IEW PAL reviews?

[heidip2p]

I am strongly considering ordering IEW's PAL both reading and writing for our 5.5 year old. He is already reading quite a bit. We use AAS so it seems like this would be a great fit. Just wondering what some people who have used it think about it?

 

My plan would be to use....

PAL reading and writing

MUS Alpha

Sonlight for bible, reading, and science

[BugsMama]

The TOS Review Crew actually just started reviewing PAL this week- you'll have 100 reviews to read by the end of the week.

 

Here is the link:

http://schoolhousereviewcrew.com/786738/

[mhaddon]

We used it last year. Almost to the book. My son is dyslexic and I thought it would help. His retention was very low and despite all the games it just didn't work for us. It is very, very time/teacher intensive. We had to shelf it with him and my other son is moving along so well that it is too much for him as well.

[mommy5]

We used it this year (almost finished with it now). I LOVE it and can't say enough good things about it. I made the games up ahead of time and it is teacher intensive but it was what worked for my kids. My oldest was very slow to read and write and was in 2nd grade and my dd was 4.5 when we first started using it. It was an awesome fit for both of them. They are both reading (my son is now reading on a 3rd-4th grade level) and writing and enjoying it, finally. I love the approach to this. We had tried multiple programs with my 7 yr old that just didn't work for him until this program. I'm sure it won't be for everyone but I love it ... the kids thought it was more fun than anything we had tried previously (like 100EZ lessons and ETC) ...

Edited November 9, 2012 by mommy5

[lexi]

I'm on the Review Crew and my post just went up today. You can see my review here and a day in the life of using PAL post here. There will be many more reviews on the TOS Crew blog soon though.

 

But I can try to summarize my thoughts for you.......I'll be the voice of one of the few who did not enjoy the program. It just doesn't work for us.

 

There are so many pieces to keep track of-so many games introduced at different times, flash cards, worksheet pages, reading practice pages, copywork pages, journals, phonics farm, stickers, etc. It was just a huge mess for us.

 

There were not enough words used to reinforce concepts taught and I felt like things jumped back and forth too much. There were too many small pieces or small bits of information taught in each lesson. The lessons did not seem to build on each other at all.

 

There are lots of worksheets, reader pages, copywork pages, and posters to have to print if you use them all. That was quite an expense to get going with 3 kids. And the worksheets are not very exciting either.

 

The order of introduction of sight words and phonograms made no logical sense to me whatsoever. In one lesson you learn one sound of this phonogram and then you learn a sight word that contains some sounds that you haven't learned yet. One of the sight words is even "hen." How is that a sight word??? I understand sight words and I do teach them. Just not in a way this program does. In addition, the way rules and phonogram sounds were explained was extremely complicated.

 

My kids weren't taught the tools for sounding out and decoding words. They learned a sound here based on one word, they learned a sight word here, they played games and tried to memorize words. They had no skills for sounding things out.

 

So, after trying the program with all 3 of my older kids (at differing levels) for several weeks. I have officially thrown in the towel. There are simpler ways of learning to read, less pieces needed, and less headache for me.

 

I want a program that starts with simple CVC words and then progresses from there. I want to start with single letter sounds and then add in phonograms. I don't want to spend several hours a day doing language arts with my kids. I can be more efficient than that.

 

I see why people enjoy the program. The games can be fun. Each lesson has multiple small lessons in it so it might keep things interesting for some kids (for me it jumped around too much). It provides lots of parent-child interaction. It does teach lots of sight words so I guess some kids can start reading certain readers right away rather than sticking to simple CVC words. It does contain some good writing instruction which would prepare you for IEW. It uses All About Spelling which I'm really loving.

 

But, overall, it was a bust for us. I had such high hopes for the program and I really thought we would love it! I really really did! I kept trying to make the lessons work. But I was confused and frustrated and so were my kids. I'm still in shock that we didn't care for it.

 

We are using All About Reading now and it's just making so much sense to my son. My daughter is doing great with All About Spelling. She's making big improvements. We've cut our language arts time in half now. I think I might add in Writing With Ease for my oldest and then I'll think about grammar next year. But, that's our plan and it has streamlined my day and my headache is gone!

 

So, please no one throw tomatoes at me. I wanted to like this. It just did not fit our family well at all.

[5LittleMonkeys]

I'm still mulling whether I like this program or not. I'm using it with a 6yo, 1st grader that already knew his alphabet and sounds and was sounding out cvc words already. We started at the beginning as a refresher and because I noticed a lot of blends and phonograms that he was unfamiliar with. It seemed impossible to jump in so many lessons in because of the way the site words and phonograms were introduced we would have missed some information.

 

When we first started my son was so excited to play the games each day, but now I get, "Do we HAVE to do the games?" And speaking of the games...PRINT THEM OUT AND ASSEMBLE THEM BEFORE YOU START THE PROGRAM. I can't tell you how distracting it is to have to stop halfway into the lesson to assemble the game. The worksheets are rather dull and repetitive. The readers are rather dull. I will say that I do like the fact that the lesson can be broken up to do in short sessions, however that contributes to it feeling choppy to me. I used to spread our PP lessons up into sessions, but they never felt disconnected from one another. Some people and dc may not notice or mind that lack of continuity ( I don't think it bothered ds ), but it is distracting to me.

 

We haven't used the writing portion too much as my son already knew how to form all the letters and I prefer WWE for copywork and narration at this age. In hind sight I shouldn't have purchased the writing portion since I'm already familiar with IEW and can move my son into key word outlines and rewrites on my own after a couple of years of WWE. I think having the foundation of summary skills that WWE provides is valuable before starting IEW, but that's just my .02.

 

I wanted so badly to love this program, and while I haven't dismissed it yet I'm finding that I'm having to reinvent it to keep my sons attention. Anyway, all that to say that if I tried this with a child completely new to reading, and one that connected with the program we would have had a completely different experience. If your child likes doing the program its little annoyances can be overlooked, but if your child groans each time you bring it out...well, it's hard to love.

[ondreeuh]

We are on lesson 40 and have been using it about 10 weeks. It is very different from AAR, OPG, PP, and those other parts-to-whole programs. PAL is whole-to-parts, and you start out right away with complex words that you use to find the "helpers" (phonemes). Words are coded with diacritical marks, and written on index cards which are drilled to build fluency. The point of the program is to give the student both decoding skills and a large bank of "sight words." The term "sight words" is kind of a misnomer here, because they aren't necessarily non-phonetic words. Most of them are phonetic, and the student learns through coding why the word is pronounced as it is. Even the easiest words like hen and dog are written on cards and drilled, not because they are non-phonetic, but because they are common and should be identified immediately.

 

I do think PAL is stronger on building sight words than it is on building decoding skills. We do Bob Books along with PAL and sometimes I bring out OPG. My son has a very good memory for words so after he's decoded it once or twice he has it memorized as a sight word. He has to be prompted to decode and if I didn't supplement, I think he would be in big trouble. Most of the decoding and phonics skills comes from the games. I do think they are effective. It's not messy for me at all because I made them up ahead of time and have them in a file bin. We have made it to game 30 out of 35. There are only three games he hasn't mastered after the first or second time (contractions, magic-e, and bossy e, I, and y).

 

If your child is not ready to blend or has poor phonemic awareness skills the I wouldn't start this program. It works great for my son who has excellent P.A. skills and picks up sight words effortlessly. He is cruising through the program and I am making him slow down. It will get him reading at a fairly high level very quickly. My older son is dyslexic and while I think he would have liked parts of this program, it would have moved too fast for him.

 

I do LOVE that most of the program is either games or activities. There is very little reading from a worksheet (and my son finds that incredibly easy, so it is not frustrating). My son is very active but finds this do-able. PAL is a great fit for my son, but I do adapt. I printed/assembled everything ahead of time so it is open and go. We do two lessons at a time, usually, and I don't always make him do the cutting/pasting or coloring. If I am in a hurry we just do the poem, new game, phonetic farm, activity worksheet and reading practice (20 minutes, maybe). If we have lots of time, we play a bunch of the games too and do 2 or even 3 lessons. He is able to read the poems after a few days of discussing the words, and it is really neat to see!

Edited November 9, 2012 by ondreeuh

[lexi]

We are on lesson 40 and have been using it about 10 weeks. It is very different from AAR, OPG, PP, and those other parts-to-whole programs. PAL is whole-to-parts, and you start out right away with complex words that you use to find the "helpers" (phonemes). Words are coded with diacritical marks, and written on index cards which are drilled to build fluency. The point of the program is to give the student both decoding skills and a large bank of "sight words." The term "sight words" is kind of a misnomer here, because they aren't necessarily non-phonetic words. Most of them are phonetic, and the student learns through coding why the word is pronounced as it is. Even the easiest words like hen and dog are written on cards and drilled, not because they are non-phonetic, but because they are common and should be identified immediately.

 

I do think PAL is stronger on building sight words than it is on building decoding skills. We do Bob Books along with PAL and sometimes I bring out OPG. My son has a very good memory for words so after he's decoded it once or twice he has it memorized as a sight word. He has to be prompted to decode and if I didn't supplement, I think he would be in big trouble. Most of the decoding and phonics skills comes from the games. I do think they are effective. It's not messy for me at all because I made them up ahead of time and have them in a file bin. We have made it to game 30 out of 35. There are only three games he hasn't mastered after the first or second time (contractions, magic-e, and bossy e, I, and y).

 

If your child is not ready to blend or has poor phonemic awareness skills the I wouldn't start this program. It works great for my son who has excellent P.A. skills and picks up sight words effortlessly. He is cruising through the program and I am making him slow down. It will get him reading at a fairly high level very quickly. My older son is dyslexic and while I think he would have liked parts of this program, it would have moved too fast for him.

 

I do LOVE that most of the program is either games or activities. There is very little reading from a worksheet (and my son finds that incredibly easy, so it is not frustrating). My son is very active but finds this do-able. PAL is a great fit for my son, but I do adapt. I printed/assembled everything ahead of time so it is open and go. We do two lessons at a time, usually, and I don't always make him do the cutting/pasting or coloring. If I am in a hurry we just do the poem, new game, phonetic farm, activity worksheet and reading practice (20 minutes, maybe). If we have lots of time, we play a bunch of the games too and do 2 or even 3 lessons. He is able to read the poems after a few days of discussing the words, and it is really neat to see!

 

And I think this was part of our problem. My son doesn't have amazing phonemic awareness skills and he doesn't know how to blend. That's why I wanted a reading program to help him get ready to do those things. PAL threw too many things at him at once.

 

He also doesn't just memorize words easily-he needs to decode them numerous times to start to recognize them and be able to read them. (His strong suit appears to be math and numbers instead). So he struggles with all the random sight words thrown his way. He cannot remember them and the program does not give him the skills to decode them. So, he's stuck-there are lots of big words he cannot remember or read and he does not have the tools to decode and blend the sounds.

 

If I were to use the program I would need something to use beforehand to help him with those skills. I think it depends on what you're looking for in a reading program and what skills your child already has. My kids need something to hold their hand more and to give them those skills. If your kid can't just memorize words after seeing them on a flash card a few times, then PAL might not work. While I do think it's important for a student to build up a list of sight words that they recognize, it doesn't help if they don't have the decoding skills if they get stuck and forget a word. And if your child doesn't memorize random words easily, you'll hit a brick wall.

 

So, it depends on learning styles of the child. After trying this program I learned something about my son and middle daughter-they need much more hand-holding in the reading area! Recognizing and remembering words are not strong suits. They need much more practice and repetition. And blending-whoa! They need so much help in that area.

 

I do plan to keep some of the games and use them with another program. They are fun if we use them on occasion.

[ondreeuh]

I agree with your assessment. I would wager that a very large percentage of children need more work on decoding than this program will provide and need either a different program entirely, or a supplement with phonetic readers or another program. I know that PAL is adapted from Anna Ingham's "Sound City" stuff, but I wonder if she did include more decoding practice.

 

I bet you will find the games helpful as your kiddo progresses. The games reinforce Bob books pretty well (we are in set 4, and the games seem to line up). Some of the games are good for phonemic awareness, but I also use the super cute, colorful games from Carson-Dellosa's Basic Phonics G.A.M.E.S. series. You just tear them out, laminate, and cut.

[Guest jumperdono]

I thought it would help. His retention was very low and despite all the games it just didn't work for us.

[edeemarie]

We tried both the reading and writing, and in the end I sold the reading but we still use the writing. I agree that it seemed like way too much focus on sight words and not enough on decoding. Plus my son was getting to the point where he didn't want to do the games or the worksheets. So we went back to AlphaPhonics for reading.

 

The writing part we love. I am using it with my older 2 so we skipped section 1 and they are currently working their way through section 3. We have also tried WWE and they both prefer PAL. I am very impressed with the kind of writing they are able to produce with this program. I am not certain if we will continue with IEW for writing (mostly because of the cost) but this program has been great for building their writing skills.

[Guest Laurielee7]

I used PAL with my 1st grade daughter, who was already reading. The first book was irrelavent for us. And the 2nd book with copy work had funny g's, the curly-q type. I decided to use Handwriting without Tears instead. But the 3rd book for writing was great! Not only did my first grader master everything in that book, we went right on into full blown IEW writing! I would not have tried IEW until 3rd grade had it not been for the baby steps of PAL, 3rd book. So I recommend the program for writing.:)

[Jim]

We're using it successfully. Ds2 sees the letter combinations he's learning everywhere, in book to billboards he's always pointing them out.

 

We create the games in advance and play them until he's mastered them or tires of them, then move on. He has favorites that we return to as a reward.

 

In regard to the program jumping around. I manage a cub scout pack. I here this all the time from parents. Instead of working on one achievement at a time we work on several at once and jump around between them. It drives parents crazy. It drove me crazy - at first. I've come to recognize that the program is written for children and their attention span. By moving from activity to activity, many of them unrelated, during a meeting we're able to hold the scouts attention since it keeps the activities fun for them. That's the bottom line, it has to hold their attention to work for them, the kids.

 

So far, we're enjoying the program. It's doing the job for us and he's enjoying it. We will use WWE as he grows, just as we did with ds1. We believe IEW and WWE play well together.

 

Jim

[mommy5]

I find it interesting that so many don't seem to like it. It seems strange that it did work so well for my 5 yr old (she was 4 when we started) and 7 yr old. Like I said in an earlier post, my 7 yr old had had phonics for 2 years and couldn't get it ... just couldn't read very well at all. By the end of this program he is reading at a 4th grade level and my 5 yr old is close to that. Maybe it is what clicked with my kids when PP, ETC, and 100EZ lessons bored them to tears...they loved the games ... they can even play them by themselves. They love the worksheets - they knew every day that it wasn't too hard (my son hated ETC - found it incredibly frustrating) but it was good review of the new words. They love the sight words and the handwriting practice. I didn't find it difficult to print out everything. I printed out everything the 2 kids would need for the entire year. I put it away in a binder and only took out enough for each week. I also made up most of the games ahead of time so no time was wasted.

[lexi]

I find it interesting that so many don't seem to like it. It seems strange that it did work so well for my 5 yr old (she was 4 when we started) and 7 yr old. Like I said in an earlier post, my 7 yr old had had phonics for 2 years and couldn't get it ... just couldn't read very well at all. By the end of this program he is reading at a 4th grade level and my 5 yr old is close to that. Maybe it is what clicked with my kids when PP, ETC, and 100EZ lessons bored them to tears...they loved the games ... they can even play them by themselves. They love the worksheets - they knew every day that it wasn't too hard (my son hated ETC - found it incredibly frustrating) but it was good review of the new words. They love the sight words and the handwriting practice. I didn't find it difficult to print out everything. I printed out everything the 2 kids would need for the entire year. I put it away in a binder and only took out enough for each week. I also made up most of the games ahead of time so no time was wasted.

 

I don't think it's strange at all that it worked for you. Every child learns so differently! The reasons it worked well for you are the same reasons it didn't work for us. But hearing how and why it worked or didn't work for everyone is really helpful when making a curriculum decision. I love, love, love reading negative (but objective) reviews on curricula. They are so helpful when I make decisions based on our needs and my kids' learning styles. I think there are quite a few people who do enjoy this program. I've seen many positive reviews around the web. So, don't find it strange that it worked for you! Be glad it did and know that it did work well for other people too!

[lexi]

I agree with your assessment. I would wager that a very large percentage of children need more work on decoding than this program will provide and need either a different program entirely, or a supplement with phonetic readers or another program. I know that PAL is adapted from Anna Ingham's "Sound City" stuff, but I wonder if she did include more decoding practice.

 

I bet you will find the games helpful as your kiddo progresses. The games reinforce Bob books pretty well (we are in set 4, and the games seem to line up). Some of the games are good for phonemic awareness, but I also use the super cute, colorful games from Carson-Dellosa's Basic Phonics G.A.M.E.S. series. You just tear them out, laminate, and cut.

 

Yes, I learned that my kids need more decoding practice. They needs lots of it! My oldest may have been ok with the amount contained in PAL but my middle 2 don't think like she does. They need much more hand-holding.

 

Thanks for recommending the G.A.M.E.S. series. I'm going to check those out. We enjoy using the games a few times a week so I bet my kids would like some more variety in the game category. And if they were less work to put together than the PAL games-I'm all for that too!!!!

[Guest eslmama]

We used it last year. Almost to the book. My son is dyslexic and I thought it would help. His retention was very low and despite all the games it just didn't work for us. It is very, very time/teacher intensive. We had to shelf it with him and my other son is moving along so well that it is too much for him as well.

 

 

Oh my, I read your post after posting my own questions about PAL. Perhaps my enthusiasm was premature. My kiddos struggle with reading - one is dyslexic, the other is possibly also but this hasn't been confirmed.

 

I have all this OG background but it is very time consuming so I would love something that is more of a kit. I don't need or want a script but want more of a language arts curriculum than just reading & spelling. I have some of Barton and Wilson but those still need other items (I think) to make it a full language arts curriculum.

 

I'm curious to know how PAL was time/teacher intensive? What kind of teacher/mom prep is required?

[Ecclecticmum]

 

 

Oh my, I read your post after posting my own questions about PAL. Perhaps my enthusiasm was premature. My kiddos struggle with reading - one is dyslexic, the other is possibly also but this hasn't been confirmed.

 

I have all this OG background but it is very time consuming so I would love something that is more of a kit. I don't need or want a script but want more of a language arts curriculum than just reading & spelling. I have some of Barton and Wilson but those still need other items (I think) to make it a full language arts curriculum.

 

I'm curious to know how PAL was time/teacher intensive? What kind of teacher/mom prep is required?

 

What about Logic of English Foundations or Essentials, would that work? Its OG inspired.

 

I actually have PAL, and planned to use in in conjunction with bits from LLATL. I was looking for a spelling program to go with it (I am not fond of AAS), and came across LOE, and fell in love. I agreed with the videos I saw, and the more I looked, the more I felt myself agreeing with her. The two methods are really not compatible together (if you are going to do them properly, as one is about proper foundations, and the other is about fast-tracking) so I ended up going with LOE-F, I decided to put all my eggs into that basket, as I can see where its going, and the one thing I was concerned about was eliminated by reviews/post from Beta testers.

 

It covers a lot more than just reading/spelling.

 

LLATL is another option (I put mine away after deciding to concentrate on LOE).