No composition or grammar until age 9?

[Epicurean]

I recently asked Christine Perrin what writing program would best prepare students for the rigor of Writing & Rhetoric. Writing With Ease 1 and 2 seem like the obvious first choice (maybe even 3?), but did she have something else in mind for for the ideal student?

 

She wrote back that she didn't recommend using a writing program K - 2nd grade, because focusing on reading skills through a solid phonics program should be enough. She didn't think it would hurt to start with WWE, but she felt that the skill set of a reading program might be more useful.

 

That definitely took me by surprise. :scared: In he past, I've been really resistant to the idea of delaying writing and grammar. I always thought that those skills could be better mastered if introduced early. But now I'm wondering if it might be a case of diminishing returns to introduce them to the younger set. They might have a slight edge over their peers who don't receive formal instruction until age 8 or 9, but at what cost? 

 

I think back to my own education. My public school teachers taught only the most basic grammar starting in third grade, and no writing instruction at all until seventh grade. Despite those deficiencies, I became a great writer, scoring at the top of my class throughout high school and college. If I learned to love writing in spite of the gross negligence of my education, do my kids really need a structured writing program starting at the age of six?

 

I just came across this passage by Charlotte Mason the other day, and it pushed me a little bit farther in that direction.

 

‘Composition’ comes by Nature.––In fact, lessons on ‘composition’ should follow the model of that famous essay on “Snakes in Irelandâ€â€“–â€There are none.†For children under nine, the question of composition resolves itself into that of narration, varied by some such simple exercise as to write a part and narrate a part, or write the whole account of a walk they have taken, a lesson they have studied, or of some simple matter that they know. Before they are ten, children who have been in the habit of using books will write good, vigorous English with ease and freedom; that is, if they have not been hampered by instructions. It is well for them not even to learn rules for the placing of full stops and capitals until they notice how these things occur in their books. Our business is to provide children with material in their lessons, and leave the handling of such material to themselves. If we would believe it, composition is as natural as jumping and running to children who have been allowed due use of books. They should narrate in the first place, and they will compose, later readily enough; but they should not be taught ‘composition.’

 

So her approach differs from classical in these ways, if I'm understanding it correctly:

• start narration at the age of six, first orally and then with writing
• wait until the age of nine to begin formal writing instruction
• grammar should be taught by pointing out examples of the literature they are reading
• expose children to great literature so that they naturally imitate it in their writing
• allow children to interact with literature without adults butting in to use it to teach or over-explain it

This method would omit WWE (copywork and dictation) and FLL (grammar) until third grade, and restrict writing instruction to narrations.

 

I'm reevaluating some of my philosophy about writing and grammar in the early years. If you delayed writing and grammar with your kids and have seen them grow into teens or adults, do you have any regrets?

 

And of course, you WTM diehards can take this opportunity to talk me out of jumping ship!

 

P.S. Yes, Consider This: Charlotte Mason and the Classical Tradition is on my to-read list!

[mom2att]

Well WWE is pretty  much narration, dictation, and copywork, so it seems that all of the levels would segue nicely with the above author's philosophy of writing instruction. There's really no composition involved. If you haven't yet, listen to Susan Wise Bauer's mp3 talks on writing instruction, available at the Peace Hill Press site. I think you will find that her ideas behind the WWE series are quite compatible with Charlotte Mason's.

 

Where you might find a difference is in grammar instruction, because First Language Lessons does most definitely teach grammar, but in a gentle and age-appropriate way. Investigate both WWE and FFL to see if they would work for your child. They have for many, but certainly not all. There are many options available, and no overall "best" way.

 

Enjoy this time--the early years are so much fun!

 

[IsabelC]

I am extremely suspicious of any rule that states 'All children should do A, B and C at X age', whether it's from somebody citing the spiritual dangers of letting a child read before her 'etheric body' forms at age 7 or from somebody warning that the 'window of opportunity' will slam shut if you haven't started a second language by age 3. The reason that many pronouncements on what children ought to be taught - and when they should learn it - generate differences of opinion is because there usually isn't the evidence for a hugely significant difference in outcomes either way. Even if something is supported by evidence (eg that learning oral language is, in fact, easier for younger children), this is still only true in isolation, and not in the context of your child and your home school. Everything we do is about prioritizing and compromising in order to best work toward our goals. If you intend to study grammar because your goal is for the child to know some grammar, it might be better to do it later; there is no doubt that most 10 year olds won't need to spend 10 or 20 weeks learning what a noun is (I had no formal grammar until 7th grade, and it took me maybe two weeks to learn as much as most adults know). But what if you have other goals? Perhaps you want to do grammar as an exercise in orderly and structured thinking, and you judge that this will benefit your younger child. Or again, what if you decided to 'delay' but your first grader developed an interest in grammar? You have to consider your situation, your child, and the costs and benefits of anything you're thinking about doing. If you delay a subject, what will your child be doing instead: more of the subjects already being done? different subjects? more free time? How do the benefits of the alternative activity (or non activity) stack up against the benefits of having this learning a few years earlier? Christine won't know any of the details about people's specific context. If the parents think WWE will work well, chances are it probably will. And anyway, the comment about a reading program being preferable is a bit silly, because of course people would be doing reading as well as WWE.

[ByGrace3]

Not doing formal* grammar and writing is different than not doing anything. Doing copywork, narration, and dictation is still developing the skills of writing and grammar. I would not be comfortable doing no writing or grammar, but basic narrations and copywork (in which like CM says-- you point out the grammar) would be fine. But yes, that's basically what WWE is.;)

 

 

I think CAP W&R after basic copywork and narration for a few years is fine--great even. Doing Fable when the child has never done anything? Maybe? but why? Summarizing and copying are important skills. Don't do them at the cost of getting your chid reading, but certainly adding them would not hurt-- I only see that helping (for most children). ;)

[SparklyUnicorn]

I don't care for the one size fits all advice.  WWE isn't really composition.  It builds up skills that will help with composition.  I don't care for the typical public school approach either, but WWE is not that at all.

 

 

[TheAttachedMama]

I agree with what is written above.   WWE isn't really "writing"....it more focuses on the mechanics needed so that one CAN eventually write.   For example, WWE teaches how to form abstract ideas into words, building hand stamina through copywork, building working-memory through dictation, etc. etc.. 

[8filltheheart]

I agree with IsabelC.  Why classify all children into inflexible categories? The beauty of homeschooling is that there does not have to be a one size fits all answer.  There are plenty of advocates who state definitively that younger kids are incapable of mastering algebra b/c it requires abstract thinking.  I think it is the LOF author who states something like not before hair in their armpit.  My poor ds would have been bored to tears and it would have hampered his natural progression via his innate abilities.

 

Writing/grammar are no different. If a child is having to focus so much on decoding that they really have no energy left after finally reading a passage to really analyze it, I agree that that child is not read for composition or grammar instruction.  The focus needs to be on mastering reading.  However, what about kids who are solid readers?   Copywork is a great way to teach grammar, mechanics, AND basic composition elements. 

 

In an old thread where I describe how I teach my children, I posted this example of my then 2nd grade dd's copywork/grammar for the day:

Nikki raced down the narrow streets and shouted insults at pedestrians and cars that got in his way. His own car sputtered and rattled and clanked as if it would fall apart any moment. But it didn’t.

My daughter had no trouble identifying any of the parts of speech except for that and as if.

 

http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/239259-bringing-karens-mention-of-essay-writing-to-a-new-thread/?p=2363522
 

 

That dd is now in 10th grade. She was beyond copywork in 3rd.  She was writing essays by 6th.   Her language abilities have always been strong.  She has been studying multiple foreign languages for several yrs (French, Latin, and Russian.)  Her Russian teacher attributes her success in Russian to her grammar abilities.  (Definitely the case with Latin as well.)

 

Conversely, her older brother (the one described above who took his first alg course at age 10) was still struggling decoding Frog and Toad books in 2nd grade.  (He is severely dyslexic.)  Would it have made sense to spend time on grammar studies with him?  No, b/c his needs were very different from his sister's.

 

FWIW, I think copywork w/o purpose is meaningless.  Kids can totally zone out and simply focus on letter by letter formation w/o any context for what they are copying.  Copywork is an excellent teaching tool, but the "tool" part has to be utilized.  Do you notice capital letters?  Why do you think you they are used?  How do you know when one sentence begins and another ends? How do specific words create a complete thought and others leave us hanging feeling like we need more to finish the thought?  How do all of the sentences work together?  Is there one over all theme on which all the sentences focus?  Are there any words that you really like?  Which word is your favorite and why?  How does it make you feel?  What does it make you picture in your mind?
 

I am a copywork advocate and I believe in its inherent value.  BUT copywork w/o teaching instruction may not be more than penmanship.

[amyc78]

 

 

I just came across this passage by Charlotte Mason the other day, and it pushed me a little bit farther in that direction.

 

‘Composition’ comes by Nature.––In fact, lessons on ‘composition’ should follow the model of that famous essay on “Snakes in Irelandâ€â€“–â€There are none.†For children under nine, the question of composition resolves itself into that of narration, varied by some such simple exercise as to write a part and narrate a part, or write the whole account of a walk they have taken, a lesson they have studied, or of some simple matter that they know. Before they are ten, children who have been in the habit of using books will write good, vigorous English with ease and freedom; that is, if they have not been hampered by instructions. It is well for them not even to learn rules for the placing of full stops and capitals until they notice how these things occur in their books. Our business is to provide children with material in their lessons, and leave the handling of such material to themselves. If we would believe it, composition is as natural as jumping and running to children who have been allowed due use of books. They should narrate in the first place, and they will compose, later readily enough; but they should not be taught ‘composition.’

 

So her approach differs from classical in these ways, if I'm understanding it correctly:

• start narration at the age of six, first orally and then with writing
• wait until the age of nine to begin formal writing instruction
• grammar should be taught by pointing out examples of the literature they are reading
• expose children to great literature so that they naturally imitate it in their writing
• allow children to interact with literature without adults butting in to use it to teach or over-explain it

 

 

Interesting… this makes me think about 18 months from now when we will start CC Essentials (EIW). I have often worried that that program would stifle creativity and 'natural writing ability'. Any thoughts on that?

 

[Pingo]

We did WWE and IEW and I've noticed with my kids (9&11)' that narration comes easier to them than composition, but they DO enjoy compositions, when they have something they are EAGER to write about. In my own public school experience in Singapore, I loved compositions, not narrations. I know at 9, some schools there focus on just dictation, but by 10, we were certainly attempting compositions. I cannot remember concretely what writing instruction looked like and I have wondered often if that meant the type of instruction didn't matter or if it's just a piece of amnesia on my part.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that one size really doesn't fit all. I don't agree with Pudewa or SWB that creative composition is hard if a child has something to say. And I've used WWE with ease (hallelujah!) which others have pointed out is NOT composition in the usual sense. In the end, what works is what gets done and what you're comfortable doing. Your long-term goals would also make a difference. If i plan on homeschooling all the way, I would feel more at liberty with a CM approach. But if I am planning on putting my child in publi school in a few years' time, I may need something a little more structured.

[Ellie]

I agree with what is written above.   WWE isn't really "writing"....it more focuses on the mechanics needed so that one CAN eventually write.   For example, WWE teaches how to form abstract ideas into words, building hand stamina through copywork, building working-memory through dictation, etc. etc.. 

 

How is that not "writing"? :confused1:

[EmseB]

How is that not "writing"? :confused1:

 

I think two ideas of what writing is are getting conflated in this thread.  There's writing as in the physical act of writing (which is what I think copywork and handwriting is), and writing as in composition -- composing original thought and putting it on paper (which could be typing or physically writing, I suppose).

[8filltheheart]

I think two ideas of what writing is are getting conflated in this thread. There's writing as in the physical act of writing (which is what I think copywork and handwriting is), and writing as in composition -- composing original thought and putting it on paper (which could be typing or physically writing, I suppose).

I disagree. Copywork has the potential to be far more than handwriting. My children master grammar through copywork. They learn paragraphing (topic sentence and supporting details) from copywork. They transition from copywork to independent compositions.

 

Without explicitly engaging with the copywork selection (I engage via "treasured conversations" with my children) then, yes, copywork is penmanship vs. forming the foundation for independent writing.

[FO4UR]

Read CM further.  You are likely going to get opinions of CM that don't come from CM's actual words or intent.

 

 

CM did copywork and oral narration starting at age 6. She wouldn't refuse a 5yo a turn at narration, but she wouldn't require it until age 6.  She wasn't as inflexible as a brief glance may seem.  Likewise, she required written narrations at age 10, but would never discourage a 9 or 8 yo from trying out their pens a bit early.

 

She taught phonics and spelling thoroughly!  She just did so from living books, thus there is no manual, thus there is a perception that she didn't teach these things.  She taught through copywork!

 

So 6-9 is reading, copying, oral narrations and discussion.

 

10-14 is reading, copying, STUDIED dictation, written narrations in addition to oral narrations and socratic discussion.

 

She taught grammar and spelling ages 10+ via studied dictation.  And, yes, when a child has cut their teeth on Beatrix Potter and has been reading classic literature since the beginning of their memory, good English oozes off the pencil...once the child knows how to use the pencil. Writing is, afterall, an art of putting to paper what ideas are in our minds.  Oral narration builds the muscle that puts those ideas into words.

 

 

It isn't that a writing curric 6-9 isn't useful.  It's that it might be taking the time and energy that could be put into greater things...oral narrations, good literature, copywork. You can teach many things at age 10 in 6 weeks, but how to put your ideas into words is not one of those things,  That art must be cultivated over the course of years. Don't waste time on other things if they are usurping oral narration.

 

[Ellie]

I think two ideas of what writing is are getting conflated in this thread.  There's writing as in the physical act of writing (which is what I think copywork and handwriting is), and writing as in composition -- composing original thought and putting it on paper (which could be typing or physically writing, I suppose).

 

No, I'm not confused about the difference between penmanship and writing. :-) What you described regarding WWE sounds like *writing* to me. :-)

[Farrar]

I don't read the advice in the OP to be inflexible, but rather about reconfiguring our basic expectations. I think our expectation that 8 yos be writing - and by writing I don't mean copywork and dictation, but writing their own beginning compositions - is not a good basic starting point. Of course - of course! - there are a good number of younger kids who want to be writing their own stories or ideas or are really ready to be writing those beginning compositions. And of course we should look for that readiness. But I think there's too much focus on composition in the early grades and it's to the detriment of focusing on phonics, reading, spelling, mechanics, oral narration, learning skills through dictation and copywork, etc. 

[EmseB]

No, I'm not confused about the difference between penmanship and writing. :-) What you described regarding WWE sounds like *writing* to me. :-)

That was a different poster. I was just being a buttinski and trying to explain what I thought she meant. Because I do think WWE is writing and not penmanship, but I don't think it's exactly composition, either. And many people think writing has to be composition at the paragraph/essay level.

[Bluegoat]

I don't think I would understand the advice as being "do nothing".  Reading good books, learning to compose orally - which is what narration is - and doing copywork is not doing nothing.

 

I took it to mean that there was not a need for a "program" as such.

 

For what its worth, we began W&R Fable, along with Growing with Grammar, this year at age 9/10.  My dd is a fairly academic student, a good reader and she likes her work most of the time.  Up until now we have had one quickly aborted attempt at WWE3, and we did some things like English for the Thoughtful Child, but mostly orally.  My dd has had no problems with the work, and I don't really see that having spent a lot of time on coursework would have improved things.  In fact when we tried WWE, it was like getting blood from a stone, it was a very negative experience, but dictations and copywork of similar length this year seems to be no problem. 

[amyc78]

Read CM further.  You are likely going to get opinions of CM that don't come from CM's actual words or intent.

 

 

CM did copywork and oral narration starting at age 6. She wouldn't refuse a 5yo a turn at narration, but she wouldn't require it until age 6.  She wasn't as inflexible as a brief glance may seem.  Likewise, she required written narrations at age 10, but would never discourage a 9 or 8 yo from trying out their pens a bit early.

 

She taught phonics and spelling thoroughly!  She just did so from living books, thus there is no manual, thus there is a perception that she didn't teach these things.  She taught through copywork!

 

So 6-9 is reading, copying, oral narrations and discussion.

 

10-14 is reading, copying, STUDIED dictation, written narrations in addition to oral narrations and socratic discussion.

 

She taught grammar and spelling ages 10+ via studied dictation.  And, yes, when a child has cut their teeth on Beatrix Potter and has been reading classic literature since the beginning of their memory, good English oozes off the pencil...once the child knows how to use the pencil. Writing is, afterall, an art of putting to paper what ideas are in our minds.  Oral narration builds the muscle that puts those ideas into words.

 

 

It isn't that a writing curric 6-9 isn't useful.  It's that it might be taking the time and energy that could be put into greater things...oral narrations, good literature, copywork. You can teach many things at age 10 in 6 weeks, but how to put your ideas into words is not one of those things,  That art must be cultivated over the course of years. Don't waste time on other things if they are usurping oral narration.

 

This. Yes. Thank you.

 

Could you define STUDIED dictation?

[FO4UR]

This. Yes. Thank you.

 

Could you define STUDIED dictation?

 

 

Take a passage from literature.

 

Pull out any words that are tricky. Study the spellings.  

 

Are there any words I don't know?  

 

Note the grammar at play.

 

Knowing you are going to be writing this in a few minutes without peeking, the student will concentrate deeply for those few minutes.  Any bits of alliteration, rhythm or rhyme will be noted as a help for the memory.

 

An older student (14+) might be able to do this all mentally, without guidance.  (So it may look like nothing is going on.)  I think a younger student (10-14-ish) needs guidance through this process.  

 

Once the passage is studied and dictated, not only are the spellings and grammar implanted, but so is the authors way with words. This is similar to the concept behind CM picture study or composer study.  Immerse deeply, enjoy the artistry for its own worth, note the details as an extension or crutch (not the core of the lesson), and reproduce.

[amyc78]

Take a passage from literature.

 

Pull out any words that are tricky. Study the spellings.  

 

Are there any words I don't know?  

 

Note the grammar at play.

 

Knowing you are going to be writing this in a few minutes without peeking, the student will concentrate deeply for those few minutes.  Any bits of alliteration, rhythm or rhyme will be noted as a help for the memory.

 

An older student (14+) might be able to do this all mentally, without guidance.  (So it may look like nothing is going on.)  I think a younger student (10-14-ish) needs guidance through this process.  

 

Once the passage is studied and dictated, not only are the spellings and grammar implanted, but so is the authors way with words. This is similar to the concept behind CM picture study or composer study.  Immerse deeply, enjoy the artistry for its own worth, note the details as an extension or crutch (not the core of the lesson), and reproduce.

ok thank you. I can keep this in my head as a readiness goal for the next couple of years.

 

In the meantime, for my 8.5 year old, I've been dictating the passage to him one sentence at a time, asking him to listen carefully, repeat the sentence to me and then write it. 

 

I do this for narrations he has scribed to me and for passages from literature. This is separate from our regular copy work. I do not allow him to look at the paper and I do not repeat it more than once. But I'm wondering if instead of reading them to him, if I should be letting him study the passage one sentence at a time and copy from memory? Does it matter? Is a combination ideal? 

[ALB]

 

 

And, yes, when a child has cut their teeth on Beatrix Potter and has been reading classic literature since the beginning of their memory, good English oozes off the pencil...once the child knows how to use the pencil. 

 

 

Love the way this is phrased!

 

I agree with many of the pp's.  In my mind, copywork is an essential first step before W&R or any classical writing program.  It offers physical practice in writing without requiring original thought, but more importantly it creates a visual and a physical memory of excellent writing.  

 

As far as grammar goes, I can't anything magical about age 9 or any other age particularly.  It just makes sense that once a child is reading fluently and has mastered phonics, he is ready to start learning some basic mechanics of this language in which he's being immersed.  

[8filltheheart]

And, yes, when a child has cut their teeth on Beatrix Potter and has been reading classic literature since the beginning of their memory, good English oozes off the pencil...once the child knows how to use the pencil.

Except when it doesn't. For some children reading great literature and modeling that writing does translate into excellent writing skills, but for others it does not. It all sounds so simple and logical until it doesn't work. Some kids struggle with organizing their thoughts, creating cohesive sentences, integrating ideas, and transitioning smoothly from one idea to another. Modeling those processes is not enough for kids who struggle independently to put words on paper. They need repeated independent practice working through those concepts in their own writing. They need step by step instruction, varied types of assignments which require them to apply their skills in different ways, etc.

 

Consider 2 kids in a different scenario. One student is a confident math student and can analyze the process behind what is being done and incorporate that process because he has seen it worked out and has reasoned his way through the steps. Then you have another student who has diligently paid attention to the math problems that they worked out as examples and can replicate the process but falters when having to apply those concepts to a unique problem. Both students have worked through problems presenting how to solve for certain givens. They are now assigned a page of word problems to solve. The first student takes the knowledge he possesses, analyzes what is required, and solves not only the problems that are very similar to the modeled problems but the ones that require slightly different set ups in order to solve. The other student successfully sets up the replica problems by referencing the worked out problems but falters when the problems do not follow the same pattern. He cannot figure out how to go about setting them up bc he lacks the ability to independently analyze the process and apply the concepts. Watching someone else work through the problems and understanding what process they did does not automatically translate to being able to apply uniquely what was demonstrated. For the second child, it does not ooze down their pencil even though for the first child it did.

 

Writing is no different. Studied modeling and written narration does lead to solid independent writing for some kids, but for other kids those are only the beginning steps. It takes more for those kids to organize their thoughts into a logical, well-written composition.

[SparklyUnicorn]

Very true.  I have one kid who is a voracious reader.  I have another who only tolerates it.  The reader also loves to be read to and the other not so much.  The anti reader is the better writer and has had very little specific instruction.  The reader is not a bad writer, but I would not say he is a natural writer. 

 

 

Except when it doesn't. For some children reading great literature and modeling that writing does translate into excellent writing skills, but for others it does not. It all sounds so simple and logical until it doesn't work. Some kids struggle with organizing their thoughts, creating cohesive sentences, integrating ideas, and transitioning smoothly from one idea to another. Modeling those processes is not enough for kids who struggle independently to put words on paper. They need repeated independent practice working through those concepts in their own writing. They need step by step instruction, varied types of assignments which require them to apply their skills in different ways, etc.

Consider 2 kids in a different scenario. One student is a confident math student and can analyze the process behind what is being done and incorporate that process because he has seen it worked out and has reasoned his way through the steps. Then you have another student who has diligently paid attention to the math problems that they worked out as examples and can replicate the process but falters when having to apply those concepts to a unique problem. Both students have worked through problems presenting how to solve for certain givens. They are now assigned a page of word problems to solve. The first student takes the knowledge he possesses, analyzes what is required, and solves not only the problems that are very similar to the modeled problems but the ones that require slightly different set ups in order to solve. The other student successfully sets up the replica problems by referencing the worked out problems but falters when the problems do not follow the same pattern. He cannot figure out how to go about setting them up bc he lacks the ability to independently analyze the process and apply the concepts. Watching someone else work through the problems and understanding what process they did does not automatically translate to being able to apply uniquely what was demonstrated. For the second child, it does not ooze down their pencil even though for the first child it did.

Writing is no different. Studied modeling and written narration does lead to solid independent writing for some kids, but for other kids those are only the beginning steps. It takes more for those kids to organize their thoughts into a logical, well-written composition.

 

[Bluegoat]

Except when it doesn't. For some children reading great literature and modeling that writing does translate into excellent writing skills, but for others it does not. It all sounds so simple and logical until it doesn't work. Some kids struggle with organizing their thoughts, creating cohesive sentences, integrating ideas, and transitioning smoothly from one idea to another. Modeling those processes is not enough for kids who struggle independently to put words on paper. They need repeated independent practice working through those concepts in their own writing. They need step by step instruction, varied types of assignments which require them to apply their skills in different ways, etc.

 

Consider 2 kids in a different scenario. One student is a confident math student and can analyze the process behind what is being done and incorporate that process because he has seen it worked out and has reasoned his way through the steps. Then you have another student who has diligently paid attention to the math problems that they worked out as examples and can replicate the process but falters when having to apply those concepts to a unique problem. Both students have worked through problems presenting how to solve for certain givens. They are now assigned a page of word problems to solve. The first student takes the knowledge he possesses, analyzes what is required, and solves not only the problems that are very similar to the modeled problems but the ones that require slightly different set ups in order to solve. The other student successfully sets up the replica problems by referencing the worked out problems but falters when the problems do not follow the same pattern. He cannot figure out how to go about setting them up bc he lacks the ability to independently analyze the process and apply the concepts. Watching someone else work through the problems and understanding what process they did does not automatically translate to being able to apply uniquely what was demonstrated. For the second child, it does not ooze down their pencil even though for the first child it did.

 

Writing is no different. Studied modeling and written narration does lead to solid independent writing for some kids, but for other kids those are only the beginning steps. It takes more for those kids to organize their thoughts into a logical, well-written composition.

 

I think though this is where oral narration is also important.  It involves all of those other things - complete senences, presenting a coherent thought, putting your own ideas in order.  It just isn't done much in writing until the child is at a point where the more mechanical aspects of writing are quite comfortable.  If people can't organize their thoughts mentally, doing so on paper will be a struggle.  That isn't to say students will not need to work to improve at every stage, some more than others.  But I don't think it means kids need to be doing another writing program to get ready for the beginning level writing program.

 

 

 

[8filltheheart]

I think though this is where oral narration is also important. It involves all of those other things - complete senences, presenting a coherent thought, putting your own ideas in order. It just isn't done much in writing until the child is at a point where the more mechanical aspects of writing are quite comfortable. If people can't organize their thoughts mentally, doing so on paper will be a struggle. That isn't to say students will not need to work to improve at every stage, some more than others. But I don't think it means kids need to be doing another writing program to get ready for the beginning level writing program.

 

I am not discussing the bolded (not sure anyone would argue that a beginning writing program requires another beginning writing program).

 

What I was disagreeing with is the statement that studied dictation/modeling/oral and written narrations automatically translate into excellent English oozing from their pencils. Not for all children.

[FO4UR]

ok thank you. I can keep this in my head as a readiness goal for the next couple of years.

 

In the meantime, for my 8.5 year old, I've been dictating the passage to him one sentence at a time, asking him to listen carefully, repeat the sentence to me and then write it. 

 

I do this for narrations he has scribed to me and for passages from literature. This is separate from our regular copy work. I do not allow him to look at the paper and I do not repeat it more than once. But I'm wondering if instead of reading them to him, if I should be letting him study the passage one sentence at a time and copy from memory? Does it matter? Is a combination ideal? 

 

 

The purpose of all of this, for an 8yo, is to immerse him in good English and nudge him along into independence ever so slowly. You want the spellings to be visualized properly. You want the grammatical bits to be noticed. You want him to smirk at something humorous.

 

If he is able to do those things with straight dictation, that's fine.  If straight dictation frustrates him, that's an indication that he's struggling to see it in his head.  I say let him peek.  Peeking is concentrated study.

 

 

 

Except when it doesn't. For some children reading great literature and modeling that writing does translate into excellent writing skills, but for others it does not. It all sounds so simple and logical until it doesn't work. Some kids struggle with organizing their thoughts, creating cohesive sentences, integrating ideas, and transitioning smoothly from one idea to another. Modeling those processes is not enough for kids who struggle independently to put words on paper. They need repeated independent practice working through those concepts in their own writing. They need step by step instruction, varied types of assignments which require them to apply their skills in different ways, etc.

 

Consider 2 kids in a different scenario. One student is a confident math student and can analyze the process behind what is being done and incorporate that process because he has seen it worked out and has reasoned his way through the steps. Then you have another student who has diligently paid attention to the math problems that they worked out as examples and can replicate the process but falters when having to apply those concepts to a unique problem. Both students have worked through problems presenting how to solve for certain givens. They are now assigned a page of word problems to solve. The first student takes the knowledge he possesses, analyzes what is required, and solves not only the problems that are very similar to the modeled problems but the ones that require slightly different set ups in order to solve. The other student successfully sets up the replica problems by referencing the worked out problems but falters when the problems do not follow the same pattern. He cannot figure out how to go about setting them up bc he lacks the ability to independently analyze the process and apply the concepts. Watching someone else work through the problems and understanding what process they did does not automatically translate to being able to apply uniquely what was demonstrated. For the second child, it does not ooze down their pencil even though for the first child it did.

 

Writing is no different. Studied modeling and written narration does lead to solid independent writing for some kids, but for other kids those are only the beginning steps. It takes more for those kids to organize their thoughts into a logical, well-written composition.

 

 

The math analogy doesn't fit what is happening with copywork/narration/dictation.  imho

 

 

A better analogy would be the child who grows up watching their dad at his carpentry business.  At some point, the child wants to use a hammer.  So the dad teaches the child how to use a hammer on a scrap piece of wood with a box of nails.  He watches to see that the child is using good technique, and then lets the child hammer away while he continues his work.  One day the child, feeling bored with just the hammer now that he's mastered it, decides to ask to try out the measuring tape in hopes of really trying out the saw.  The dad takes great pains to teach precise measurement, but just a bit every day. Meanwhile, he's showing the child how he uses the saw safely. Once the child can talk through the way and the reason for everything the dad does with the saw, the dad places the saw in the child's hand. The child carefully cuts the piece of wood that he has been measuring all this time.  Fast forward a few years, and the father has taught his son how to use all of the tools in his carpentry shop in this intimate and open fashion. By 12 years old, the child can use any tool and he can even build some small and easy, but useful things!  That said, he is now just ready to learn to read a blueprint for serious projects. He is not finished!

 

 

Copywork/Narration/Dictation are tool builders.  Writing instruction does not stop there. These activities give the child the tools needed to then master composition. Just as it's foolish to teach a child how to build a house when they can't handle a hammer, it's foolish to teach "composition" to a child who is still learning to use their pencil. 

 

 

Yes, many students are naturals at that end stage of learning to write.  Give them the assignment, and they've got it!  Others need the blueprint, verbal explanation of the blueprint, and probably some gentle guidance as they go too.  Both of these students need those basic tools; putting ideas into words, putting words down on paper, etc...  Both students benefit greatly from having grown up within that carpentry(literary) home, having learned to use the tools of the trade young, slowly, methodically, while immersed in the world of carpentry (literacy).  It would be utterly ridiculous to pull a child out of his father's carpentry shop to go to a school to learn wood-working simply b/c the child wasn't learning to build houses early enough.  There is no school that can teach the tools of the trade better than a master craftsmen teaching a cherished child.

 

 

That's a long way of saying that each child needs those tools before they can write well, regardless of their natural bent.  Spending that time building up those foundational skills does not mean that we are forgetting advanced skills altogether.  It just means that the advanced stuff needs to wait a while. Don't waste time in the early years trying to teach advanced skills to a child who needs that time and energy spent on foundational skills.  That bit of wisdom spans across the board - writing, math, science, music, etc...

[Bluegoat]

I am not discussing the bolded (not sure anyone would argue that a beginning writing program requires another beginning writing program).

 

What I was disagreeing with is the statement that studied dictation/modeling/oral and written narrations automatically translate into excellent English oozing from their pencils. Not for all children.

 

I think that the idea of getting ready for a program is actually kind of unexamined in the background in people's minds.

 

For example, look at the setting of the OP question.  The W&R person said that essentially it is meant to be a beginning composition program, and nothing special needs to be done ahead of time to get ready for it.  Now, obviously the student does actually need to know how to read and write, both something seen on a page and probably to some extent from something held in the mind, but really the program begins by asking very little of the latter.  But the idea is that W&R and whatever grammar program is chosen to accompany it are a starting place for more advanced writing beyond the mechanical act of writing.

 

So what do we make then of the question of whether there is a need of one or more years years of a writing and grammar program to prepare for that?  That isn't just something the OP was thinking either I'd say, it seems to be a common view that without beginning in the years when many are still working on mechanics, kids will be ill preared to make a start.

[8filltheheart]

The purpose of all of this, for an 8yo, is to immerse him in good English and nudge him along into independence ever so slowly. You want the spellings to be visualized properly. You want the grammatical bits to be noticed. You want him to smirk at something humorous.

 

If he is able to do those things with straight dictation, that's fine. If straight dictation frustrates him, that's an indication that he's struggling to see it in his head. I say let him peek. Peeking is concentrated study.

 

The math analogy doesn't fit what is happening with copywork/narration/dictation. imho

 

A better analogy would be the child who grows up watching their dad at his carpentry business. At some point, the child wants to use a hammer. So the dad teaches the child how to use a hammer on a scrap piece of wood with a box of nails. He watches to see that the child is using good technique, and then lets the child hammer away while he continues his work. One day the child, feeling bored with just the hammer now that he's mastered it, decides to ask to try out the measuring tape in hopes of really trying out the saw. The dad takes great pains to teach precise measurement, but just a bit every day. Meanwhile, he's showing the child how he uses the saw safely. Once the child can talk through the way and the reason for everything the dad does with the saw, the dad places the saw in the child's hand. The child carefully cuts the piece of wood that he has been measuring all this time. Fast forward a few years, and the father has taught his son how to use all of the tools in his carpentry shop in this intimate and open fashion. By 12 years old, the child can use any tool and he can even build some small and easy, but useful things! That said, he is now just ready to learn to read a blueprint for serious projects. He is not finished!

 

Copywork/Narration/Dictation are tool builders. Writing instruction does not stop there. These activities give the child the tools needed to then master composition. Just as it's foolish to teach a child how to build a house when they can't handle a hammer, it's foolish to teach "composition" to a child who is still learning to use their pencil.

 

Yes, many students are naturals at that end stage of learning to write. Give them the assignment, and they've got it! Others need the blueprint, verbal explanation of the blueprint, and probably some gentle guidance as they go too. Both of these students need those basic tools; putting ideas into words, putting words down on paper, etc... Both students benefit greatly from having grown up within that carpentry(literary) home, having learned to use the tools of the trade young, slowly, methodically, while immersed in the world of carpentry (literacy). It would be utterly ridiculous to pull a child out of his father's carpentry shop to go to a school to learn wood-working simply b/c the child wasn't learning to build houses early enough. There is no school that can teach the tools of the trade better than a master craftsmen teaching a cherished child.

 

That's a long way of saying that each child needs those tools before they can write well, regardless of their natural bent. Spending that time building up those foundational skills does not mean that we are forgetting advanced skills altogether. It just means that the advanced stuff needs to wait a while. Don't waste time in the early years trying to teach advanced skills to a child who needs that time and energy spent on foundational skills. That bit of wisdom spans across the board - writing, math, science, music, etc...

I don't disagree with your last paragraph, but I still disagree with the main premise that modeling and narration until 14 will automatically lead to excellent writing. Writing is far more than measurement and cutting. What is the difference between a factory produced piece of furniture and a finely crafted masterpiece? The vision of the creator and the careful hand holding the tools. It is one thing to replicate, but another to create. Replicating strengthens skills. The replications become better and more closely resemble the original. But, moving from replicating to master craftsman takes an inward ownership that requires requires moving from reading a blueprint to build a replica to creating the blueprint independently and producing a unique piece of furniture.

 

Excellent writing requires that step. In writing, replication can lead to plagiarism. Mature writing needs to be original.

 

Do they need to be there at 9, 10, 11? No. But, I want my children moving in that direction by 12, 13 and 14. (Honestly, I want my kids heading in this direction before 12.) My goal for my children as they enter high school is that they have found their own voice and can confidently express their own thoughts. High school is about their mastering their art of argument without having to struggle with the skill of self-expression.

 

Throughout high school we still read well crafted essays and discuss how to incorporate techniques into their own writing, but they have been writing independent compositions and mastering their own organized unique writings throughout middle school.

 

This is the path my children have successfully navigated from elementary school to college. You don't have to agree with me, but neither do I need to agree with CM. :)

[SparklyUnicorn]

I took 8's disagreement to be simply that reading good literature does not always equal the child automatically becomes a great writer and that it flows from him.  Some people need more explicit instruction. 

[FO4UR]

I don't disagree with your last paragraph, but I still disagree with the main premise that modeling and narration until 14 will automatically lead to excellent writing.  

 

 

....

 

 

This is the path my children have successfully navigated from elementary school to college. You don't have to agree with me, but neither do I need to agree with CM. :)

 

My main premise is not that "modeling and narration until 14 will automatically lead to excellent writing."  You are misunderstanding what I'm trying to say.  My main premise is that you cannot have a student prepared to learn excellence in writing at age 14 without years of experience with modeling and narration. Modeling and narration are the foundation upon which composition is built.  (It's ok to wait on formal composition until the child is ready.)

 

 

I have a great deal of respect for you.  I think we agree much more than we disagree.  

[8filltheheart]

My main premise is not that "modeling and narration until 14 will automatically lead to excellent writing." You are misunderstanding what I'm trying to say. My main premise is that you cannot have a student prepared to learn excellence in writing at age 14 without years of experience with modeling and narration. Modeling and narration are the foundation upon which composition is built. (It's ok to wait on formal composition until the child is ready.)

 

I think we agree much more than we disagree.

There are probably areas where we both agree and disagree. I love copywork as a teaching tool for young children. I think its value is grossly underestimated by most educators. However, I think reading and studying examples for stylistic techniques they can incorporate into independent compositions is not an unrealistic goal for elementary age kids. (My definition of young is 10ish and under.) That is where we most likely disagree. Once students have mastered basic writing structures, I believe strong writing skills can be developed through their own writing by discussing the strengths and weaknesses of their own words. I think models are excellent for analyzing via discussion and talking about how to incorporate different techniques to improve their writing. I prefer that approach over studied dictation.

 

Fwiw, I just enjoy conversing about these sorts of things. It isn't personal, simply personal preference. :)

[FO4UR]

There are probably areas where we both agree and disagree. I love copywork as a teaching tool for young children. I think its value is grossly underestimated by most educators. However, I think reading and studying examples for stylistic techniques they can incorporate into independent compositions is not an unrealistic goal for elementary age kids. (My definition of young is 10ish and under.) That is where we most likely disagree. Once students have mastered basic writing structures, I believe strong writing skills can be developed through their own writing by discussing the strengths and weaknesses of their own words. I think models are excellent for analyzing via discussion and talking about how to incorporate different techniques to improve their writing. I prefer that approach over studied dictation.

 

Fwiw, I just enjoy conversing about these sorts of things. It isn't personal, simply personal preference. :)

 

FWIW, I enjoy discussing these things too.  Iron sharpens Iron.  I learn something new, think about things from a different perspective and take a sharper critique of my own homeschool every time we chat like this. ;)  :001_smile: