wehave8 Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 I have always done Rod & Staff English with our older, graduated children. Now I am using SWR with our sons 7 & 9 and I am not sure if I should use the grammar in SWR and skip R&S or stay with R&S and skip the SWR grammar and just do the phonics/spelling part. Or should I do both? If I just do the grammar in SWR will I cover all that is in R&S? And if I do SWR for a few years and then do R&S, where would I start in it? Pam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nansk Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 I would do both, at least for the 9 yo. For the 7 yo, the introduction to parts of speech in SWR may be enough for now. I don't know what R&S 2 and 3 covers, but I have R&S 4 and it is more comprehensive than SWR's coverage of grammar. Unless you can expand what is taught in SWR grammar (without a grammar curriculum) I would add a separate grammar program. Hope that helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyhomemaker Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 I add a separate grammar program to SWR. The grammar in SWR is not as systematic or as thorough as I would like so we use the activities in SWR just for reinforcement of our formal grammar program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterPan Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 We always did a separate grammar along with SWR. Just lighten it (the R&S) up so it doesn't get overwhelming. We found the enrichments with grammar activities, etc. in SWR very useful, but they didn't replace a separate program, not for us. We used Shurley and we just did it gently, 5-10 minutes a day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dinsfamily Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 I use FLL with SWR and incorporate the grammar enrichments as they often reinforce what FLL is teaching. I do think SWR's grammar is plenty for K-2, but I really needed the scripted nature of FLL because grammar is one of the subjects I was most uncomfortable teaching in the beginning. I don't really need the hand-holding anymore, but FLL is just so easy, quick, and thorough that I have no plans to drop it with my littles coming up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloha2U Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 We found the enrichments with grammar activities, etc. in SWR very useful, but they didn't replace a separate program, not for us. :iagree: We supplement SWR with a separate grammar, but still find the SWR enrichments useful. I use FLL with SWR and incorporate the grammar enrichments as they often reinforce what FLL is teaching. :iagree: Same story here. On a side note... we've also dabbled with Shurley (which I liked without the writing), but when I came across MCT - 4 level analysis and such - I knew that I wanted to incorporate it alongside SWR and FLL. For me, MCT is like taking the things I liked about Shurley to the next level... and beyond. We do FLL (our grammar spine) three days a week and MCT on the fourth. I'm not exactly sure what we'll use after we complete FLL 4 this year. I have the first 15-ish(?) lessons of ALL, so we'll definitely do those, but after that ? I've thought about R&S (5?) lightened, but I don't know if I'll want to sift through it, picking and choosing which parts to use alongside SWR... and possibly MCT, too. Ok, now I'm rambling. Perhaps this is too much information? :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.