Haiku Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 I have long been planning to use Primary/Intermediate Language Lessons by Emma Serl with my kids. However, I have been reading that, in addition to being "classic," a fair amount of content in Serl's books is archaic. Queen's Language Lessons looks like the same idea with a more modern flavor. However, we are not Christian and I don't want something that is very religiously based. Can someone please compare Queen's and Serl's for me? 1. Do you find Serl's content archaic? 2. Do you find Queen's content to be mostly Christian? 3. Is Serl's content mostly overtly Christian? TIA! Tara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisa Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 I've used both. Queen's is a workbook, Serl's is not. Serl's is older, but still good, and its not archaic. I wouldn't say either one is overtly Christian. Although I've only used Queen's in the early elementary, not the older ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiku Posted October 1, 2008 Author Share Posted October 1, 2008 Which did you like better and why? Tara :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trivium Academy Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 (edited) We're using Primary Language Lessons by Emma Serl, updated by Margot Davidson. Hillside Education publishes it, there are only 4 lessons that have ANY type of Catholic flavoring out of 164. It has full color artwork and the language has been updated. It is not overtly Christian either. From the author- "This latest book in the Lingua Mater series is a reprint of the 1911 version of Emma Serl's Primary Language Lessons. While keeping the flavor of the original book, we have made some changes to make the language more in keeping with today's English usage. We also changed some of the pictures and poems in hopes of making the book more interesting to young readers. Since this book is intended as a complete third grade course, or as a two year course for second and third grade, we have made some of the exercises near the end of the book more appropriate for the end of third grade. These selections are longer and provide more opportunities for writing. By the time the sudent has progressed through the course, he will be well equipped to handle these tasks. The beauty of this book is the balance between oral and written work. The exercises are intended to inspire conversation with the student about the use of language and to provide the child with practice using proper grammatical forms. This can be a very enjoyable time for teacher and student as they explore the beauty of the our language." --Margot Davidson, August 2005 There are two samples at the Hillside website and the answer key. http://hillsideeducation.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=6&products_id=18 If you wanted to purchase it - http://www.emmanuelbooks.com/product_detail.cfm?ID=718&OID= Queen's is a workbook, PLL is a noncosumable spiral book that lays flat. My dd8 writes her lessons on notebook paper and this has not been a problem at all. We'll use Queen's Language Lessons for the Very Young for my ds4's first grade year then do PLL but I'm not going to have him write in LLVY either, there's not enough room. Here's a review I did on LLVY when I received it. http://triviumacademy.blogspot.com/2008/02/mail-came.html Hope this helps! I cannot compare Serl's original text, I've seen it briefly but once I realized Davidson's updated version was available, I didn't give the original text another thought. The only thing that might tilt the scales back in the Serl direction is that Lost Classic Books has a TM now for PLL and ILL. :) Edited October 1, 2008 by Trivium Academy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat in MI Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 I have both and think they are both very good. I prefer Queen's because it is easier for us to use. Just open and go for the most part. PLL requires more help from me, has a lot more writing and the poems are longer for memorization. Even my dd who is a very good student has problems with this book. So while they are both very good, we prefer Queen's. HTH Blessings, Pat P.S. The TM from Lost Classics is very good if you decide to go the Serl's route. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momee Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Okay, does anyone have the link for Queens. Our method isn't quite "cuttin' it". TIA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat in MI Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Yep, it is: http://www.queenhomeschool.com . Look under their Language Lessons Series. They have good samples of the Language books online. I will say that this is not as rigorous as something like Rod and Staff, but for at least one of my children this is better. He is getting english lessons, but it is not overwhelming him. I have been adding Daily Grams along with the Language Lessons. Blessings, Pat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiku Posted October 1, 2008 Author Share Posted October 1, 2008 What does it mean for a grammar program to be "rigorous"? Tara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trivium Academy Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Rigorous grammar (to me) is synonymous with formal grammar, a in-depth study of the concepts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.