How does WTM compare to typical public or private school?

[Penelope]

I am planning on using most of the recommendations for WTM for first grade. We use OPGTR and I think we will finish it this summer, or into the fall.

 

My question is, how do you think the WTM sequence stacks up compared to typical schools, for the elementary years?

 

If a WTM homeschooled student entered traditional school in 3rd or 4th grade, do you think there would be any challenges?

 

My first impression is that such a student will have more history knowledge, maybe more science background, but is WTM approach a little (or a lot) lighter on writing in the early years than schools? I wonder if there would be trouble transitioning to doing more writing. I also wonder how you all think other areas would compare. BTW, I think overall, it is much superior! I just wonder how it compares for the 3R's, in the early years--way ahead, behind, or ?

[Julie in Austin]

I agree with you--the WTM kid would likely be better at math and reading and know more science/history, but might be a little weak on writing BUT have a better foundation in place to become a better writer later on.

[rockermom]

My neice is a 4th grade ps teacher and she said she can't believe how ill-prepared her students are for even the review work they do at the beginning of each school year. She told me that most of her students' writing assignments were on par with where the average 2nd grader would be. It may just be her school district, but I should hope that TWTM curriculum guidelines would at least be equal to that. Actually, I am confident they will far outstrip our local schools.

[mcconnellboys]

Gee, I've always thought it was way ahead in everything. I guess different areas of the country could vary by what their public schools teach, so maybe some are very writing intensive in early elementary, but I haven't seen that anywhere I've lived. In fact, even up through sixth grade it was difficult to ask kids to read aloud in Sunday school when I used to teach because so few could even do it. I've never found any of them to be advanced in math or grammar, either.

 

So, I guess it depends on what the parent does with the child, but if you're following WTM guidelines pretty closely and covering all the bases with good curriculum, then I think you're going to have a better end product than if you were in public school, in general. I can't imagine putting a child back into school even for middle school and finding that they were behind in any way whatsoever (in fact, I can't imagine why anyone would even put a child back for middle school as those who don't homeschool any other time often choose to do so through that difficult age because the schools can be so generally atrocious).

 

As far as writing is specifically concerned, I had my younger child writing, both for handwriting practice and for practice in copywork and dictation, in first grade. My older son came home and was writing lengthy reports in second grade, but he's a writer naturally. My younger son is writing more lengthy reports now, in fourth grade, because I've moved into writing more slowly with him as I could see that he was not a natural. Homeschooling has simply allowed me to give him more time to mature into his writing, which is a skill that sometimes comes later for boys than girls. I certainly could have forced more writing at a younger age, but what would have been the point of that?

 

Regena

[Suzanne in ABQ]

The WTM approach teaches kids to write well before it requires them to do tons and tons of writing. PS seems to do the opposite. They try to get them to just put words down on paper, lots and lots of words, before they even attempt to teach them how to write well.

 

First, let me say that this opinion is based on my experience. I'm not making broad generalizations about ALL schools or ALL teachers. But, I see your question in three parts (or, at least, it can be interpreted in three ways).

 

First, penmenship/handwriting: Public schools don't take the time that they used to teaching kids to form letters consistently. Kids are jumbled around from style to style, from little instruction to none. Then, they're expected to write pages and pages everyday. I've seen the work produced in 1st to 3rd grade, and most of it is illegible. But, there are volumes of it! Instead, I had my children spend 5 to 10 minutes a day practicing making perfect letters. The lessons were short, but those neural pathways were deeply entrenched. As they practiced, their speed increased, and their volume increased, but their formation remained consistent.

 

Second, writing content: they expect kids to write pages and pages of stuff, without first teaching them how to construct proper sentences or paragraphs, how to organize their thoughts, or even how to make sense. Their theory seems to be that if you just get the kid to get their thoughts down on paper, you'll be able to teach them the other stuff later. Does it work? I suppose it might for some kids. Instead, I didn't expect my kids to write paragraphs until they were comfortable and proficient at writing sentences. I didn't expect them to write sentences until they were proficient at copying other peoples sentences (becoming familiar with syntax, punctuation, etc. through copywork and dictation), and with getting their thoughts together (I wrote their narrations and creative stories down for them). Of course, a school teacher wouldn't have enough time in a year to do this for every student, so she just requires them all to just write and write, hoping eventually to instill proper grammar, spelling, punctuation, capitalization, word usage, etc. through grading and correction.

 

Third, volume: they require lots and lots of writing, pages and pages of writing, at a young age. These pages are a jumbled mass of letters. There is no way to distinguish words or make sense of the sentences because they child hasn't yet learned to form letters correctly, to spell correctly, to leave space between words, to punctuate or capitalize, or to make any sense. They're quite good at filling a page with something that looks like letters, but it is all meaningless. They're not proud of what they did. Instead, my kids might produce one sentence in first grade, three in second grade, or a short paragraph in 3rd. They're proud of it, though, because it is perfect. They can show it to their dad and he'll actually be able to read it, and understand it. He won't have to hmm and haw, and ask cryptic questions, or say, "Tell me about this." :o/

 

So, to (finally) answer your question: If your child enters school in third or fourth grade, he/she might not have the physical stamina (at first) to fill an entire page with writing, but he'll be able to produce a little bit of very good writing. I believe they'll be ahead. They'll be able to build the strength in their hand in no time.

[siloam]

The WTM approach teaches kids to write well before it requires them to do tons and tons of writing. PS seems to do the opposite. They try to get them to just put words down on paper, lots and lots of words, before they even attempt to teach them how to write well.

 

First, let me say that this opinion is based on my experience. I'm not making broad generalizations about ALL schools or ALL teachers. But, I see your question in three parts (or, at least, it can be interpreted in three ways).

 

First, penmenship/handwriting: Public schools don't take the time that they used to teaching kids to form letters consistently. Kids are jumbled around from style to style, from little instruction to none. Then, they're expected to write pages and pages everyday. I've seen the work produced in 1st to 3rd grade, and most of it is illegible. But, there are volumes of it! Instead, I had my children spend 5 to 10 minutes a day practicing making perfect letters. The lessons were short, but those neural pathways were deeply entrenched. As they practiced, their speed increased, and their volume increased, but their formation remained consistent.

 

Second, writing content: they expect kids to write pages and pages of stuff, without first teaching them how to construct proper sentences or paragraphs, how to organize their thoughts, or even how to make sense. Their theory seems to be that if you just get the kid to get their thoughts down on paper, you'll be able to teach them the other stuff later. Does it work? I suppose it might for some kids. Instead, I didn't expect my kids to write paragraphs until they were comfortable and proficient at writing sentences. I didn't expect them to write sentences until they were proficient at copying other peoples sentences (becoming familiar with syntax, punctuation, etc. through copywork and dictation), and with getting their thoughts together (I wrote their narrations and creative stories down for them). Of course, a school teacher wouldn't have enough time in a year to do this for every student, so she just requires them all to just write and write, hoping eventually to instill proper grammar, spelling, punctuation, capitalization, word usage, etc. through grading and correction.

 

Third, volume: they require lots and lots of writing, pages and pages of writing, at a young age. These pages are a jumbled mass of letters. There is no way to distinguish words or make sense of the sentences because they child hasn't yet learned to form letters correctly, to spell correctly, to leave space between words, to punctuate or capitalize, or to make any sense. They're quite good at filling a page with something that looks like letters, but it is all meaningless. They're not proud of what they did. Instead, my kids might produce one sentence in first grade, three in second grade, or a short paragraph in 3rd. They're proud of it, though, because it is perfect. They can show it to their dad and he'll actually be able to read it, and understand it. He won't have to hmm and haw, and ask cryptic questions, or say, "Tell me about this." :o/

 

So, to (finally) answer your question: If your child enters school in third or fourth grade, he/she might not have the physical stamina (at first) to fill an entire page with writing, but he'll be able to produce a little bit of very good writing. I believe they'll be ahead. They'll be able to build the strength in their hand in no time.

 

Agree 100%.

 

Heather

[Excelsior! Academy]

The WTM approach teaches kids to write well before it requires them to do tons and tons of writing. PS seems to do the opposite. They try to get them to just put words down on paper, lots and lots of words, before they even attempt to teach them how to write well.

 

First, let me say that this opinion is based on my experience. I'm not making broad generalizations about ALL schools or ALL teachers. But, I see your question in three parts (or, at least, it can be interpreted in three ways).

 

First, penmenship/handwriting: Public schools don't take the time that they used to teaching kids to form letters consistently. Kids are jumbled around from style to style, from little instruction to none. Then, they're expected to write pages and pages everyday. I've seen the work produced in 1st to 3rd grade, and most of it is illegible. But, there are volumes of it! Instead, I had my children spend 5 to 10 minutes a day practicing making perfect letters. The lessons were short, but those neural pathways were deeply entrenched. As they practiced, their speed increased, and their volume increased, but their formation remained consistent.

 

Second, writing content: they expect kids to write pages and pages of stuff, without first teaching them how to construct proper sentences or paragraphs, how to organize their thoughts, or even how to make sense. Their theory seems to be that if you just get the kid to get their thoughts down on paper, you'll be able to teach them the other stuff later. Does it work? I suppose it might for some kids. Instead, I didn't expect my kids to write paragraphs until they were comfortable and proficient at writing sentences. I didn't expect them to write sentences until they were proficient at copying other peoples sentences (becoming familiar with syntax, punctuation, etc. through copywork and dictation), and with getting their thoughts together (I wrote their narrations and creative stories down for them). Of course, a school teacher wouldn't have enough time in a year to do this for every student, so she just requires them all to just write and write, hoping eventually to instill proper grammar, spelling, punctuation, capitalization, word usage, etc. through grading and correction.

 

Third, volume: they require lots and lots of writing, pages and pages of writing, at a young age. These pages are a jumbled mass of letters. There is no way to distinguish words or make sense of the sentences because they child hasn't yet learned to form letters correctly, to spell correctly, to leave space between words, to punctuate or capitalize, or to make any sense. They're quite good at filling a page with something that looks like letters, but it is all meaningless. They're not proud of what they did. Instead, my kids might produce one sentence in first grade, three in second grade, or a short paragraph in 3rd. They're proud of it, though, because it is perfect. They can show it to their dad and he'll actually be able to read it, and understand it. He won't have to hmm and haw, and ask cryptic questions, or say, "Tell me about this." :o/

 

So, to (finally) answer your question: If your child enters school in third or fourth grade, he/she might not have the physical stamina (at first) to fill an entire page with writing, but he'll be able to produce a little bit of very good writing. I believe they'll be ahead. They'll be able to build the strength in their hand in no time.

 

Well said!