melissamomof5 Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Talk to me about the pros and cons of each approach. I am so torn!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insertcreativenamehere Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 What grade level? Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melissamomof5 Posted May 3, 2016 Author Share Posted May 3, 2016 (edited) I should have mentioned I have used both, but I am just wondering one which is the best approach. This fall I am considering this for 1st, 4th, and 6th. The 6th would be intermediate language lessons or CLE. CLE is more expensive of course and consumable. But there seems to be some reassurance in my kids moving through workbooks. But I also want to trust that MFW has best thought this out and thinks what they recommend is best. Different ends of the spectrum totally! Edited May 3, 2016 by melissamomof3girls Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunshineslp Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 Oh man. This is me! For my 2nd and 3rd graders next year. I can't find many people who are familiar with LLFT. CLE is one I am considering too. It is just so vastly different from the gentle Charlotte Mason approach though. I am actually using FLL right now because I just wanted something more... MORE than LLFT for some reason. I can't put my finger on it really. Homeschooling mama of 4... Preschool 3, preschool 4, 1st, and 2nd:) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ewe Mama Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 I have used LLFT levels 1, 2, and 3 with my youngest. She went through grade 3 when she was technically in 2nd grade, but she didn't want to stop because she So enjoyed it. When she actually began 3rd grade, I started CLE LA with her. I wasn't sure which level to place her in, so I got the first few books of 2 and 3. We looked through it and went with 2nd. (Since we school year-round, this was not a concern; she would catch up quickly.). After two light units, we had had enough. Faith dreaded language lessons and kept asking why we couldn't go back to LLFT. I explained that they didn't have a new level available yet. She asked why we couldn't do the one we already had again. So, we got the Grade 3 LLFT book out again, and she is in her happy place with language arts once more. I just received the 4th grade level and plan to continue with it as long as possible. On the surface, it does not seem like enough on its own, but I think it really and truly is. I am going to do Winston Grammar with her next year, along with LLFT 4, just because I think she will like it and we can make LLFT last longer. :) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ewe Mama Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 I just realized I didn't answer your question about which approach is better. In my case the better approach is the one that allows for my child to find joy in learning. Another child may love the CLE approach and be bored to tears with LLFT. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
featherhead Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 My oldest used CLE for Math, Reading, and LA for grades one and two. For grade three this year she is in public school, but when we homeschool again in fall we will be using LLFT. CLE was not too hard, she got the work done, but we were definitely not enjoying the journey. I think LLFT is something that will bring a bit of joy back into our homeschooling. My grade 2 daughter will also be using it, and for her especially I think CLE would be a disaster right now. She is too creative, loving to write and draw, and I think CLE would just kill that. We will still be using CLE for reading. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insertcreativenamehere Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 (edited) We have used CLE LA from grades 2-5 and I think it is very thorough and complete, but there are some things I didn't like. The grade 2 materials were very heavy on phonics and I already had a good reader, so some of it was redundant. I really like the materials for grades 3 and 4. Grade 5 is also good, but starts to get more difficult and abstract. I am not sure if we will use 6th grade or move to something different. I mentioned to my boys yesterday that I was thinking of switching their LA (because we are considering a public charter) and they both said "But Christian Light is awesome!" I never realized they were so attached to it! :laugh: The best approach will vary by child. What my kids love and thrive with may not be what your kids need. Edited May 3, 2016 by poikar 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
featherhead Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 The best approach will vary by child. What my kids love and thrive with may not be what your kids need. Definitely! While CLE isn't the best for my two oldest girls, I would have LOVED it as a child. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbollin Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 I've not used CLE. The reason I didn't pick it is that they do a lot of diagramming from what I saw in samples. That method is not something I wanted to focus on as a end. I get it that it's a means for some. But my oldest is in college and only diagrammed a few sentences in 7th grade with what mfw sold for that. Since the philosophy in the CM approach versus CLE approach matched more of what I wanted to do, it made sense to do what I wanted. Oldest ended up in college with A's in composition. Middle gal's best ACT subscore was in English. If you read my siggy you'll see we're mfw junkies. Does that mean it's the "best approach?" ha ha ha ha ha. no. It's a road that got us where we needed and wanted to be. Does that mean CLE is the best approach. ha ha ha ha ha no. It's a road that can get someone where they want to be and we ended up at the same place. one will click better in a family based on time available to teach, and ways to learn. goals to reach. I have mfw's lang. lessons for today. grade 2 and 3 are basically PLL (serl's primary language lessons) with some updates for envelopes and a few things to make it easier to use (such as taking the original PLL lesson 2 and making that shorter and over 2 days instead of one, or giving options for observation lessons that are obvious, but needed to be pointed out) Grade 4 of LLfT (mfw) is based mostly on ILL (serl's intermediate lang lessons). However, order of lessons are moved around. grade 4 is not just a reprint of "part 1 of ILL" , but takes lessons from part 3 (the 6th grade year) especially in the parts of speech lessons and moves those to 4th grade year. My family was helping to pilot the grade 4 level with our youngest who is a special learning case. When, my oldest and middle used ILL in 6th grade, it was in the context of using it in mfw curriculum, which means English/language arts was not just from ILL. so it adds in the bits and pieces that aren't covered in writing, narration, copywork, memory work etc. so keep that in mind if you're using a mfw curriculum in the 5 year (investigate) cycle. Of course you can use CLE if it just works better in your child's needs and you are mindful of not overloading the day. That can even happen in some days in mfw with their stuff. hope some of that long term down the road experience helps a bit. doing it the mfw path was a good one for my oldest who is doing very well in college. middle gal who has some struggles also exceeded my expectations in all of that. Nothing against CLE's approach. It just wasn't what my heart and mind were set on following in terms of how to organize instruction in grammar/usage/mechanics, etc. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbollin Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 Oh man. This is me! For my 2nd and 3rd graders next year. I can't find many people who are familiar with LLFT. CLE is one I am considering too. It is just so vastly different from the gentle Charlotte Mason approach though. I am actually using FLL right now because I just wanted something more... MORE than LLFT for some reason. I can't put my finger on it really. Homeschooling mama of 4... Preschool 3, preschool 4, 1st, and 2nd:) If you find people who used Serl's Primary Language lessons, then you can find out about MFW's LLFT for grades 2 and 3. It's the same thing. MFW didn't create from scratch. Some lessons were changed to fit modern times. such as instead of give names (nouns) of farm equipment, it was list parts of computer. same lesson. or current US postal standards. that kind of stuff. or they changed up lesson 2 so it wasn't so scary on day 2 of school to write ALL of that. people freaked out that the original PLL lesson had the early second grader doing some of that as dictation, so mfw took it to just copywork. and that makes it "easier" on lesson 2 of the book when the child didn't know how to spell squirrel yet. (most of us in the old way of it just spelled out squirrel for child to copy and didn't worry on it.) Some poems where changed. Format and size of book was changed to just be easier to open and keep open. larger font is great for younger child (and old moms like me. giggle) what you are probably experience in liking FLL is that it has the parts of speech focus that PLL (aka MFW's llft) did not. That is one of the big differences in FLL vs PLL. plus the script aspect of FLL. long long ago, before SWB wrote FLL, the recommendation was Serl's PLL. hope some of that trivia is fun for you to learn about. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meadowlark Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 Well, I've tried both FLL and LLFT. We did LLFT in 2nd grade, and I felt like it was too light. This was with my oldest though, and I was kind of a wreck fearing I'd "screw him up". So this year for 3rd, we're doing FLL. We all really dislike it. It's way too auditory and quite honestly, I don't think my 2nd/3rd graders really NEED To know all about prepositions quite yet. I think I like the gentle approach better. Having said that, I don't know if I could go back to LLFT either because I didn't really love that either. I didn't feel like there was enough...kind of like "look at this, what do you think?' I wanted more in general. With FLL, it was just too much and very auditory. I am visual, my kids are visual. I'm still searching for what I want to do next year so will be following. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunshineslp Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 Well, I've tried both FLL and LLFT. We did LLFT in 2nd grade, and I felt like it was too light. This was with my oldest though, and I was kind of a wreck fearing I'd "screw him up". So this year for 3rd, we're doing FLL. We all really dislike it. It's way too auditory and quite honestly, I don't think my 2nd/3rd graders really NEED To know all about prepositions quite yet. I think I like the gentle approach better. Having said that, I don't know if I could go back to LLFT either because I didn't really love that either. I didn't feel like there was enough...kind of like "look at this, what do you think?' I wanted more in general. With FLL, it was just too much and very auditory. I am visual, my kids are visual. I'm still searching for what I want to do next year so will be following. Check out Cottage Press Primer books and also ELTL [emoji4] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
................... Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 FWIW, we loved PLL and ILL...however it was not the best decision for our kids. My husband is dyslexic and both of my kids are unsuual, visual spatial learners and my dd is probably also dyslexic and has focus issues as well.... Both times, with both kids, using PLL really sent them backwards in their ability to write and spell. They needed the constant practice and review, and "over-learning" or repetition for things to sink in. Unfortunately, it was a big mistake doing CM style LA, and they would have been better had we stuck with Abeka or CLE from pre-K through 4th grade. At about 5th grade, Once reading, writing, and spelling are established, then incorporating some CM syle LA makes sense, since you are moving from the details and the skills, to the big picture. I know that many people enjoy the more relaxed, big picture, sweet approach and it even works for their kids. But, unfortunately, you can't really tell till after a year or two, and then it's not too late, but it's certainly very difficult to backtrack and re-learn the skills and practice that would have been better cemented earlier. So, I am a HUGE proponent of intensive phonics, with workbooks and TM's or it being in the book like CLE and ABeka. (although CLE's learning to read includes more sight words so I really recommend Abeka.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
................... Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 PS, if you wanted something with a more CM flavor but more rigor, you should look at ELTL, though I do not have personal experience. 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.