What did you not like about first language lessons FLL?

[bnwhitaker]

What did you not like about first language lessons FLL?

[Mama Anna]

I've got a couple criticisms. I'm using FLL 1/2 for the second time and I'm happy with it, but there are a couple things that don't fit us perfectly.

 

I like that it's a gentle introduction. However, my dc are able to sing back the definition of a verb to me (no, the tune isn't in the book, it's just the product of a music-major mom) within about 1 1/2 lessons. They don't really need to review it 4-5 more times before moving on to something else. There are lessons in there that I feel perfectly okay with mostly skipping due to the repetition.

 

The lesson length is not consistent. You'll have an (understandably) short lesson on "brief" very close to a loooooong one that focuses on finding action verbs in a paragraph. You need to look ahead to know how much time to allow.

 

The full scripting of the lessons can be a help or an annoyance depending on how comfortable I feel with a certain concept. But since I can always depart from it without consequences, I can deal with that! :)

 

The copywork exercises, introduced by the second half of the first year, seem very simplistic to me. But then, again, that's part of the gentleness.

 

I will say that in spite of the gentleness of its approach, dd-now-9 learned her stuff well when she went through it.

 

So, there you have the parts of this program that I don't like - while I do like the program overall!

 

HTH!

Mama Anna

[FairProspects]

Very, very verbal only. When you have pattern-loving VSLs who can intuit language when they "see" it but not hear it, it is not a great approach. It is not great for top-down thinkers who want to know why this matters or how it applies either. I do like how gentle it is and how it includes poetry, but it just doesn't engage the best ways my boys learn.

[KellyMama]

It wasn't a fit for us either. In theory, I loved the 'look' of it and the gentle approach to grammar. In reality, the scripting drove me bonkers and it was waaaay too repetitive for my DS (9) who just wanted to learn the concept and move on.

[redsquirrel]

My only complaint about FLL is that it stops after 4th grade. I would much rather it went all the way through high school.

 

Other than that, no complaints. It has been an excellent grammar program for my kids.

[serendipitous journey]

Well, I couldn't stand the emphasis of poetry "rules", as in begin each line with a capital. Until the children have more experience producing poetry I will not teach them this ... it sort of misses the entire point of poetry.

 

This bugged me so much I haven't used it since I hit that lesson (I know, I am not well-adjusted or moderate in temperament, but I'm working on it ...) I also much preferred the MCT definitions for the parts of speech, which are both intuitive and (so far as I can see) linguistically correct. FLL may be gentle, but it also seems overly cerebral and a bit separated from the power and the feel of language ...

 

example: MCT: nouns are words that name things.

I totally love that. It's like AoPS for words ...

 

ETA: I want to add a note that I really appreciate the effort Peace Hill Press, and Jessie Wise & Susan W. Bauer particularly, put into providing excellent materials & resources that make homeschooling a child well a much simpler job than it would otherwise be. So many folks like FLL and find that it produces good results that we may use FLL3 & 4, esp. when we've done more of our MCT and I have a better feel for my preferred way of adapting and teaching these things.

[Down_the_Rabbit_Hole]

It was more slower then a gentle approach then I expected. Very little if any creative written work. I cannot remember now but it is either nouns or verbs that went on fore e v e r. The repeat, repeat, repeat part was mind numbing. We went through FLL 1 and 2 in less then a year and FLL3 in half the time skipping tons of the repeat lessons.

[SilverMoon]

I don't have any real complaints for the first two levels. It's easy enough to just skip redundant lessons and double up on the easy ones for quick learners. And really, it takes a whopping ten minutes of your day. Ten minutes of reviewing nouns yet again won't hurt anyone.

 

The 3 book didn't go over as well in my house. My first DC to use FLL3 could not stand the completely parent-led format by the time she finished that book. She would have committed mutiny if I'd handed her the 4 book. I've used FLL 3 with two more kids since then, and neither of them particularly cared much for FLL3. They'd do it without complaining for the most part, but none of the kids felt like that over FLL1/2 or their Rod and Staff English books. I let the last one drop it halfway through, and I doubt I'll use the 3 level with my last two DC.

[Alice]

I don’t like the scripted nature but I just don’t use it. I think it’s a good solid intro. I used FLL 1 and 2 for my oldest and then went to MCT for 3rd. He really loved MCT but I think it would have been too much for him before 3rd. Having done FLL previously made MCT very gentle also. We have FLL 3 (I was on the fence for a long time about what to buy and finally just got both that year). I didn’t like FLL 3 as much for us. I found it a weird combo of workbook and overally parent-led. I have pulled it out to use selectively for some concepts that MCT doesn’t cover explicitly (dictionary skills, some grammar words, traditional diagramming).

 

I’m using FLL 1 again with my middle son and we just use it selectively. We also use WWE so I skip all the narration and copywork in FLL. I also prefer to pick my own poems so I skip the poems. But I find it a good gentle guide to cover basic grammar.

[Rbsmrter]

I started it with a 4 year old and while the gentle approach was just what she needed, I realized about halfway through the book that she understood the basic concepts and the rest of the lessons seemed overly redundant. She's now starting book three and I tend to pick and choose the lessons that we need. The sentences are perfect for her level (she's 5 now) and the definitions are easy for her to remember. Her favorite part is the poetry memorization. They were very affordable books and they provided an excellent foundation for introducing grammar. Three books in I'm definitely feeling the need to supplement but I know that I will continue to use FLL as an introduction for all of my kids.

[chicagoshannon]

I really like it (we're 2 days away from finishing FLL1). I think the only complaint is that it spends a lot of time on nouns (didn't bother us) but when we got to verb we spent a lot less time and now that we're talking about types of sentences we've spent even less time.

 

 

[bbcooker]

We skip the poem memorization, the picture studies, and all the copy work. We only use FLL for the grammar. But we love it! I also do many days in just 1 day, and skip days that seem that they've already mastered the material. Other days, we do only 1 lesson. It all depends on how new the teaching is to my dc, and how much I think we should do that day.

 

We love FLL in how we use it!!

[Mommy22alyns]

FLL 1/2 was nice, but Rebecca didn't need that many repetitions. I went through both in a school year. We tried FLL 3 and it was mind-numbingly boring. R&S actually doesn't bore me!

[sassenach]

It's extremely auditory for the first 2 years, then very repetitive the second 2. Neither of these features was a love match for my ds. We like MCT.

[nmoira]

What did you not like about first language lessons FLL?

 

Aside from the fact it is joyless and moves as fast as molasses for the first year? :tongue_smilie:

 

I *really* don't like the fact that some of the poems are "adapted," at least one drastically so. If a poem doesn't suit the purpose, don't use it... don't sanitize it or dumb it down.