Ruth Beechick Books: anyone reading any right now?

[FO4UR]

Now I'm very curious to see the old LLATL books. 

 

And

 

 

The little books give room for our own teaching style to emerge.  If bigger book just is not your particular style of teaching, or not what is needed for a particular student, it's difficult to weed through teaching style vs pertinent information.  Teaching involves a great deal of intuition, little books leave room for that.

[Hunter]

Now I'm very curious to see the old LLATL books.

 

And

 

The little books give room for our own teaching style to emerge. If bigger book just is not your particular style of teaching, or not what is needed for a particular student, it's difficult to weed through teaching style vs pertinent information. Teaching involves a great deal of intuition, little books leave room for that.

Maybe that is why I get so overwhelmed with big books.

 

The old LLATL books are a treasure hunt. If you are patient, you can get them quite cheaply, one at a time, here and there. It takes patience, though.

 

Most of the books are set up with 2 page spreads for a week. There is not so much there, but it's all I can handle at once, and I can feel the room to use my intuition. There is plenty of white space to take notes.

 

I think the green book is the only one that has book studies like the current edition. The series is a bit choppy, and changes a bit in the later published volumes, from those published earlier. And my yellow says it is a second printing and includes assessments and sight words.

 

The old LLATL is far from perfect, but...I don't see anything else on the market for any price that I like better. I could use the current LLATL. Used copies are cheap and plentiful. If there were no original edition, I think I would use the current editions.

[ElizaG]

Now I'm very curious to see the old LLATL books. 

 

If you look on eBay, some of the sellers have included photos of one or two pages, e.g.:

 

Red (2): http://www.ebay.com/itm/Learning-Language-Arts-Through-Literature-Red-Grade-2-Homeschool-Llatl-/171332049103

 

Yellow (3): http://www.ebay.com/itm/Learning-Language-Arts-Through-Literature-Yellow-Book-3rd-Grade-Homeschool-/171332034931

 

Orange (4):  http://www.ebay.com/itm/Learning-Language-Arts-Through-Literature-ORANGE-book-Llatl-Homeschool-4-5-/171332038916

 

Tan (6): http://www.ebay.com/itm/Learning-Language-Arts-Through-Literature-The-Tan-Book-6th-grade-Homeschool-Llat-/171332057919

 

Green (7):  http://www.ebay.com/itm/learning-language-arts-through-literature-green-book-spiral-Llatl-Homeschool-7-8-/171332101093

 

Not very big samples, but they might still give a bit of an idea.   :001_smile:

 

ETA:  Looking at the pages in isolation like that, I can see how these books might seem too light if they were used as a complete "open and go" curriculum.   I think they work best as a starting point, for parents who have a good sense of their children's strengths and weaknesses, and have the confidence to go beyond what's written in the lessons at times.  

[vaquitita]

Nm

[Hunter]

If you look on eBay, some of the sellers have included photos of one or two pages, e.g.:

 

Red (2): http://www.ebay.com/itm/Learning-Language-Arts-Through-Literature-Red-Grade-2-Homeschool-Llatl-/171332049103

 

Yellow (3): http://www.ebay.com/itm/Learning-Language-Arts-Through-Literature-Yellow-Book-3rd-Grade-Homeschool-/171332034931

 

Orange (4): http://www.ebay.com/itm/Learning-Language-Arts-Through-Literature-ORANGE-book-Llatl-Homeschool-4-5-/171332038916

 

Tan (6): http://www.ebay.com/itm/Learning-Language-Arts-Through-Literature-The-Tan-Book-6th-grade-Homeschool-Llat-/171332057919

 

Green (7): http://www.ebay.com/itm/learning-language-arts-through-literature-green-book-spiral-Llatl-Homeschool-7-8-/171332101093

 

Not very big samples, but they might still give a bit of an idea. :001_smile:

 

ETA: Looking at the pages in isolation like that, I can see how these books might seem too light if they were used as a complete "open and go" curriculum. I think they work best as a starting point, for parents who have a good sense of their children's strengths and weaknesses, and have the confidence to go beyond what's written in the lessons at times.

Yes, you have to go beyond. The introductions are from RB and say to read more RB, and explain how to go beyond in GENERAL , but don't always explain how to go beyond in each lesson. The current edition gives go beyond instructions in the individual lessons.

 

It was the eBay samples that made me want to see more. Thanks for linking those! I didn't think to do that.

[Hunter]

EFL is very intriguing. I see benefits to both CMs short lessons and EFLs working till something is accomplished. I'm not sure how to reconcile these two. :-) Where does EFL talk about reading? Reading a memorized passage might suite my DD, she does like to do it herself more than me teaching her. Of course, she also likes me to just do it for her, rather than figuring out the word for herself. But that's not going to help her. :-)

 

I have RBs three R's. I read it four years ago and used its ideas to teach my oldest some. I like the waiting for the optimal time, I have gotten away from that (it's definitely not the general feeling I get on the WTM board). A year or so later I found CM/AO and began using that. RB definitely emphasizes teaching your child and deemphasizes curriculum , which is good, but I found, for me, harder and harder to plan/organize/do as I had more children and became busier and more tired. But lately I've found with math I've been doing too much teaching of the curriculum and not the child. I should reread the three R's, even if it don't follow it, it might help me get back into a teach the child mindset.

 

There are things I like about RB, and things I like about CM/AO, and TWTM, and probably EFL, and I am currently reading norms & nobility and really liking certain aspects of an older concept of a classical education. Now to figure out how to meld all these together. Lol. Life would be easier if just one appealed to me.

 

One thing I have really liked about N&N, is that suddenly my homeschool goal became clear. I do want to teach the ideal (though my ideal is Christ, not the hero of Greek myths), the big picture of truth and beauty. I want my child to enjoy 'the good life' of beautiful things in his leisure, never bored or lacking something to do. While at the same time preparing them for a practical career. That is very necessary, but is merely practical, to eat and live and support the real life. It is not an end to itself. Possession of things is not a worthy goal. That's focusing on the pebble under your foot when there is a beautiful vista before you.

 

Kind of like Sabrina's father in that old movie, taking a job as a chauffeur so as to have more time to read. Lol. :-)

 

Eta: I was thinking over some of the comments on shooting for the moon. I am setting my aims high as far as their personal life goes, their 'life of virtue' as N&N or early classical educators put it. Reaching the moon there is only dependent on them, circumstances (within reason) can't hold them back from enjoying a full, real life. But as far as the utilitarian side of it, jobs, our goals are very practical. Vocational training, community college, depends on our children's interests as they grow up. Even though I can see that there is some things to learn that could only be taught by a knowledgeable instructor, or at least it would be a whole lot easier, those things/ideals are not really what American colleges are geared for. Like right now, reading N&N, I wish I'd had a classical education. I wish I could read Latin and French and be able to read all these annoying quotes. :-) Neither my husband nor I went to college, nor our parents, and perhaps that shows in our goals. We don't value an amazing STEM career. Money is good, poverty is bad for the body and the mind. But MORE money is not necessarily better and can, in fact, be worse.

I forget where I downloaded a couple pdf EFL books. Maybe archive.org?

[ElizaG]

I came across a series of newspaper columns from 1936 (linked below) in which EFL is advising "Florence B.," a strung-out mother of four young children who've been drawing on the walls, taking all the knobs off the dressers and blaming it on someone else, etc.   You know, the sort of things that never seem to happen in those perfect English families in CM's books.   :tongue_smilie:  

 

In addition to discipline hints and general encouragement, she recommends spending a few minutes on religion, a few minutes on spelling, a few minutes on poetry, and a few minutes on observation and general information.   That does sound like "short lessons."   But Florence's eldest isn't even six yet.   I need to read more to get a sense of how it would look with older children.  

 

----

Here are the first 10 articles from the series, "How Florence's Children are Taught."  Note that this is a Catholic newspaper, so there's more religious content than in some of her other writings.  

 

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS06111936p08.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS06181936p08.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS06251936p06.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS07021936p02.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS07091936p02.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS07161936p02.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS07231936p02.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS07301936p02.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS08061936p02.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS08131936p02.php

 

(I'm fascinated by the recipe column that appears next to EFL's.   Apparently its writer is more interested in novelties than in "timeless classics."  I was just getting used to the idea of peanut butter and pickle spread...  and then came the meatloaf with sliced bananas in it.   :blink: ) 

 

[ElizaG]

These are the three books by EFL that I've been able to locate:

 

Educating the Child at Home: Personal Training and the Work-Habit (1914)

 

Bookless Lessons for the Teacher-Mother (1922)

 

Beginning the Child's Education (1925) -- still in copyright, but I was able to find a hard copy.  The advice is for parents of 3-7 year olds.

[vaquitita]

Nm

Edited December 13, 2015 by vaquitita

[FO4UR]

These are the three books by EFL that I've been able to locate:

 

Educating the Child at Home: Personal Training and the Work-Habit (1914)

 

Bookless Lessons for the Teacher-Mother (1922)

 

Beginning the Child's Education (1925) -- still in copyright, but I was able to find a hard copy.  The advice is for parents of 3-7 year olds.

 

 

I've been reading parts of these today.  Thanks for linking.

[Hunter]

 

I came across a series of newspaper columns from 1936 (linked below) in which EFL is advising "Florence B.," a strung-out mother of four young children who've been drawing on the walls, taking all the knobs off the dressers and blaming it on someone else, etc. You know, the sort of things that never seem to happen in those perfect English families in CM's books. :tongue_smilie:

 

In addition to discipline hints and general encouragement, she recommends spending a few minutes on religion, a few minutes on spelling, a few minutes on poetry, and a few minutes on observation and general information. That does sound like "short lessons." But Florence's eldest isn't even six yet. I need to read more to get a sense of how it would look with older children.

 

----

Here are the first 10 articles from the series, "How Florence's Children are Taught." Note that this is a Catholic newspaper, so there's more religious content than in some of her other writings.

 

 

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS06111936p08.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS06181936p08.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS06251936p06.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS07021936p02.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS07091936p02.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS07161936p02.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS07231936p02.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS07301936p02.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS08061936p02.php

http://obs.stparchive.com/Archive/OBS/OBS08131936p02.php

 

(I'm fascinated by the recipe column that appears next to EFL's. Apparently its writer is more interested in novelties than in "timeless classics." I was just getting used to the idea of peanut butter and pickle spread... and then came the meatloaf with sliced bananas in it. :blink: )

These are delightful!

[Hunter]

These are the three books by EFL that I've been able to locate:

 

Educating the Child at Home: Personal Training and the Work-Habit (1914)

 

Bookless Lessons for the Teacher-Mother (1922)

 

Beginning the Child's Education (1925) -- still in copyright, but I was able to find a hard copy. The advice is for parents of 3-7 year olds.

Thank you! I just couldn't remember where I got my copies.

[Hunter]

Those LLATL books are intriguing. Since LLATL contains so much (handwriting, spelling, grammar) it would mess up the LA plans I am happy with (italics, serl's PLL, simply spelling). Though an all in one is tempting. But I guess it's not what I need. I taught my oldest to read using a combo of RB and CM methods, but have felt the need for a laid out curriculum now. It's just simpler to have a list of what's next and not making things up as I go. I am definitely on curriculum information overload now. Sigh.. I wish I could just find/pick one that works well for me and stop looking. But it's hard to choose. Ok, now I'm way off topic from RB. Going to go find the three R's and hopefully it will talk some sense into me... :D

Except for my 2nd printing yellow book, the original spiral-bound books do not include spelling lists and handwriting. The 2nd printing yellow book does not have weekly lists, but just a list of sight words for each assessment. The spelling and handwriting instructions are just general instructions, with a suggestion of which pages to read in RB.

 

I know what you mean about laid out. I'm not sure if I want to use RB math or try and acquire a full set of 1st edition Saxon 54-87.

 

It is hard to choose! At least now, I've begun to narrow down to switching back and forth between 2 or 3 books/methods for some subjects, but I'm still not down to 1. Often one thing sets off a ripple effect to other things, because the whole is so important to me.

[Hunter]

I'm reading the Boxcar Children because the original orange book quotes from it for 3 lessons. More than ever I want to eventually have the copywork and lessons based off of Bible or a Bible story book and just have the literature be literature.

 

I like some of The Boxcar children, but like so much literature, some of it is just awkward. There is a section that could be triggering to a certain type of student. Yes, the Bible is also SO awkward. :lol: But, I'm just used to dealing with it, and find it worth dealing with.

 

My copy of Boxcar children doesn't match the copywork. I wonder if there are different versions of the book, or if Debby Strayer rewrote it to better fit the lessons.

 

RB rewrote some KJV scripture to simplify and modernize it. That would certainly be unacceptable to some people.

[Guest]

Big books with big price tags come with big emotional baggage. I have a problem with that.

 

Little ds is having a blast with his "Ruth Beechik cards" for reading and I'm enjoying this thread immensely.

[ElizaG]

I'm reading the Boxcar Children because the original orange book quotes from it for 3 lessons. More than ever I want to eventually have the copywork and lessons based off of Bible or a Bible story book and just have the literature be literature.

 

I'm starting to doubt that books like The Boxcar Children even belong on a regular curriculum.   It's sort of like serving cookies for dinner.  They might be low-sugar, whole grain cookies, but still, there's not enough in them for a main course.   Scripture, maxims, fables, poems, and excerpts from classic non-fiction (histories, speeches, etc.) are the types of literature that were traditionally used for beginners.  They tend to have more concentrated "nutritional value" in terms of language, moral lessons, and general knowledge.   

 

After the big 2012 CiRCE thread, I started making up my own lessons based on short poems, lesser-known nursery rhymes, and classic travel writings.  This wasn't recommended on the thread; the posts just gave me a push to start teaching what I wanted to teach, and this is how it turned out.   We all loved it, but I wasn't comfortable using these lessons as our core curriculum, because I wasn't clear on what the "output requirements" should be.  

 

I now have a better idea of what sort of exercises to do, but in the process of figuring it out, I came across EFL.  And she's challenging me to go a step further, put away all the bits of this and that, and just teach one long poem.   For a whole year.  This is harder for me than for the children, because I have a flaky attention span, and usually have a lot of things going at once.   On top of that, she recommends starting with "Hiawatha," and even though I know it's a classic (and we've had a picture book version around here for a long time), I've never really been able to get into it myself.   And yet, this is supposed to be our basis for English language, literature, and the "content subjects."

 

Somehow, I think the Holy Spirit must have helped me, because I memorized the first ten lines of "Hiawatha's Childhood" right away without much effort.  And now I feel as if I understand the poem -- that part, anyway -- for the first time.   It's like moving from viewing it as a museum piece, to having a real relationship with it.   And the more I learn and recite, the more I like it.   You can certainly have a similar experience with a passage of great prose -- even some prose fiction.  But you can't do that with the Boxcar Children.  It's just not going to happen.  

 

When I started homeschooling, one of my friends recommended FIAR, but it seemed as if the titles they used wouldn't really hold up to repeated reading and in-depth investigation.   And the curriculum did seem to be more about the spin-off learning activities than about connecting with the books in themselves.  I think this is also the way it goes with a lot of "literature-based" curricula.

 

As for RB, I'm finding it hard to relate to her standards for choosing books.  On the one hand, she says that the Bible is the only book you need, and you can base your whole curriculum around it.   But then, for children learning to read, she recommends a very large quantity of easy reading.   And for language arts work, she just says that we can use any book from our shelves.   She also seems to think it's okay to use choppy samples, rather than continuous passages.  

 

I think EFL and RB are generally compatible -- and almost identical in some areas -- but EFL has some things that are missing in RB.   Especially the emphasis on quality over quantity, from the very beginning.  

[Hunter]

I'm starting to doubt that books like The Boxcar Children even belong on a regular curriculum.   It's sort of like serving cookies for dinner.  They might be low-sugar, whole grain cookies, but still, there's not enough in them for a main course.   Scripture, maxims, fables, poems, and excerpts from classic non-fiction (histories, speeches, etc.) are the types of literature that were traditionally used for beginners.  They tend to have more concentrated "nutritional value" in terms of language, moral lessons, and general knowledge.   

 

After the big 2012 CiRCE thread, I started making up my own lessons based on short poems, lesser-known nursery rhymes, and classic travel writings.  This wasn't recommended on the thread; the posts just gave me a push to start teaching what I wanted to teach, and this is how it turned out.   We all loved it, but I wasn't comfortable using these lessons as our core curriculum, because I wasn't clear on what the "output requirements" should be.  

 

I now have a better idea of what sort of exercises to do, but in the process of figuring it out, I came across EFL.  And she's challenging me to go a step further, put away all the bits of this and that, and just teach one long poem.   For a whole year.  This is harder for me than for the children, because I have a flaky attention span, and usually have a lot of things going at once.   On top of that, she recommends starting with "Hiawatha," and even though I know it's a classic (and we've had a picture book version around here for a long time), I've never really been able to get into it myself.   And yet, this is supposed to be our basis for English language, literature, and the "content subjects."

 

Somehow, I think the Holy Spirit must have helped me, because I memorized the first ten lines of "Hiawatha's Childhood" right away without much effort.  And now I feel as if I understand the poem -- that part, anyway -- for the first time.   It's like moving from viewing it as a museum piece, to having a real relationship with it.   And the more I learn and recite, the more I like it.   You can certainly have a similar experience with a passage of great prose -- even some prose fiction.  But you can't do that with the Boxcar Children.  It's just not going to happen.  

 

When I started homeschooling, one of my friends recommended FIAR, but it seemed as if the titles they used wouldn't really hold up to repeated reading and in-depth investigation.   And the curriculum did seem to be more about the spin-off learning activities than about connecting with the books in themselves.  I think this is also the way it goes with a lot of "literature-based" curricula.

 

As for RB, I'm finding it hard to relate to her standards for choosing books.  On the one hand, she says that the Bible is the only book you need, and you can base your whole curriculum around it.   But then, for children learning to read, she recommends a very large quantity of easy reading.   And for language arts work, she just says that we can use any book from our shelves.   She also seems to think it's okay to use choppy samples, rather than continuous passages.  

 

I think EFL and RB are generally compatible -- and almost identical in some areas -- but EFL has some things that are missing in RB.   Especially the emphasis on quality over quantity, from the very beginning.  

 

I've been on the memory kick today too. I don't think I want to plan my LA lessons on Bible reading, I think I want to plan them on a bible MEMORY plan. I haven't read all that much EFL yet, but the parts I did got me on the memory kick.

[Hunter]

Do you all think Living Memory would work well with EFL?

http://www.lulu.com/shop/andrew-a-campbell/living-memory/ebook/product-17520206.html

[Hunter]

I saw this in another thread. It looks like a good supplement to Living Memory and it's FREE.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2uLJHGaFdQ9OGRhNTBhNmItNWVlMS00YTE4LTk5OTktOTNiMTI1MTQ1OGMw/edit?pli=1&hl=en

[ElizaG]

Do you all think Living Memory would work well with EFL?

http://www.lulu.com/shop/andrew-a-campbell/living-memory/ebook/product-17520206.html

Not particularly, I'm thinking.  At least, not for elementary age.  The only parts that might fit would be the poems and speeches, and you can find these sorts of writings online, or in a good second-hand anthology -- which would be well worth having anyway.   

 

EFL seems to recommend against having children memorize isolated lists of facts, verses, quotations, and so on.   Knowledge comes through reading literature (in long passages, not bits and pieces), or by doing things in everyday life, or by discussing either of these with the parent/teacher.  For foreign languages, she starts early with a sort of natural method, first teaching some everyday phrases and naming familiar objects, then moving on to giving them simple texts with the translations provided.   

 

This is from an article she wrote on teaching Latin to children up to age 10.  (It's not in the public domain, unfortunately.)  The section is called "Pedagogical Pitfalls."

 

"One writer tells us that the first exercises should be connected with pictures.  Imagine teaching such words as hand, foot, head, bone, blood and so on, in connection with a picture-symbol rather than the thing itself.   Another gives a method whereby 'the work of memorizing can be much lightened if' -- but where is the heaviness in memorizing words whose meaning is entirely familiar -- mater, pater, soror, arbor?  Such instructions must be aimed at word-learning in the adolescent stage, 'the unnatural in nature,' and not in the primary years."

 

This is interesting, because it goes against the flash-cards and chants that many "back to basics" Christian schools and homeschool co-ops are using in the early years.   EFL seems to be saying that this sort of rote memorization is unnecessary precisely because children of this age are so good at memorizing ("poll parrots," to use Sayers' term) that we can take it easier and let them learn the material in its natural context.   That's a different way of looking at it, but it makes a lot of sense.  

 

And I do trust her judgment, because she was in contact with people who used these methods successfully with thousands of children, over a period of decades.   

[Hunter]

Hmmm. I've had living memory for awhile and haven't used it. I think I bought it when it was recommended for the grammar. I wasn't really looking at all the random bits of content knowledge. There is a lot of it, isn't there? I was looking more at the longer Bible, hymns and poems, which as you say are available anywhere.

 

I'm not usually a big memory person, but I'm thinking that memory work is usually of high quality and often might be a good resource to base integrated language arts lessons.

 

Some of the random content lists looked good for teaching spelling and the proper format of writing a list, though.

 

I tried to find a used copy of the 1925 Beginning the Child's Education, but there are NO copies, not even overpriced ones.

[Beth in Mint Hill]

Many people have accelerated the rigor of topics assigned to grade levels by about 2 years, to fit in at least a couple years of AP courses in high school. RB scope and sequences are oldschool 1990's more developmentally appropriate, less fear based and rigorous. Is anyone liking RB, but accelerating it?

 

I like the numbers assigned to the levels of rigor. I'd rather label the student as working a year ahead, than assign low numbers to high level topics. I know others feel differently. I'm wondering if people focusing on rigor have no place for Beechick: or if they like the method, but just assign different numbers to the scope and sequence; or just skip a child ahead a grade.

 

Or are you thankful for a developmentally appropriate scope and sequence, and take advantage of the breathing room?

 

Hunter, I *love* these books. Still remember how impressed I was with their wise counsel (read them shortly after we first started hschooling in 1991).  

 

Personally, I do not like the idea of a rigorous education (rigor means stiff and rigid as in rigor mortis!)  I would rather use the term "vigorous" to describe an education program.(vigor in latin means full of life) There is a place for rigorous training in certain things, but not as a program to educate a child. I know that people don't really mean the original root meaning of this word, that it has come to mean "holding a high standard," but it still has the connotation of being very strict and unyielding.

 

Just think that we are burning out a lot of our kids.  "Yes!" to breathing room in education.  :hurray: 

[Mommyfaithe]

I love her books. I used the 3Rs series for the first three years of schooling and then the You Can Teach Your Child for grades 4 - 8. She was my major influence and I modeled most of our schooling after her methods.

 

I give her books the highest recommendation. :thumbup:

Beechick was my intro to teaching theory. I still love her simple, basic, no non-sense, no busy work, combining subject to get the most bang for your buck approach. From Beechick, I learned about CM and still use Beechick type LA with my kids. It is most natural to me...it makes sense. It is easy, yet as rigorous as the literature you are reading and the copy work/dictation passages you are using.

 

I can use one literature read aloud, a scope and sequence for grade level skills and choose passages for each child from the same book. When I had 5 children homeschooling, it was cost effective, time effective and as challenging for them and as easy for me as can be.

 

I really love Beechick's books....they are simple to understand, deep in theory and reassuring that teaching children is not some magic formula that only certain people can understand.

[Mommyfaithe]

Big books with big price tags come with big emotional baggage. I have a problem with that.

 

.

Oh my goodness!! This is so true! I have a big problem there too!

[Mommyfaithe]

...about fourth grade, the level where children can use their reading skills to learn history or science or any other subject found in books. In terms of age, the time varies widely.

 

Does anyone wait to start SOTW (or their first history cycle) until the student is reading at a 4th grade level?

Ok, so here is my two bits FWIW, and from my own experience with SOTW. I have used SOTW consistently with my kids since it came out. So, my younger kids have been around it for 3 goes now. They jump in wherever we are in the cycle and I always include extra books ( short picture, lit, etc.) at their level. I find VERY LITTLE to almost NO recall in the first 3 grades. They sort of kind of remember some of it, or will say OH YEAH, I remember this....but, if I question further, they really don't remember!!! Round 2 is going on now with my youngest. My next one up is also on round 2 and my teenager is listening in ....because for her SOTW is comfort food ;-)

 

My 6th grader is getting the flow of history and understanding how all things that happen effect others. My 4th grader is more focused on people stories...this is the good guy/ this is the bad guy. This guy beat the tar out of that guy. This guy was beat up by that guy. Same book, same stories, different perspectives.

 

My older group first heard SOTW, and then read the books themselves, repeatedly...well into high school. It was their jumping off point for deeper study...to help them choose topics they wanted to delve deeper into...

 

So, anyway...my 3 year old got stories, my 6 year ol got an intro to history, my 9 year old got to have good guys and bad guts, my 12 year old got to see the interconnectedness of the human experience, my 15 year old had a simple intro in which to jump off into reading more difficult primary documents or literature, or their textbook.

 

So, honestly, do not expect recall from children under at least a 4th grade level...even with narrations, coloring pages, timeline cards, review, review, review, extra reading etc. from 5th on, their focus will be different according to where their academic level is.

 

This applies not only to SOTW, but to our science curricula, language arts skills, math skills etc. we build a good foundation, then build on the foundation.

[Rebel Yell]

Hunter, I *love* these books. Still remember how impressed I was with their wise counsel (read them shortly after we first started hschooling in 1991).  

 

Personally, I do not like the idea of a rigorous education (rigor means stiff and rigid as in rigor mortis!)  I would rather use the term "vigorous" to describe an education program.(vigor in latin means full of life) There is a place for rigorous training in certain things, but not as a program to educate a child. I know that people don't really mean the original root meaning of this word, that it has come to mean "holding a high standard," but it still has the connotation of being very strict and unyielding.

 

Just think that we are burning out a lot of our kids.  "Yes!" to breathing room in education.  :hurray: 

 

:iagree: :hurray: :iagree: :hurray: :iagree: :hurray: :iagree:

 

 

[Hunter]

My original spiral-bound purple LLATL came in today. This volume is very like the current edition. It's THICK.

 

I went to B&N and looked at the current Boxcar Children. The current edition is different than the free Gutenberg edition. The awkward bits are gone, and it is just entirely rewritten and reordered and maybe shorter. Boxcar Children is used in the original orange book, and I'm not sure about any of the current edition.

[Hunter]

Ok, so here is my two bits FWIW, and from my own experience with SOTW. I have used SOTW consistently with my kids since it came out. So, my younger kids have been around it for 3 goes now. They jump in wherever we are in the cycle and I always include extra books ( short picture, lit, etc.) at their level. I find VERY LITTLE to almost NO recall in the first 3 grades. They sort of kind of remember some of it, or will say OH YEAH, I remember this....but, if I question further, they really don't remember!!! Round 2 is going on now with my youngest. My next one up is also on round 2 and my teenager is listening in ....because for her SOTW is comfort food ;-)

 

My 6th grader is getting the flow of history and understanding how all things that happen effect others. My 4th grader is more focused on people stories...this is the good guy/ this is the bad guy. This guy beat the tar out of that guy. This guy was beat up by that guy. Same book, same stories, different perspectives.

 

My older group first heard SOTW, and then read the books themselves, repeatedly...well into high school. It was their jumping off point for deeper study...to help them choose topics they wanted to delve deeper into...

 

So, anyway...my 3 year old got stories, my 6 year ol got an intro to history, my 9 year old got to have good guys and bad guts, my 12 year old got to see the interconnectedness of the human experience, my 15 year old had a simple intro in which to jump off into reading more difficult primary documents or literature, or their textbook.

 

So, honestly, do not expect recall from children under at least a 4th grade level...even with narrations, coloring pages, timeline cards, review, review, review, extra reading etc. from 5th on, their focus will be different according to where their academic level is.

 

This applies not only to SOTW, but to our science curricula, language arts skills, math skills etc. we build a good foundation, then build on the foundation.

Thank you so much for this!

[ElizaG]

I'm not usually a big memory person, but I'm thinking that memory work is usually of high quality and often might be a good resource to base integrated language arts lessons.

It sounds as if you might be better off with a list of links to high quality texts that could be used for memory work (maybe roughly organized by age?).  Someone else's collection isn't likely to have all the literature you might want to use, especially if you're looking to memorize longer passages, or just want to read the verses and excerpts in context.

 

From EFL:  "Quite different indeed was the practice of learning long and difficult poems, whole chapters from the Bible, speeches of the world's great orators, books of the Iliad and Odyssey -- things that have literary content, fine pictures for the mind's gallery, and lessons for life.  If equal in the first place to the strain of acquiring, the mind fed upon such things as these becomes strengthened."  

 

She has them learn short poems as well -- some assigned, and some free choice -- but the longer works are at the core of the curriculum.   

 

I tried to find a used copy of the 1925 Beginning the Child's Education, but there are NO copies, not even overpriced ones.

 

Maybe I got the last one.  I'll try to take some time to summarize it.  

 

I found that there were some unfamiliar references in her writings, so I've started a blog with notes.  It has posts for the first few chapters of Educating the Child At Home.   (The gaps are for bits I haven't got around to yet. )  Not doing comments, as I can't keep up with them.   But we could also discuss the books in another thread.  

 

[Hunter]

 

It sounds as if you might be better off with a list of links to high quality texts that could be used for memory work (maybe roughly organized by age?).  Someone else's collection isn't likely to have all the literature you might want to use, especially if you're looking to memorize longer passages, or just want to read the verses and excerpts in context.

From EFL:  "Quite different indeed was the practice of learning long and difficult poems, whole chapters from the Bible, speeches of the world's great orators, books of the Iliad and Odyssey -- things that have literary content, fine pictures for the mind's gallery, and lessons for life.  If equal in the first place to the strain of acquiring, the mind fed upon such things as these becomes strengthened."  

 

She has them learn short poems as well -- some assigned, and some free choice -- but the longer works are at the core of the curriculum.   

 

 

 

Maybe I got the last one.  I'll try to take some time to summarize it.  

 

I found that there were some unfamiliar references in her writings, so I've started a blog with notes.  It has posts for the first few chapters of Educating the Child At Home.   (The gaps are for bits I haven't got around to yet. )  Not doing comments, as I can't keep up with them.   But we could also discuss the books in another thread.  

 

 

Is this book public domain? I know it's 1925, but I think copyrights of that year had to be renewed. If you scanned this book, there might be people willing to buy it from you.

[ElizaG]

Is this book public domain? I know it's 1925, but I think copyrights of that year had to be renewed. If you scanned this book, there might be people willing to buy it from you.

 

Alas, it was renewed in 1952 by her next of kin (probably a brother, I'm thinking).  If someone can track down the descendants and get permission, I'd be happy to scan it.  

 

Pretty frustrating!   But at least we do have many of her books and articles available.  

[Mommyfaithe]

Trail Guides has workbook book pages with word searches. I think maybe I can safely say THAT is not RB?

It isn't. They say Trail Guides ARE, but I am not convinced. I met Maggie Hogan years (20?) back at a conference and she was wonderful, made me feel really able to homeschool my kids, and I am sure trail guides are great, but Beechick is simpler. Use the materials you have to teach the skills kids need to learn. That is Beechick! Don't neglect the Bible, or good books or that cute wipe off board that is laying around. make it simple, quick, rich. Don't drive them to wrath with hours of busy work. Get more bang for your buck by combining language skills with reading skills with writing skills. All language arts can be integrated instead of having a workbook for each subject. One bound composition book can be used for all lessons. I added a box of colored pencils, some highlight markers and some stickers to jazz things up. I have wandered away from CM and Beechick over the past few years due to health issues and family issues, but I could kick myself! Instead of things being easier with workbooks, they became ridiculously cumbersome! I have spent the entire year undoing the damage, and because if that for the first time ever, my kids are not at grade level. Nothing at all sank in!!! We are back to the drawing board! Took a bit of a break and will be starting lessons back up in the way I am comfortable and convinced my kids learn.... Simple, to the point, No bells or whistles unless they want them😠good books, sharpened pencils and a happier mindset.

[Hunter]

A couple times I have seen the idea of glueing long bits of rules into a notebook that is otherwise mostly copywork. I just saw the idea again yesterday.

[FO4UR]

 Use the materials you have to teach the skills kids need to learn. That is Beechick! Don't neglect the Bible, or good books or that cute wipe off board that is laying around. make it simple, quick, rich. Don't drive them to wrath with hours of busy work. Get more bang for your buck by combining language skills with reading skills with writing skills. All language arts can be integrated instead of having a workbook for each subject. One bound composition book can be used for all lessons. I added a box of colored pencils, some highlight markers and some stickers to jazz things up. I have wandered away from CM and Beechick over the past few years due to health issues and family issues, but I could kick myself! Instead of things being easier with workbooks, they became ridiculously cumbersome! I have spent the entire year undoing the damage, and because if that for the first time ever, my kids are not at grade level. Nothing at all sank in!!! We are back to the drawing board! Took a bit of a break and will be starting lessons back up in the way I am comfortable and convinced my kids learn.... Simple, to the point, No bells or whistles unless they want them😠good books, sharpened pencils and a happier mindset.

 

 

Thanks for posting this!  I needed to hear it.

 

One composition notebook for all lessons.  That is mind-shattering.  I love it!

[KeriJ]

It isn't. They say Trail Guides ARE, but I am not convinced. I met Maggie Hogan years (20?) back at a conference and she was wonderful, made me feel really able to homeschool my kids, and I am sure trail guides are great, but Beechick is simpler. Use the materials you have to teach the skills kids need to learn. That is Beechick! Don't neglect the Bible, or good books or that cute wipe off board that is laying around. make it simple, quick, rich. Don't drive them to wrath with hours of busy work. Get more bang for your buck by combining language skills with reading skills with writing skills. All language arts can be integrated instead of having a workbook for each subject. One bound composition book can be used for all lessons. I added a box of colored pencils, some highlight markers and some stickers to jazz things up. I have wandered away from CM and Beechick over the past few years due to health issues and family issues, but I could kick myself! Instead of things being easier with workbooks, they became ridiculously cumbersome! I have spent the entire year undoing the damage, and because if that for the first time ever, my kids are not at grade level. Nothing at all sank in!!! We are back to the drawing board! Took a bit of a break and will be starting lessons back up in the way I am comfortable and convinced my kids learn.... Simple, to the point, No bells or whistles unless they want them😠good books, sharpened pencils and a happier mindset.

 

I've read and re-read this 3 times this morning because I love it.  I'm going to keep reading it again all summer.

[Hunter]

Using "better" doesn't always produce better results.It's funny that way.

[mamamindy]

Not sure if I can ask this here… anyone using Beechick right now to teach reading?  I am…and we're in step 3: Blending.  Did anyone else use the chart she describes?  This is where DS is stalling (which I am totally okay with - he is the one who initiates these lessons).  The chart seems kinda funny to me, but we're giving it a whirl.  And I'm also using real books to help him sound out words.  But it's so funny, he'll know the sounds of P, O, and P, and say them all separately.  But then I'll try to have him say the word and he'll say, "Pumpkin?"  It is funny to me, and I don't stress over it at all.  I'm just starting to wonder if I should keep at it with the chart…?

[Hunter]

Are you talking about the chart that is basically Spalding/O-G phonograms?

 

I'm planning on using that chart, instead of what I have been using. RB doesn't believe that they need to memorize all the phonograms, but just the easy ones. After that, rarer spellings can be learned individually or with a few words grouped together. That makes a lot of sense to me.

 

I was going to use Alpha-Phonics and all the extras by Don Potter exactly as specified, but...I decided to go back to the old How to Tutor book and will add the RB phonograms, and then teach the last few word families without having the student drill phonograms.

 

[mamamindy]

Are you talking about the chart that is basically Spalding/O-G phonograms?

 

I'm planning on using that chart, instead of what I have been using. RB doesn't believe that they need to memorize all the phonograms, but just the easy ones. After that, rarer spellings can be learned individually or with a few words grouped together. That makes a lot of sense to me.

 

I was going to use Alpha-Phonics and all the extras by Don Potter exactly as specified, but...I decided to go back to the old How to Tutor book and will add the RB phonograms, and then teach the last few word families without having the student drill phonograms.

No, I'm talking about the home made chart she suggests in the chapter on blending in A Home Start in Reading.  It's blending my son isn't quite ready for -which is fine!  He's not even 5!  But he wants to learn to read, so I'm am continuing with teaching him the sounds.  I am actually using the flashcards for a an o-g phonics program, but just teaching him the most basic sounds at first, so as not to confuse him.  I think that's just fine.  :)

[Hunter]

No, I'm talking about the home made chart she suggests in the chapter on blending in A Home Start in Reading.  It's blending my son isn't quite ready for -which is fine!  He's not even 5!  But he wants to learn to read, so I'm am continuing with teaching him the sounds.  I am actually using the flashcards for a an o-g phonics program, but just teaching him the most basic sounds at first, so as not to confuse him.  I think that's just fine.   :)

I'm not at home, so don't have access to the book. I think I remember the blending section being a bit awkward and Beechick saying a student can stay stuck at that stage awhile.

[Guest]

Not sure if I can ask this here… anyone using Beechick right now to teach reading?  I am…and we're in step 3: Blending.  Did anyone else use the chart she describes?  This is where DS is stalling (which I am totally okay with - he is the one who initiates these lessons).  The chart seems kinda funny to me, but we're giving it a whirl.  And I'm also using real books to help him sound out words.  But it's so funny, he'll know the sounds of P, O, and P, and say them all separately.  But then I'll try to have him say the word and he'll say, "Pumpkin?"  It is funny to me, and I don't stress over it at all.  I'm just starting to wonder if I should keep at it with the chart…?

 

My little dude is in the decoding stage and we just started using the card game. I thought I knew what I was doing after all these kids, but he's wound up with a very cobbled together phonics program this year. I only added in RB a short time ago (upthread I posted when the book arrived in my hot little hands) so it may be anecdotal that I need to make some plain brown jackets for my library books if I don't want him asking a million questions about why I am reading a particular volume of the self-help genre.

 

The blending stage can be very frustrating and sometimes boring for parents. It's normal for the kid to stall. I let ds take breaks and curriculum surf, but other parents do it differently. Someone once told me that it is common for kids to stall out and parents to buy new (usually more expensive and complicated) reading curricula. The third one usually works not because it is a superior product to the first two, but because after seeing the material presented three different ways from the different perspectives of three different authors, it makes sense.

 

Of course I think ds1's "magic bullet" is something extra special and used it successfully in enough tutoring situations that it's falling apart and needs to be replaced or scanned for little ds. I've been looking forward to using it with him since the minute I first saw those double lines.

 

He thinks it's "Meh". I keep putting it back on the shelf and pulling out inexpensive alternatives I don't have any attachment to and letting him tell me how much for how long because I don't want to spoil the content of the special stories.

 

So to make a short story long, my advice would be to keep using the chart as long as it's fun for him but switch things around and come at blending from different angles.

[ElizaG]

I'm looking back over RB's Language and Thinking for Young Children.   I think this one is my favorite so far.   :001_smile:

 

The approach in this book is very similar to EFL's, but the poems EFL uses are generally longer and more challenging, and she spends more time on observation, drawing, practical tasks, and outdoor activities.  For her, these sorts of "language and thinking" lessons make up the core of the curriculum, from the preschool years until age 10.  As the child learns to read and write, these activities also become the basis of the written work, in the form of copywork and original compositions.  Along with arithmetic, religious education, and foreign languages (if you're doing them), this makes up the whole system.  

 

I think LTYC will be a good reference.   It's sturdy enough to haul around the house, it's plain-looking enough that I don't mind marking it up extensively with notes and highlights, and the margins are big enough even to paste in some extra poems.   RB describes it as "a full year's lesson strategies" that are ideal for kindergarten or first grade, but I'm going to try to turn it into a lot more.   :001_smile:  

[vaquitita]

So to make a short story long, my advice would be to keep using the chart as long as it's fun for him but switch things around and come at blending from different angles.

OT, but loved your post. Makes me feel so much better about the past year of using some of this and some of that. I'm not a mess, we just used a variety to keep from getting bored while stuck in the blending stage. That sounds much better. :D

[Hunter]

Okay, I got to my library copy of 3R's. Yes, I still have not bought this book, yet. :)

 

This blending is covered in How to Tutor quite well, while simultaneously teaching cursive. It doesn't feel like being stuck in blending, as the student is working so hard on their cursive. And here, we are also covering dictionary respellings and mechanics and even some parts of speech at the same time. So there is all this other stuff going on that distracts the student from realizing how much trouble they are having blending.

 

With these older students, it's the focus on handwriting that really makes the difference.

 

And there is a tutor here that insists no one can learn to read a dictionary. So, of course there is great incentive to learn something that a professor says cannot be done. Everyone LOVES my copy of the large print concise Merriam Webster. Students that can barely blend, want to learn the respelling for what they can blend.

 

And they want to HEAR important sounding words like "imperative sentence", while learning to write very very simple sentences, like "Hand Dan an ax."

 

Most of this will not apply to little ones. But that is why I haven't felt stuck camping out in this stage. We are so busy with the things I wrote about, that we need to camp out here. I tried doing manuscript first with a student this week, and she wasn't having any part of it.

[Hunter]

This is a free pdf of the chapter that led to HTT being written. We write a lot of sentences about Sam and Dan, using just a few letters of the alphabet. 

http://www.donpotter.net/pdf/blumnfeld_home_primer.pdf

[mamamindy]

Okay, I got to my library copy of 3R's. Yes, I still have not bought this book, yet. :)

 

This blending is covered in How to Tutor quite well, while simultaneously teaching cursive. It doesn't feel like being stuck in blending, as the student is working so hard on their cursive. And here, we are also covering dictionary respellings and mechanics and even some parts of speech at the same time. So there is all this other stuff going on that distracts the student from realizing how much trouble they are having blending.

 

With these older students, it's the focus on handwriting that really makes the difference.

 

And there is a tutor here that insists no one can learn to read a dictionary. So, of course there is great incentive to learn something that a professor says cannot be done. Everyone LOVES my copy of the large print concise Merriam Webster. Students that can barely blend, want to learn the respelling for what they can blend.

 

And they want to HEAR important sounding words like "imperative sentence", while learning to write very very simple sentences, like "Hand Dan an ax."

 

Most of this will not apply to little ones. But that is why I haven't felt stuck camping out in this stage. We are so busy with the things I wrote about, that we need to camp out here. I tried doing manuscript first with a student this week, and she wasn't having any part of it.

DS is learning to form his letters while learning the sounds, but with manuscript (really because it's just the way that's easiest  for me and makes sense to me -not  saying I don't think cursive is the first way to go) so he really doesn't feel like he's stalled at all.  It's just me.  With teaching all of them to read, it's just a bit (or more!) frustrating.  But I don't let him see that it's frustrating to me.  He's having fun.  So we're good. ;)

 

With pretty much everything I'm teaching them lately (even bed making & hair washing!) I'm trying to take myself back a few (million) notches and realize that this is just totally new to them.  This is a skill that requires lots and lots of practice and just because it's like breathing for me, it is not that way for my dc.  I'm learning. :)

[mamamindy]

My little dude is in the decoding stage and we just started using the card game. I thought I knew what I was doing after all these kids, but he's wound up with a very cobbled together phonics program this year. I only added in RB a short time ago (upthread I posted when the book arrived in my hot little hands) so it may be anecdotal that I need to make some plain brown jackets for my library books if I don't want him asking a million questions about why I am reading a particular volume of the self-help genre.

 

The blending stage can be very frustrating and sometimes boring for parents. It's normal for the kid to stall. I let ds take breaks and curriculum surf, but other parents do it differently. Someone once told me that it is common for kids to stall out and parents to buy new (usually more expensive and complicated) reading curricula. The third one usually works not because it is a superior product to the first two, but because after seeing the material presented three different ways from the different perspectives of three different authors, it makes sense.

 

Of course I think ds1's "magic bullet" is something extra special and used it successfully in enough tutoring situations that it's falling apart and needs to be replaced or scanned for little ds. I've been looking forward to using it with him since the minute I first saw those double lines.

 

He thinks it's "Meh". I keep putting it back on the shelf and pulling out inexpensive alternatives I don't have any attachment to and letting him tell me how much for how long because I don't want to spoil the content of the special stories.

 

So to make a short story long, my advice would be to keep using the chart as long as it's fun for him but switch things around and come at blending from different angles.

I've heard this (bolded), too!!  Makes sense!  And thank you for posting!  It also makes me feel better that I have a few phonics resources, and that's okay - we can use a lil' of this and lil' of that.  Love your perspective! 

[Hunter]

I am NOT advocating cursive first. I had decided to give it up for some very good reasons. I don't think my students are going to let me do that though. 

[ElizaG]

Hunter, I figured out that the first part of EFL's Beginning the Child's Education at Home was previously published in the PTA journal.   Links here.   

 

I think Educating the Child at Home is much more useful, though.  And it's the only one of her books that says much about older elementary children -- though even then, it's not much.  Her thinking seems to have been that, if you get the foundation right, you can just continue to build on that until age 10.   After that, you'd either send them to school, or keep going at home with more of a self-teaching/Robinson kind of thing.  

[Hunter]

Hunter, I figured out that the first part of EFL's Beginning the Child's Education at Home was previously published in the PTA journal.   Links here.   

 

I think Educating the Child at Home is much more useful, though.  And it's the only one of her books that says much about older elementary children -- though even then, it's not much.  Her thinking seems to have been that, if you get the foundation right, you can just continue to build on that until age 10.   After that, you'd either send them to school, or keep going at home with more of a self-teaching/Robinson kind of thing.  

 

I'm not seeing the links.