Thoughts on when/how to start grammar/writing? FLL vs R&S opinions?

[mommysanders]

I'm looking ahead and trying to figure out a plan of attack for teaching grammar and writing. These are probably the most intimidating subjects to me since they are my weakest subjects. I have read WTM and also listened to Susan Wise Bauer's audio lecture on writing for elementary years. However, I am still uncertain of when to start and which curriculum/method to choose. I seem to be drawn to FLL for the scripted nature and also because I like the methods described by Susan. I also have heard great things about Rod and Staff, which is recommended in WTM, but I notice FLL starts in 1st (and some people start it in K) and R&S starts in 2nd.

 

Can someone help me understand the differences/similarities between the two? Is R&S also scripted, or does it need prep work? Are the methods similar? Any opinions on when to start teaching grammar and writing?

 

Here's the deal with my oldest. He's a very talented just-turned-5 year old. He reads fluently on his own and writes often. He is eager to write letters, stories, etc and loves learning. Even though he's young, I wonder if I should start him on some grammar? If I don't start teaching him, I'm worried he will build bad habits. However, since he's my first and I've never taught grammar before, I am unsure of myself.

 

I would love some thoughts/advice from some more experienced folks here.

 

Thanks!

Sarah

[HomeAgain]

We teach grammar loosely starting after reading fluently and beginning to write sentences.  We're slowly working our way through Grammar Land with a Montessori symbol based activity work.  Each of the mini-symbols are kept in a small envelope with their picture on the front and the character from the book is a standup cutout displayed at all times.  About once or twice a week as he does his copywork, we place the grammar symbols of the chapters we've read above the words in his work.  By next year we'll introduce diagramming, replacing the symbols with colored lines to get him started, and then in the 3rd year actually start studying grammar more formally and diagramming more traditionally.

 

I have no idea about R&S, but I just know an extra workbook wouldn't be wise for my own kid at this point.  Keeping his writing lessons short and doing as much hands on as we can helps him more.

[Faithful_Steward]

Go with SWB's suggestions. FLL 1-4 followed by R&S. FLL has more memory work and is just overall a lot more pleasant for a young child. R&S is open-and-go and thorough, but it can be dry and tedious, especially if you use it year after year after year.

[FO4UR]

For a little guy who is already reading and writing for fun, I would go with FLL 1 and start in 1st grade.  Go at his pace. If he just snaps up language skills, he might zip through memorizing all of the parts of speech and such.

 

Delaying grammar won't hurt him though.  He could probably do FLL 1 & 2 in 2nd grade if he's a language-loving guy. (Or spread FLL 1-4 throughout 2nd-4th grades.) That would be an option.  Delaying grammar would give time in the day during 1st grade for solidifying other skills. (But FLL doesn't take long.  15min/lesson.)

 

FLL is scripted, and I think much easier for mom to learn along with the child than other programs. After doing FLL1-4, you can switch to R&S or something else. There are all sorts of options, but don't worry about those for another 4 years.

 

R&S is very dry. very dry.  :closedeyes:

 

I have the old FLL 1&2 combined.  The poetry, narrations, and copywork that focuses on the child's life (names, address, etc.) is good stuff.  The review of the parts of speech gets repetitive, but I found that I could just say "Who can tell me what a verb is?" a few times per week once the definition was learned, and so reduce some of the lesson.

[Ellie]

I'm looking ahead and trying to figure out a plan of attack for teaching grammar and writing. These are probably the most intimidating subjects to me since they are my weakest subjects. I have read WTM and also listened to Susan Wise Bauer's audio lecture on writing for elementary years. However, I am still uncertain of when to start and which curriculum/method to choose. I seem to be drawn to FLL for the scripted nature and also because I like the methods described by Susan. I also have heard great things about Rod and Staff, which is recommended in WTM, but I notice FLL starts in 1st (and some people start it in K) and R&S starts in 2nd.

 

Can someone help me understand the differences/similarities between the two? Is R&S also scripted, or does it need prep work? Are the methods similar? Any opinions on when to start teaching grammar and writing?

 

Here's the deal with my oldest. He's a very talented just-turned-5 year old. He reads fluently on his own and writes often. He is eager to write letters, stories, etc and loves learning. Even though he's young, I wonder if I should start him on some grammar? If I don't start teaching him, I'm worried he will build bad habits. However, since he's my first and I've never taught grammar before, I am unsure of myself.

 

I would love some thoughts/advice from some more experienced folks here.

 

Thanks!

Sarah

 

R&S starts in second, because first graders are just learning to read and write (as in penmanship).

 

Yes, R&S is dry. Some people like it anyway. :-)

 

Rod and Staff's English texts (and most subjects after first or second grade) are written to the children. Many years ago, R&S did a survey of the schools which use R&S materials; most of them were one-room, multi-grade schools, with only one teacher, who didn't have time to lecture and do projects and all that; Often they only have time to do a quick correction in class and make the next assignment. So they began rewriting the texts, such that *everything* the children need to know is right there in their textbooks. They also wrote new teacher manuals, which include not only the answers and copies of the children's texts but also oral presentation/discussion; teachers who have more time can teach the lesson and then make the assignments; there is no new information i that oral class time, though; it's still the same stuff that's in the student texts. It just adds warm fuzzy face time to a subject which can be dry. :-) (The oral classtime in the first three grade levels of math are *not* optional; just wanted to clear that up, lol.)

 

So, if you wanted to hand the student text to your child and say, "Here, do this," you could; or you could spend a few minutes teaching from the teacher manual. Your choice.

 

FTR, you do not have to teach grammar to such a young child. You can easily correct any errors without doing formal grammar instruction. There are only 8 parts of speech and some thingummies like gerunds; IMHO, native speakers of English do not need to study grammar for 12 years.

[SilverMoon]

I really enjoy doing FLL 1/2 with my little ones. It's nearly all oral and quite gentle. Those definitions and chants get memorized with such ease, and lay a sturdy foundation for meatier grammar studies down the road. It's quite easy to speed up for kids who don't appreciate slow and steady or spread out for kids who may need extra time for things to soak in.

 

We part ways at FLL 3. Even with a workbook the course is completely dependent on the scripting in the TM. The DC can't pick up the book and do any part of it on their own. My 15yo used it the first year it was written. It taught the grammar very well, but she couldn't stand that book by the time we finished it. I started the next kid on it and we bailed 1/3 through. Now we just switch to R&S 3 right after FLL 1/2.

 

My oldest used FLL 1/2 before FLL 3 and 4 were published. We floundered with this and that until landing with R&S in 5th, and I promptly kicked myself for not just listening to older TWTM recommendations and starting R&S in third. He used it all the way to high school.

 

R&S is totally open and go and requires no extra prep from you. The student texts have the new concept taught to the student, exercises for the new concept, and usually a review section where old concepts are spiraled through to keep them fresh. Starting in book 4 or 5 there's an oral/class exercise section, and a written exercise section, followed by a review section. The oral drill is very easy to run through to make sure they're really understanding what they're doing, and then they can do the written drill on their own. The TM will hold your hand the whole way, and let you learn this with your DC if needed. There's a small copy of every student page, an optional oral quiz of old concepts, a scripted plan for teaching the new concept (also optional, since it's already presented in the student text), and a full answer key. The workbook they sell is just extra practice and doesn't replace the exercises in the book; it's easily skipped altogether. There's also a test booklet, that many homeschoolers also skip. We barely ever touched the workbook, but we did use the tests. LOTS of options here. Pick the parts that are right for you and yours. My oldest especially did most of the books orally, the oral drill and written drill sections, putting diagrams on a whiteboard. He had a separate composition book, and balked hard at writing for many years. My current 8yo reads the R&S English 3 lesson to herself, discusses the concept and exercises with me, then writes out her answers in a notebook. We skip the extra review; it would be redundant for her.

[Cake and Pi]

If your 5yo is reading very well and picks up on things quickly, I shouldn't think he'd have any trouble at all jumping in to FLL1 in the fall, or even right now.  It's very gentle.  My DS#3 started FLL1 a couple of months before he turned 4yo and it was perfectly appropriate for him.  On the other hand, my DS#1 didn't start FLL1 until 2nd grade, and I don't believe postponing grammar did him any harm.  DH and I are also engineers (or, well, I was before becoming a SAHM), and I feel similar to you about grammar and writing.

 

Admittedly, we're only ~1/2 way through FLL2, so I can't speak to what the later levels are like, and I don't have any experience with R&S.  I guess that's my disclaimer that my perspective isn't the most complete. 

[Mrs Twain]

I use R&S starting in 2nd grade. It is an excellent program, and my children know grammar very well.

 

The first several years of R&S are very gentle, but then it ramps up in difficulty. My middle schooler (and I) are quite challenged with the upper level books, so I don't my kids before second grade in R&S English.

 

For K and 1st grades, I had my children write journals. I bought the paper from Miller Pads and Paper with the blank part at the top and lines at the bottom (or printed journal paper from the Internet). My kids wrote one or more sentences and drew a picture about the topic. I mainly wanted to teach them to start the sentence with a capital letter and put appropriate punctuation at end. I also corrected the sentences if they were not complete and all spelling errrors. If the child wanted to know how to spell a word while he was writing the journal, he brought me a piece of scrap paper or small white board for me to write the word out. Then he would copy it onto his a paper.

 

With one child in 1st grade, I used Growing with Grammar as a workbook-type grammar exercise to supplement. With another child in 1st grade, I used CLE. I did not like my either program very much, but of the two I preferred GWG.

[mommysanders]

Thank you, all! Very good thoughts and advice.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fourisenough]

I recommend going to the analytical grammar website and reading about their approach to teaching grammar. You might even buy AG to teach yourself grammar since you feel this is a weak area for you. I agree with Ellie up thread who said you don't have to teach grammar every year for 12 years. That being said, I do own and have used all levels of FLL. I think it is a good program and my language-loving early readers have all done it easily and with joy. But I don't think it is necessary or right for every student. I have looked at R & S before, but it is just too religious for my taste. YMMV.

 

In terms of what to teach your child now: I would (probably without a curriculum) teach him that a complete sentence needs a naming part (subject) and a telling part (predicate), must begin with a capital letter and end with an end mark, and it must make complete sense. I'd probably also explain that there are four types of sentences: telling, asking, exclaiming, and commanding. And finally, I would make sure he knows that names begin with capital letters. You can point out these things in his own writing or in sentences from books you're reading. When you ask him questions, help him respond in complete sentences. The rest I'd leave until first-grade or later.

 

IMHO Teaching grammar/writing at the K/1st level is a very natural extension of the speaking and reading you do while parenting.

[waa510]

Go with SWB's suggestions. FLL 1-4 followed by R&S. FLL has more memory work and is just overall a lot more pleasant for a young child. R&S is open-and-go and thorough, but it can be dry and tedious, especially if you use it year after year after year.

 

:iagree:  I've been through FLL 1-4 and now in R&S 5 with my eldest and I would go with FLL first, personally. I found FLL to be just enough..very gentle but still had a depth to it with its poetry memorization, preposition list, definitions and verb chants. At Level 3 of FLL, the student has a work text which my little DD just *loves*. They are both very different kids and this sequence is working really well for both! R&S is very dry, but thorough in its presentation. I feel like my Dd wouldn't have had the maturity to deal with the dry grammar instruction any younger than when we started it. No regrets here. :) 

 

Your son sounds a lot like my oldest who was an early fluent reader although her writing lagged with her slower fine motor skill development. Anyway, I also had the same fears of picking up bad habits as she was *so* eager to learn and kept pushing me to do more schoolwork with her. FLL is so gentle and fun you could definitely start it now, but don't be afraid to slow down or speed up as he needs to.

[8filltheheart]

I start teaching my children grammar at a young age in the context of creating pictures with words.

 

Here is an example of how I do it. http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/239259-bringing-karens-mention-of-essay-writing-to-a-new-thread/?p=2363522

[Miss Tick]

We are definitely a family where slow and steady persistence works well. We have used FLL all the way through, with tweaking to avoid unnecessary repetition. It sounds like her follow-on program ALL is back in the pipeline, so would likely be another option for you after FLL if you want to keep going down the SWB path.

[Sarah0000]

I've got an early, natural reader as well and we've just been doing the poetry memorization from FLL (you can find free printables online of the poems) and playing Silly Sentences to learn very basic parts of speech. He learns basic punctuation through copywork and reading aloud.