Why does everyone dislike SL LA?

[dragons in the flower bed]

It looks to me like copywork, dictation, narration, plus some extra standard school stuff like literary terms and creative writing prompts. What is it that you don't like about it?

[Upward Journey]

I "think" it has to do with the fact that it gets revised, as in completely overhauled, every couple of years. So you might hate it and drop it, and then they revise it, but you already don't use it anymore. So maybe you'd like what they've done to it, but you don't use it anymore and already have a bad taste in your mouth, kwim? I'm in this camp. Tried their LA way back when it was REALLY, REALLY hard, like high school level in 5th grade, hated it, then they revised it, it was still challeging, but in a good way and my son thrived, but then they changed it again. Hated it, again. Then they changed it again so that it seems like it's mostly dictation and writing instruction. Of course, now they're changing it yet again. So who knows?

[Lori D.]

We attempted to use SL core 1 and 2, the 2000 ed. (the first big overhaul). The LA totally did not fit with either of DSs specific, individual needs.

 

We used some of the dictation worksheets from SL cores 3, 4, 5 from the post-2001 edition (but before the next big overhaul in -- what, 2010??). They were fine, but often, I made my own (similar to the SL ones) because that allowed me to focus on the specific grammar points that WE were covering in our separate Grammar program. We used a separate Grammar program because I didn't find the Sonlight LA (in the specific editions and cores we used) to be very logical or systematic in the instruction of the grammar, and that was something *I* needed, not feeling solid in Grammar myself.

 

In any those above cores I listed, I did not like the writing portion of the LA because it really didn't teach HOW to write, which is right where our need was in grades 3-7 when we were using some of the Sonlight LA materials. We ended up, as with the grammar, going with separate writing programs that were more systematic and detailed in teaching writing.

 

 

I guess for me, it wasn't so much disliking Sonlight's LA, as it wasn't worth buying the TMs from SL for what ended up only working as supplemental worksheets. It was nice to have worksheets already done because it saved me time, but it ended up not being that big a deal in the end to just switch over and do my own after getting a feel for the kinds of things we could cover from seeing the SL ones.

 

FWIW: When I looked at samples of the high school cores (pre-2010 or whenever that next big change was), they looked more like a way-too-long reading list, and lacked all that I would have wanted in a literature guide:

- instruction in how to analyze literature

- background info on the author/times

- guided discussion questions

- information on how to write a literary essay

- variety of writing assignments to choose from

 

Again, I am speaking only from the core editions from 2000-2010 or so. Throughout our homeschooling, I have always looked at the SL book lists (along with others) for great ideas of "good books to read". :) Hope that helps! Warmest regards, Lori D.

Edited March 31, 2012 by Lori D.

[KirstenH]

Based on the samples I've seen, I think their LA approach is disjointed, uneven, and confusing.

 

In fairness, I have not seen the samples from the newest IGs, only the last round.

[boscopup]

You can see samples of the new grade 1 and Core D LA here and here.

 

I think the LA1 looks like it'd be fine for my middle son. I think it would have been a bit too much writing right away for DS1 when he was in first grade. Week 1 copywork:

 

 

 

• The fat rat is Pat. Is Pat fat?
  
• That fat cat is Nat. Pat the rat is on a mat.
  

 

 

Then there is creative writing focus:

 

Today, your children will dictate a short story about Pat

the Rat.

 

Then week 2 copywork ramps up:

 

 

 

• Pat is flat, Pat is sad, and Pat is mad! Nat is a bad cat!
  
• Ann had a ham, jam and a yam. Is the ham that Ann has bad?
  

 

 

Then week 3 copywork ramps up more:

 

 

 

• Matt said, “Sam the ram can pass Val the nag.†Jan said, “He can not! Val the nag can pass Sam the ram!â€
  
• Sam the ram, Val the nag, and Hal the cab ran. Val and Hal lap Sam.
  

 

 

Compare to WWE1's first day of copywork: Pa owned a pig. :lol:

 

I know my oldest couldn't have done that much copywork in one day in first grade. WWE1 copywork was much more developmentally appropriate for him.

 

My middle son doesn't have "my hand hurts" syndrome, so he might be able to handle it. I probably won't buy a reader package until he's ready for grade 2 readers though.

[Kathryn]

We went through K and 1 last year and half of 2 this year before giving up.

Mondays are copywork. Developmentally inappropriate copywork. K has them writing out name and address, etc., while supposedly learning letters.

Tuesdays are grammar concepts. Completely random, does not build on itself. One week is verbs, another onomatopoeia, the next homonyms. If a concept ever was repeated fifteen weeks later, DS had no memory of it.

Wednesday was writing prep and Thursday was writing. I'd guess that well over half, more like well over three-quarters, of the assignments are creative writing. Again, developmentally inappropriate. And the examples were clearly written by adults, so it was extremely hard to determine how your child "should" be doing. There is really no "instruction" either.

Fridays are optional assignments that we never even looked at.

Oh, and their "spelling" is just lists of words.

 

Overall, it's very disjointed and developmentally inappropriate.

[Mommy22alyns]

Based on the samples I've seen, I think their LA approach is disjointed, uneven, and confusing.

 

In fairness, I have not seen the samples from the newest IGs, only the last round.

 

Yes. We used 20 weeks of 2 Int. The writing expectations were insane and nowhere near correlation with the reading level of the books. This is disjointed through at least the beginning LAs. Plus, the actual instruction for writing is practically nil. "Have your child write a book report." Okay, HOW? She's never written one before! Things like that. And the grammar was not systematic. One topic this day, another one the next, and so on.

[Ecclecticmum]

I didn't "dislike" it exactly. I actually thought it was cute.

 

We did K LA. The problem was, it was wayyy too much writing for my daughter, and the repetition was exhausting. For her to write "Road" was a lot for her, to write out our ginormous address 3 times, and then do other bits, was exhausting for her. The LA was too integrated for us. We prefer separate LA's so we can adjust to her individual style.

 

For example - Explode the Code is usually a winner in many households, but for us, there was too much repetition for her. She "gets" it and doesn't understand was she has to do page after page about the same thing.

 

For children who like repetition, and an intergrated LA, it would probably go down quite well. I can't advise on the whole LA, as we have only used K.

[jer2911mom]

We used 18 weeks of the 2010 version of LA 1 this year and found the same things to be true. The copywork was too long for my dd who only learned letter formation and small words in K. WWE 1 was much more appropriate for her. The grammar portion was probably the part I appreciated the most, but it was disjointed and random, as the others have said. The creative writing assignments were weekly and my dd who loves to write outside of school would give me the deer-in-the-headlights look when I gave her the assignment. And like the other posters said, the samples given were so far from what a child that age would come up with, it was ridiculous. It really made you question what was appropriate for that age. Also, I found the phonics instruction very ambiguous. I couldn't tell that actual instruction was occuring compared to OPGTR, which we used for K. It had a lot of having the child tell what random words mean and doing some rhyming exercises and such. There were some bingo type games and other activities. I just saw no rhyme or reason to what we were doing. We did not use the spelling. In looking at the sample for the new version, I don't see a lot of difference in content, just formatting, unfortunately. It's a shame because I think a lot of people want to make the SL LA work and really give it a good try before dumping it. We did FLL, WWE, AAS, and CLE LA on the side because we had a good feeling it wasn't going to work, just based on the reviews. It was a relief for both of us to stop using it.

 

HTH,

Kathy

[WeeBeaks]

We found the writing much much harder than the reading for any given level (up to core 3 as we only did up to 3). So they would be teaching letters in Get Ready/Set/Go for the code but the copywork that same week of learning a letter in the first 10 weeks might be to copy their entire address. And this was before a child even read the Fun Tales set. It seems to be of the assumption that a child writes much better than he/she reads, which IMHO is completely backwards from what I experienced and what I hear many other parents lamenting.

 

It evened out as we were in core 3, as by then of course many kids are evening out in terms of writing and reading capabilities. We did the last revision of LA before this one also, and it was lacking in grammar. I hear in the previous revision it took out a lot of the grammar and focused on creative writing, exactly what we didn't need for my son. So it just never worked for us.

 

All the revising though makes it hard to know if it is or isn't what you need for your child besides. In the last iteration, it had a creative writing focus but not as much grammar, and most grammar was taught by the idea that they will pick it up as they read. That works for some kids.

[thegirlwhopaintedtrees]

You can see samples of the new grade 1 and Core D LA here and here.

 

I think the LA1 looks like it'd be fine for my middle son. I think it would have been a bit too much writing right away for DS1 when he was in first grade. Week 1 copywork:

 

 

• The fat rat is Pat. Is Pat fat?
  
• That fat cat is Nat. Pat the rat is on a mat.
  

 

Then there is creative writing focus:

 

Today, your children will dictate a short story about Pat

the Rat.

 

Then week 2 copywork ramps up:

 

 

• Pat is flat, Pat is sad, and Pat is mad! Nat is a bad cat!
  
• Ann had a ham, jam and a yam. Is the ham that Ann has bad?
  

 

Then week 3 copywork ramps up more:

 

 

• Matt said, “Sam the ram can pass Val the nag.†Jan said, “He can not! Val the nag can pass Sam the ram!â€
  
• Sam the ram, Val the nag, and Hal the cab ran. Val and Hal lap Sam.
  

 

Compare to WWE1's first day of copywork: Pa owned a pig. :lol:

 

I know my oldest couldn't have done that much copywork in one day in first grade. WWE1 copywork was much more developmentally appropriate for him.

 

My middle son doesn't have "my hand hurts" syndrome, so he might be able to handle it. I probably won't buy a reader package until he's ready for grade 2 readers though.

 

Not too mention that "Pa owned a pig." is infinitely more interesting to copy than a bunch of nonsense using short a sound cvc words! Love WWE.

[Miss Cornelia Snook]

Oh, don't even get me started on Sonlight's LA!! I started out with Core1 with the LA2 intermediate readers because my son at age 6 was already an excellent reader. But his handwriting was a mess (and at barely nine years old now, it is just starting to show real improvement--thank you, physical development and Getty-Dubay!). The LA was way too advanced for him. All the writing required was enough to make both of us cry. We quit after a couple of weeks!

 

We were a lot happier with FLL and WWE, though I cut down a lot on the copywork in WWE because handwriting still made us cry.

 

I never realized before that a kid really has to have a good handle on handwriting if you're going to get anywhere with teaching LA! He's pretty behind on it, but now we're gaining steam. My second son is the same way--awful handwriting. DD, however, will likely be able to write her name legibly before she turns four. Phew!

 

I think the other posters have given excellent examples as to the inanity of SL's LA program.

[LindaOz]

I like it !! ;)

[frugalmama]

I like the looks of it, we are starting with an older version from 2002 next week. I am allowing dd to type everything possible though, as she is not one for doing lots of handwriting and I'm okay with her using her pc to complete assignments.

[Tanikit]

I have only ever looked at the K LA and it did seem a bit crazy that children who were just starting HWOT K learning to form capital letters were expected to do copywork sentences in both capital and small letters at the same time as they would be starting HWOT. I find any LA programme will not suit my DD if reading is part of it as she is too advanced with her reading and her handwriting is about average or only slightly advanced for her age.

 

I did enjoy looking at some of the creative writing ideas in LA K though as they would not have been things I would have thought of doing with my kindergartener and she has had some fun with them when done orally.

[Mommyfaithe]

It looks to me like copywork, dictation, narration, plus some extra standard school stuff like literary terms and creative writing prompts. What is it that you don't like about it?

 

I am really enjoying it for dd this year. It is not her only LA program, but she is really enjoying the projects( writing assignments). I like her to still have dictation passages etc.

 

It is definitely NOT stand alone as there is h

Ardly any grammar practice at all. In Core W they suggest Keys to Good Language 6, but we just continued with CLE 8, and found it perfect since CLE rarely provides writing instruction or assignments. We also use Wordly Wise for Vocabulary.

 

 

Hth...

[Down_the_Rabbit_Hole]

I "think" it has to do with the fact that it gets revised, as in completely overhauled, every couple of years. So you might hate it and drop it, and then they revise it, but you already don't use it anymore. So maybe you'd like what they've done to it, but you don't use it anymore and already have a bad taste in your mouth, kwim? I'm in this camp. Tried their LA way back when it was REALLY, REALLY hard, like high school level in 5th grade, hated it, then they revised it, it was still challeging, but in a good way and my son thrived, but then they changed it again. Hated it, again. Then they changed it again so that it seems like it's mostly dictation and writing instruction. Of course, now they're changing it yet again. So who knows?

:iagree: my husband thinks I nuts, I tried SL LA a good 5 times (maybe more) and am thinking of trying it again when dd tackles the grade 4/5 readers. What's the definition of insanity...

 

Anyway, for me it was the LA IG that had me sending it back time and time again. It was just a bunch of words with no cohesiveness. The examples of writing in the IG looked like a professional writer wrote them and in no way would equal a normal childs writing at that level...best to leave them out. I never got a feel for where we were going. The spelling portion is a joke in my opinion. I could go on and on but I will just agree with everything all the non SL LA people said.

Edited April 1, 2012 by Down_the_Rabbit_Hole

[Upward Journey]

:iagree: my husband thinks I nuts, I tried SL LA a good 5 times (maybe more) and am thinking of trying it again when dd tackles the grade 4/5 readers. What's the definition of insanity...

 

Anyway, for me it was the LA IG that had me sending it back time and time again. It was just a bunch of words with no cohesiveness. The examples of writing in the IG looked like a professional writer wrote them and in no way would equal a normal childs writing at that level...best to leave them out. I never got a feel for where we were going. The spelling portion is a joke in my opinion. I could go on and on but I will just agree with everything all the non SL LA people said.

 

I'm in that crazy house with you :lol: But this year I'll have an 11yo and a 13yo using Core 4, so I think that the writing assignments might be perfect. I'm thinking about pushing that button before tonights' deadline, since I own the last "non-writing intensive" version and I don't want to buy the new combined IG. We will continue using R&S for grammar.

[PentecostalMom]

I like it !! ;)

 

I have several friends who use it with no complaints, even rave reviews! We plan to pick it up this year. Excited about having everything together in one binder!!

[sassenach]

It looks to me like copywork, dictation, narration, plus some extra standard school stuff like literary terms and creative writing prompts. What is it that you don't like about it?

 

Funny that you post this. I tried it back in...2005?....or sometime thereabouts and dropped it because of the creative writing emphasis. Then this week I was looking at it again and thinking that I should take another gander at it at the convention. I doubt I would use it though.

[TracyR]

I'm not sure. We tried the LA many years ago when we first started homeschooling. It just never made any sense to me. I really tried to like it but found I just couldn't. I hope maybe these new changes are better. I just don't know if I'd go back to it. I think you can find a better LA program for less that actually makes sense.

I must of bought it in the doesn't make sense, very disjointed, and confusing period.

[MeganW]

We found the writing much much harder than the reading for any given level (up to core 3 as we only did up to 3). So they would be teaching letters in Get Ready/Set/Go for the code but the copywork that same week of learning a letter in the first 10 weeks might be to copy their entire address. And this was before a child even read the Fun Tales set. It seems to be of the assumption that a child writes much better than he/she reads, which IMHO is completely backwards from what I experienced and what I hear many other parents lamenting.

 

 

This was exactly our problem. The writing expectations were at a WAAAAY higher level than the phonics/reading expectations. And the readalouds were even higher. I ended up waiting until we were old enough to enjoy the readalouds, but by then we were way past the phonics they recommended, and were still not there for the writing.

 

I ended up using Sonlight solely for the readaloud schedule. I went back to our old phonics, handwriting, and math.

[Jonibee]

The biggest problem with Sonlight LA is that the elementary levels change their teaching methodology ALL the time.

 

I've tried their lower levels 4 or 5 times as well. Call me crazy. Every time they say New and Improved, I've been a sucker.

 

So when you want to talk about what Sonlight' LA is like or what we didn't like about it, well we may be comparing apples to oranges. I've decided that Sonlight -- in its effort to be all things to all people -- has really just reeled people in over and over by their slick advertising of New and Improved.

 

I remember way back when I was often complaining on their forum (when John was still there) about the ridiculousness of talking about antecedents with my kindergartner. Never mind that he could barely write his full name, but I was supposed to "instruct" him on antecedents (I had to look that up -- Me, the one who took 8 English classes in high school) and then teach him about placing the comma in a quote inside or outside the quotation mark. It was ridiculous. And on the forum I would be told (or maybe it was in the IG) that it didn't matter if they remembered it or even understood it, as they would cover these concepts again in future years. That sounded stupid to me. Teach it, but it doesn't matter if they get it.

 

As I said, the sad about apart the LA from Sonlight is that they seem to have no clue as to what they recommend level wise. They change their mind drastically every 2 or 3 years. They've always had dictation, but it's what they do with the instructional part that always changes.

 

I've decided to stick with authors and publishers who create ONE plan that I can agree with or not.

Edited April 1, 2012 by Jonibee

[boscopup]

As I said, the sad about apart the LA from Sonlight is that they seem to have no clue as to what they recommend level wise. They change their mind drastically every 2 or 3 years. They've always had dictation, but it's what they do with the instructional part that always changes.

 

 

Sounds kind of like what they do with their core recommendations. Their multisubject package recommendations are usually for ages that most people wouldn't recommend using them for (staring with K->core A, going on to 3rd grade->core D, etc.). If you read the fine print, they'll say that Core D is for "advanced 3rd graders, 4th graders, and 5th graders". Well, why are they making that the multisubject package for 3rd grade? Makes no sense!

 

(and I'm enjoying Core D with my advanced almost-3rd grader, but I can easily see that we'll want to slow it down a lot before we get to some of the other cores beyond this, despite what Sonlight recommends as the multisubject package age :tongue_smilie:)