely b/c I want my high schoolers to have mastered what they will be required to do at the college level.

Would you mind expanding on this. I am very interested

 

Simply put, none of the programs that I own/have owned encompass the entirety of what I personally deem as necessary for a complete writing program. I want a writing program that not only instructs students on how to narrow their thesis, develop their contention, incorporate supporting evidence, and format correctly, but contains excellent instruction on all of those areas. The sources all seem to focus on just a couple aspects at the expense of the development of the other key criteria.

 

At the elementary level, I can't abide by the focus on fiction and personal commentary. It honestly drives me crazy. (did you see the writing samples linked that were written by 8th graders? I don't want that sort of instruction w/in 100 mi of my kids!)

 

For my older kids, I want them to develop strong presentation w/topics in science, history, and lit w/evidence in MLA format. I want them to be able to not only write persuasive essays but also research papers......

 

I have not found a single source that does it all (insert very loud sigh here!! :tongue_smilie:)

 

(ETA: I don't want to get into a discussion about the pros and cons of the various programs you have listed b/c I simply don't have the time. But I did remember one other major criteria I have for teaching writing......that the process is not complicated. I do not believe that making a simple process complex strengthens/improves writing. I actually believe the opposite......making the complex simple allows students to develop their skills.)

Edited by 8FillTheHeart
Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll be interested to hear how you like the Norton book. Also is there a better place to buy the Horner book? It's a little pricey at Amazon.

 

Wow, I had no idea Horner's book cost that much nowadays. I think I pd something like $3.50 for my copy. I saw a copy on Ebay (that is the same cover as mine) for $25 w/free shipping, but that is the cheapest I saw.:tongue_smilie:

 

I'll let you know what I think of Norton.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I am still confused because I don't see the difference between a non-fiction narrative and a fiction narrative. For example, I have a book of non-fiction narratives, which includes narratives about Robert E. Lee, Abraham Lincoln, Jenny Lind, etc. We would use the same process for outlining and retelling those narratives as we would use for a story about Pandora's Box.

 

Ds just asked me yesterday what is the difference between first person scientific description and a scientific chronological narrative (both taught in WWS). For example, let's say you are describing the volcanic explosion in Pompeii from a first person point of view, telling about how the explosion felt, smelled, moved from an eyewitness point of view; and then you are writing a chronological narrative about the volcanic eruption. He wanted to know how they are they different? I told him that it has to do with your goal. When you are describing of a scientific process even from the first point of view, you focus on details that help a person understand how a volcanic eruption appears, but if your goal is a narrative, you focus on people, buildings, emotions, etc, it is more of a story. The science description might focus on the actual size and speed of the boulders flying where as the narrative might focus on what happens when the boulder hits the houses, what is lost, what is the human story.

 

There is overlap. Lots of overlap. The difference is in the details and how you weave them into your writing.

 

 

IMHO, CW is a complete program (possibly the only one out there). I would not supplement it. CW hits more non-fiction later on, while WWS is doing it earlier.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the Pompeii example, you are describing two different assignments - one a narrative story from first person point of view, and a report-type piece, which focuses on facts. The progym definitely follows a difference sequence because it doesn't teach report-type writing in the first levels. Thanks, everyone. I think I now understand something about WWS.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lewelma, your list is a good reference, but can you specifically point out where one equates to another. You mention that the progym studies the Common Topics through the progym exercises .. but which Common Topics in which exercises.. lol... I am just wondering how they relate.

 

Well, the problem is that you have the same words in both lists like maxim, comparison, analogy, law. I have spent more time than I care to think about trying to understand how the progym attacks the Common Topics.

 

If I had only been able to make it through D'Angelo's book, I might be of more use. For example, he says that the ways you amplify the Anecdote is through contrast, comparison, and example. Well, these are some of the Common Topics.

 

And for the topic of Refutation/Confirmation: your topics of invention are the probably/improbably, possible/impossible etc These are also part of the Common Topics.

 

So the progym seems to give you something to write about, and then you use certain set Common Topics to augment your arguments. I think that my kids would prefer to come up with their own theses to write about, rather than using the ones set out by the progym. But the progym guides you step by step, rather than throwing you in the deep end.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
In the Pompeii example, you are describing two different assignments - one a narrative story from first person point of view, and a report-type piece, which focuses on facts. The progym definitely follows a difference sequence because it doesn't teach report-type writing in the first levels. Thanks, everyone. I think I now understand something about WWS.

 

I have copied some of my ds(11)'s writing for WWS to help you see the difference.

 

In the first person description you are trying to describe a scientific event as if you were there to make it seem more real.

 

When the volcanic cap was blown off, a huge black cloud of ash swiftly obscured the sun turning noon into the darkness of midnight. It was a stunning picture, glowing, white-hot tendrils of lava flowing down the side of the volcano obliterating everything in their path. Soon, the ash started falling, covering everything in its warm blanket. It was possible to feel it in almost every way: you could taste it in your mouth, hear its soft patter on the ground, feel its scalding grit in your eyes, smell its acrid scent, and see it everywhere. Suddenly, part of the ash cloud collapsed falling onto the flanks of the volcano. It was a nuee ardente also known as a glowing avalanche, the most deadly sort of pyroclastic flow. Trees and bushes fell before it as it sped down the slopes of the volcano at the speed of over two-hundred kilometers per hour.

 

 

In the chronological narrative of a scientific event, you are telling a story about a scientific event like the discovery of something. This chronological narrative was for history.

 

When Johannes Kepler studied at university he learned about Copernicus's new theory of heliocentricism which hypothesized that the sun is at the center of the solar system. However, most people still believed the earth was at the center of the solar system not the sun. After he finished university, Keplar became the assistant of the famous astronomer Tycho Brahe. During this time, his job was to track the orbit of Mars. They both believe that all orbits were circular. Thus, when they noticed that Mars was speeding up and slowing down, they were unable to understand why. Unexpectedly Tycho Brahe died. Keplar continued trying to find an explanation for the movements of Mars. He struggled with this problem for five years. He once wrote, "I was almost driven to madness considering and calculating this matter. I could not find out why the planet would rather go on an elliptical orbit." In 1605, Keplar solved the problem and formed his first law of planetary motion. "The planetary orbit is elliptical and the sun, the source of movement is at one of the foci of this ellipse." He published this work in 1609, but it was not accepted immediately.

 

The second one seems more reportish, but my son is really bad at stories so there are probably better example of a true narrative on the WWS thread on the K-8 writing board.

Edited by lewelma
Link to post
Share on other sites
Lewlema... remind me again why you are not choosing to use CW? ;-)

 

Well, I have not ruled it out. I really like it. But I am a bit with 8filltheheart and find that MY instruction is so much better than a curriculum's instruction. Also, I am concerned that the progym including CW is not focusing on modern writing. I know that CW always has 1 unit on modern writing, but that kind of means that 4 units are not on modern writing. Given that my son will be a STEM major, I feel like I should teach him what he needs to know directly, and I am concerned that CW is having him support a maxim or chreia for example, when he could be writing about a scientific discovery. I also think that he will be more motivated to do his best writing when writing about something he is passionate about or at least cares about. Not sure the chreia I have seen will excite him.

 

It is just so hard. Perhaps we need fewer choices:001_smile:.

Link to post
Share on other sites
lewelma, do you plan on using any literature analysis programs?

 

I am considering Excellence in Literature because it is simple. It gives me the references and the questions, and allows my son to be self-sufficient. But at the same time it allows me to teach him directly, without a curriculum in the middle. It really just depends on if *I* can teach the literary essay, which I think I can if I get something like Writing about Literature and read through it first. http://www.amazon.com/Writing-About-Literature-Edgar-Roberts/dp/0136014569/ref=wl_it_dp_o_npd?ie=UTF8&coliid=I3N8DPAR2GAY5W&colid=22J4BQVB72WNT Also Six Walks in the Fictional Woods looks good http://www.amazon.com/Six-Walks-Fictional-Woods-Umberto/dp/0674810511/ref=wl_it_dp_o_npd?ie=UTF8&coliid=I19HX42K33ZEYH&colid=22J4BQVB72WNT But these are just ideas. I am still researching and thinking.

 

We are currently reading Figuratively Speaking, which is very good. And we are studying poetry through MCT.

Edited by lewelma
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

:lurk5: because I've had a pile of writing books out of the shelves for days, and I've been thumbing through them trying to understand a bigger picture as I plan for high school. I think this thread will help - will review it again when I am not tired. Thanks, Ruth, for posting this!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just discovered this thread. I'm now planning a summer writing intensive workshop for myself LOL! I've read so many books and each one adds a piece to the puzzle. I need to put it together. I am going to list some books that weren't mentioned here because I think that maybe someone reading this thread would want to know about them. These are almost all high school and up, but if you are working on your own learning you might want to try them. Thanks Ruth, for sharing your finds.

 

Imitation: Any book by Frances Donnelly At least 2 are free ebooks on google books. Model English , Imitation and Analysis These may be basically the same book (these are high school and up, though my bright 8th grader is liking the work) He also wrote Persuasive Speech which is worth checking out of a library if you can, otherwise very hard to fine I think.

 

Writer's Workshop by Roper I haven't read this yet

 

Writing to the Point by Kerrigan I keep coming back to what I read in this book when I am working with my kids. This is the book that helped me understand transitions and showed me how to specifically and concretely support proofs with examples. The latter being a really hard task for myself and my kids. LToW is great at teaching invention, but I still go back to what I learned from this book to realize that we need to go back to the topics for more invention. This is easy to read, I've sent my 8th grader to it more than once.

 

I also like Rhetorical Grammar by Kolln (high school and up) but I'm not sure how it fits into the puzzle. Related to style though for sure.

 

Writing and Thinking and Sentences and Thinking by Foerster (Some duplication in these) I haven't read them but have heard them recommended in Classical Rhetoric/LToW circles.

Edited by matermultorum
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ruth,

 

Another huge, hearty thanks for sharing your summary. :001_smile:

 

What do you intend to do or recommend for early elementary (K-4th)? :bigear:

 

 

I cannot really recommend K-4th because I have not done an analysis of what is out there. So all I can tell you is what we have done. My kids do NOT like writing stories, so we focus on non-fiction.

 

K and first half of 1st: copywork (building up to 50 words per day)

 

second half of 1st: easy dictation (like easy Dr Seuss) and continuing copywork

 

2nd - 4th: dictation and oral narration (like WWE but from our own books. This is what she recommended in WTM before she wrote WWE) and IEW structure and style (IEW started at age 8, whenever that falls in the 2nd grade year), I like doing IEW for just 2.5 years because it gets them writing well, but not mechanically because they don't do it for too long.

 

5th: WWS (my older son did MCT paragraph town for 5th because WWS was not out yet, but he did not get much out of it. There is just not a whole lot of instruction in the book.)

 

Ruth

Edited by lewelma
Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot to mention the BIG jump in understanding that happened after I read all those books. It seems so obvious now, so maybe everyone else already see it:glare:

 

Writing includes 2 major parts that need equal time spent on them up through 8th grade (or earlier/later depending on the kid). 1) how to mechanically get words down on paper. This includes mechanics, spelling, handwriting/typing, grammar, and memory. 2) how to organize and develop your thoughts (developing arguments, organizing essays and paragraphs, using descriptive language, etc). What I finally realized is that all of #2 is thinking. SWB mentioned in a lecture that she sees so many students in college that can write a long paper but it says nothing and is organized so poorly as to be impossible to read. These students were only taught #1. I finally understand now what oral narration in elementary school is all about. It is about thinking. And in the end writing is thinking, just thinking put on paper.

 

Now, as students move into rhetoric, the mechanics of writing should already be mastered (#1), and students focus only on developing and organizing thoughts (#2). Once a student can get their thoughts on paper, many of them never progress as it appears that they can "write," so there is nothing left to teach. But now it is their thoughts and the thinking process that must be developed and improved. The writing teacher is now really the "thinking" teacher, teaching the student how to think about a topic, how to analyze an issue, and how to structure an argument effectively. All of these processes are really about organizing your thinking. Writing just transmits these organized thoughts to others.

 

Hope this helps someone.

 

Ruth

Edited by lewelma
  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
I cannot really recommend K-4th because I have not done an analysis of what is out there. So all I can tell you is what we have done. My kids do NOT like writing stories, so we focus on non-fiction.

 

K and first half of 1st: copywork (building up to 50 words per day)

 

second half of 1st: easy dictation (like easy Dr Seuss) and continuing copywork

 

2nd - 4th: dictation and oral narration (like WWE but from our own books. This is what she recommended in WTM before she wrote WWE) and IEW structure and style (IEW started at age 8, whenever that falls in the 2nd grade year), I like doing IEW for just 2.5 years because it gets them writing well, but not mechanically because they don't do it for too long.

 

5th: WWS (my older son did MCT paragraph town for 5th because WWS was not out yet, but he did not get much out of it. There is just not a whole lot of instruction in the book.)

 

Ruth

 

Thank-you. I've wanted to use IEW for my boys before they are ready for WWS. I am encouraged to hear I am not alone in this thinking. I am going to go for it if DH gives me the green light.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The writing teacher is now really the "thinking" teacher, teaching the student how to think about a topic, how to analyze an issue, and how to structure an argument effectively. All of these processes are really about organizing your thinking.

 

It is for this reason that I'll be outsourcing to TPS after WWS. It was wonderful to watch a professional writing teacher at TPS (Mrs. Fred) inspire my dd last year.

 

Ruth, Do you plan to teach them all the way through? I have no doubt that you would be fabulous!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I forgot to mention the BIG jump in understanding that happened after I read all those books. It seems so obvious now, so maybe everyone else already see it:glare:

 

Writing includes 2 major parts that need equal time spent on them up through 8th grade (or earlier/later depending on the kid). 1) how to mechanically get words down on paper. This includes mechanics, spelling, handwriting/typing, grammar, and memory. 2) how to organize and develop your thoughts (developing arguments, organizing essays and paragraphs, using descriptive language, etc). What I finally realized is that all of #2 is thinking. SWB mentioned in a lecture that she sees so many students in college that can write a long paper but it says nothing and is organized so poorly as to be impossible to read. These students were only taught #1. I finally understand now what oral narration in elementary school is all about. It is about thinking. And in the end writing is thinking, just thinking put on paper.

 

Now, as students move into rhetoric, the mechanics of writing should already be mastered (#1), and students focus only on developing and organizing thoughts (#2). Once a student can get their thoughts on paper, many of them never progress as it appears that they can "write," so there is nothing left to teach. But now it is their thoughts and the thinking process that must be developed and improved. The writing teacher is now really the "thinking" teacher, teaching the student how to think about a topic, how to analyze an issue, and how to structure an argument effectively. All of these processes are really about organizing your thinking. Writing just transmits these organized thoughts to others.

 

Hope this helps someone.

 

Ruth

 

Ruth,

 

You have been a tremendous encouragement to me. I can read and read and read but I have great difficulty pulling it all together into a concise summary. I end up bogged down in information but not truly understanding. You are moving me along in the process. I am amazed at your ability to work through so much material and emerge with such understanding. :001_smile:

 

I hope to follow your lead and press on in learning about writing so that I can teach it. I hope to have the big jump in understanding too! I also want to understand what the end goal is. It's easy to say that I want my kid to be a good writer. However, I don't know what a good writer writes like.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It is for this reason that I'll be outsourcing to TPS after WWS. It was wonderful to watch a professional writing teacher at TPS (Mrs. Fred) inspire my dd last year.

 

Ruth, Do you plan to teach them all the way through? I have no doubt that you would be fabulous!!!

 

What is TBS ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

We're focusing on paragraphs this year and I'm actually strangely happy using an older ESL writing textbook I used to use when I taught at community college. It's called "First Steps in Academic Writing" (We use the 1st edition -- by Ann Hogue, though there's a newer one out there). There is a lot of grammar and writing mechanics instruction and some cool sentence combining exercises. Plus, the books have nice model paragraphs and lay out step-by-step how to construct them. Every once in a while, I have to skip an exercise because the book is aimed at adult ESL students in a classroom, not homeschooled native English speaking children, but 95% of the exercises are really useful. If you can find this at a library or used book store, you might want to take a look. I plan on continuing with the next book, "Introduction to academic writing" which introduces essay writing.

 

The older edition looks like it costs 0.01 on amazon: http://www.amazon.com/First-Steps-Academic-Writing-Student/dp/0201834103/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1329669673&sr=1-1

Edited by Momling
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for sharing so much of your hard work here! This is awesome!

 

I think I'll print this one out for further consideration.

 

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

 

Thank you! I have almost every book you have reviewed and will be mulling over what you have to say, as I go back to my shelves to look at what to use/read next.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I must not have been very clear, Corbett does not discuss the progym at all.

 

 

You must have an older edition of Corbett. The 1999 edition does discuss the progym in section V. It's only a few pages long, but he does cover it (using Apthonius' list) and even suggests at least eight possible assignment topics for most of the progymnasmata levels.

 

It seems to me that CW covers a great deal of what is in Corbett (I haven't seen all of CW, so I can't say for sure), incorporating Discovery (part II in Corbett) and Style (Corbett's part IV) into their framework that is built on the progymnasmata.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
You must have an older edition of Corbett. The 1999 edition does discuss the progym in section V. It's only a few pages long, but he does cover it (using Apthonius' list) and even suggests at least eight possible assignment topics for most of the progymnasmata levels.

 

Great. I will be buying another copy for my son to read (as I have completely marked up my copy) and will make sure to get the newer edition.

 

It seems to me that CW covers a great deal of what is in Corbett (I haven't seen all of CW, so I can't say for sure), incorporating Discovery (part II in Corbett) and Style (Corbett's part IV) into their framework that is built on the progymnasmata.

 

:iagree: What confused me for a long time was that different people in different posts would say:

1) CW uses the progym to teach writing

2) CW moves into rhetoric by Herodotus (and even a bit before)

3) The progym is taught *before* rhetoric.

 

These just did not line up until I really studied the curriculum/books. So what I am trying to clarify for others is that CW uses the progym in a slightly different way than it was initially designed (as far as I can tell without seeing the unpublished upper levels). It stretches out the progym exercises and augments them to turn later levels into rhetoric even while using the progym. So CW definitely covers the rhetoric material in Corbett.

 

The difference with Corbett is that it shows you how to study rhetoric without using progym exercises like CW does.

 

Other progym programs like Classical Composition move more quickly, and you would do a rhetoric program after finishing it.

 

HTH. Sorry I have not made myself clear before. I really don't want to confuse people further!

 

Ruth

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you mind giving your opinion of CW Herodotus when you get the opportunity? I would really love to hear your thoughts on it.

 

 

As soon as I finish reading it, I'd be happy to. But I might be a week or more.

 

Ruth

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the comprehensive info about writing.

I tried in vain to find Corbett's book in the library. There are used ones for sale for $18+3.99shipping on Amazon.

I am using IEW SWI A now and hope to get to WWS in the fall. I also have Killgallon and used it for a few days with ds when he was 8. I will try to incorporate it again.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
\... CW uses the progym in a slightly different way than it was initially designed (as far as I can tell without seeing the unpublished upper levels). It stretches out the progym exercises and augments them to turn later levels into rhetoric even while using the progym. So CW definitely covers the rhetoric material in Corbett.

 

The difference with Corbett is that it shows you how to study rhetoric without using progym exercises like CW does.

 

Other progym programs like Classical Composition move more quickly, and you would do a rhetoric program after finishing it.

 

HTH. Sorry I have not made myself clear before. I really don't want to confuse people further!

 

 

Oh, you're doing just the opposite: clarifying things (at least for me!) :001_smile:

 

Jum Selby, the author of CC has a blog that I recommend as reading for anyone interested in that program. I hope it's okay to post a bit of one of his posts here. He addresses why CC covers only six of the categories or topics of invention:

"

The first six stages of the Progymnasmata (and Classical Composition) train the mind to invent arguments. The curriculum begins with Fable and Narrative and teaches students to begin the mental processes of focusing their thoughts in a particular manner in order to come up with or invent ideas and thoughts. The invention of arguments proper will be taught in Refutation and Confirmation but that extremely difficult task takes the preparation for the first four stages if all students are to be equipped regardless of their innate ability. One of the many geniuses of this curriculum is its dependence not upon the gifting of students but rather its success lay in the willingness of students to apply themselves to the exercises.

In Refutation and Confirmation the students will learn how to invent arguments or what Aphthonius says is the “full force of the art.†They will achieve this massive skill by limiting the number of categories or “topics†to six. When the student gets to formal Rhetoric she will be introduced to and master 35-40 topics allowing for immense creativity. We see here the genius of the Progymnasmata in using a limited but innovative repertoire to teach a way of thinking (quality) which allows for the adding a wide variety of Common and Special Topics (quantity) in Rhetoric. Attempting to teach 40 Topics at once overwhelms and frustrates students."

 

 

Remember that if you follow Selby's schedule, your student will finish CC at the end of 9th grade, which leaves three years for Rhetoric.

 

 

 

You can read more here: http://classicalcomposition.com/blog/.

 

 

As for me, I've dusted off our CC Narrative and have had my 15 yo son work at that recently. I expect that after a few more weeks, he'll be ready to move on, and right now, I'm not sure what we'll do next. Options I'm considering include CC Maxim and Chreia (which I already have), CW Diogenes, or, after reading recent discussions, perhaps going directly to Corbett's...decisions, decisions. You would think after all my experience (see my signature) I would have it all figured out. No such luck.

 

 

:001_unsure:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...