If You Use "STUFF-y" ELA curriculums

[Gil]

This is not an attack or a gripe, I'm just genuinely curious about these "Stuff-y" curriculums.

Stuff = anything that's not a book (wkbk, txtbk, or manual)--so flashcards, cut outs, game boards, tiles, tokens, apps, cards, games, posters, specialized manipulatives, etc...

If you use a curriculum that has a lot of "stuff" involved, what's the appeal?
Do you actually use all of the stuff?
Do you feel each component is necessary?
Do you find yourself dropping some of the "stuff"?
Do you find yourself adding in additional "stuff"?
Do your kids like the "stuff"?
Did it hold their attention long-term or did the appeal wear-off fairly quickly?
How essential is the "stuff"? If you lose some of it, does the whole system collapse or can you make do without it?
Have you noticed which types of the stuff are most beneficial to your kids learning in ELA?

[KSera]

I have tried to use a couple with kids that I thought they might be beneficial with, but it never works out here. We like streamlined and I think it just gets annoying to both of us to deal with the “stuff”. Sometimes it’s more me and sometimes it’s more the kid (I had a couple who had a particularly strong dislike for using math manipulatives, despite me thinking they were useful). Whether we can do the same thing just without the “stuff” depends on the program. 
 

I do have a couple web based things I have used that were useful and not fussy (since you mention apps as “stuff”). I didn’t like using anything on a computer with my older kids when they were young, but I kind of got over that for my younger ones and see it as just a convenient way of displaying some thing that would otherwise require lots and lots of books. Which is more to juggle. The Progressive Phonics website, for example. Those little books worked very well for my youngest. Also math fact drill on xtramath.com. That works better for us than flashcards.

 

[Penderwink]

We have HWT for handwriting. There are wooden pieces to build letters and a little chalk board. We also have the dry wipe stamper board. We do use the stuff. I don’t think it’s necessary, but it’s nice. My kid likes it. It helps him break down letters to lines and curves. He is not a kid who would sit and do a workbook writting letters again and again, but he can handle a build the letter + chalkboard + one page writing letters + color the small pictures on the page. We’ve been using the stuff we got for this for more than two years now, and it’s still appealing to him. It slows me down too, and keeps my expectations reasonable.

We had AAR pre-reading, so poster, flashcards, Ziggy puppet, and we also used the HWT letters/playdoh cards.  Was any of it necessary? No. But he liked it, and I have fond memories of the routine of singing the alphabet song while Ziggy pointed the letters on the poster. We didn’t use the flashcards much, and we mostly did our own letter crafts rather than the workbook ones (e.g. clay, cutting out letters, sewing letters). His retention of this material has been great, and I am really seeing the benefits as we move onto reading. It kept things slow and light and fun.

We are now on AAR reading. It has little magnetic tiles to build words with. Those are a hit. The flashcards add variety but we don’t do lots of memorizing them. The worksheets/game cards/flipbooks do add variety at a point when reading is really hard work. None of it is necessary, of course. You can pick and choose without making the whole thing fall apart. We are mid-way through AAR1 and got diverted onto reading Oxford Reading Tree books and he suddenly took off because he likes the stories. I expect we will return at some point and finish the curriculum at high speed. We also have AAR2 waiting, but he’s kind of figured it out in the meantime.

I cannot handle too many stuff-y curriculums. We will not do something like AAS until the reading doesn’t use so many bits. We also won’t use a lot of Cusinaire rod/base ten blocks until other topics need less stuff.

In terms of how beneficial this all was - it’s tricky to tell. I do think he has the basics down really solidly, and it’s put him in a good place to really take off once he is ready. But he is also the kind of kid who would have rebelled or cried if I’d tried to push him through the plainer curriculums. 

 

[Clarita]

We use AAR reading that's probably my stuffiest curriculum. We didn't use all the stuff, but each of my children used different stuff. (Well none used the letter tiles.) DS used the flash cards and fluency sheets a lot. DD loved the silly activities. The readers are really well done. (In the other post you said phonics readers are just going to be boring. Well my children actually found the AAR readers quite entertaining.)  They have a good mix of genres and themes, also they are genuinely funny and entertaining.

What I love about AAR is the teacher's guide and their readers. I like how the curriculum doesn't just teach phonics but also teaches about parts of stories, how to find information in reading, types of books, etc. I did not use the script nature of the guide I just read the guide and then taught my children. The teacher's manual was organized well enough that this was doable.  

In terms of necessity, it comes back to how I want my homeschool to look. I want my children engaged in their education, meaning I actually want them to be a part of the conversation in how they are learning and what they are learning. Since ELA is not my strong suit, I need curriculum in this area that has a bunch of bells and whistles so that my children can see the point of the whole endeavor.  Math and science are my strong suit and in that case I do feel confident taking anything and I know I can make it work for the students I have in front of me. Since I'm so lopsided in my abilities, I can also see what a fantastic, passionate teacher can bring to the table on a school subject vs. a get it done teacher. It makes me feel guilty when I can't make every subject look like that.  So I'll admit I do strive to be a fantastic, passionate teacher for every subject I am forcing my children to study.

Is any of that necessary? No. Plenty of children do perfectly fine just being taught, even thinking school is boring and just necessary. My husband and I both ended up pretty well without personalized educations that were full and engaging. It doesn't preclude us from wanting to provide that for our children. 

 

[Clarita]

I want to add that this works for my family. I don't know that it'll work for everyone. My children are very self motivated and have goals. I don't think every child is that way. They are willing to work really hard for those goals, often times more than what would be "appropriate" for me to expect. 

Nature vs. Nurture my children come from a line of workaholics as well so, if the above sounds like too much it may very well be too much. 

[HomeAgain]

Our first grammar curriculum was "stuff"  It had cartoon character cut outs, a lap book, worksheets, and tiny markers to match the characters.  DS loved it.  It worked very well for him because the focus was not on writing, but the method let his work naturally take shape into a more standard format.  Plus, the visual reinforcement solidified grammar concepts at an early age, so by the time he was in 2nd/3rd, he could work well with diagramming and foreign languages.

I made cards for our phonics program.  It was important that he had agency, that he had the ability to pull out materials and work independently or take his own time with the information.  I wanted him to be able to have words on recall to build sentences and stories.  We ended up moving to the magnetic alphabet after, and that was worth it, too.

 

I think books are fine, but there's a reason why multisensory work is the gold standard.  The more senses involved, the more a child is working with the material.  Books offer one way, and if that's all that's available, that's fine.  But having a few curated tools is definitely preferable so that if a child does need them, they're there are ready.

[Clarita]

1 hour ago, HomeAgain said:

I think books are fine, but there's a reason why multisensory work is the gold standard.  The more senses involved, the more a child is working with the material.  Books offer one way, and if that's all that's available, that's fine.  But having a few curated tools is definitely preferable so that if a child does need them, they're there are ready.

Along these lines, even some curricula that is "just a book" often will have blurbs (either in the intro or elsewhere in the text) that suggest giving students interesting books to read, make some flashcards, or use some type of moveable alphabet (may even be simple paper). It seems to me some of the "stuff-y" curricula is just packaging it all together instead of having the teacher find/make these things on their own. Both Ordinary Parent's Guide and Writing Road to Reading talk about using books, flashcards and letters even though technically you just buy a book.

7 hours ago, Gil said:

If you lose some of it, does the whole system collapse or can you make do without it?

No the system does not collapse, if your child loves that one manipulative often you can just make a substitute for that piece or some programs let you get replacements (All About Reading will replace your missing letter pieces if you wish.)

[wendyroo]

We used All About Spelling that is based around letter tiles. We could never handle the finicky physical tiles, but all of my kids did use the tile app for a while before they were ready to transition to just writing their spelling words and dictations in a notebook. They were just ready for spelling before their handwriting and pencil stamina were ready to support that learning...so the tiles were a good stepping stone.

My youngest started with AAS, but really struggled, and has since switched to Spelling You See. That has mandatory colored pencils, which might make it qualify as stuff-y. But I actually make it a bit more stuff-y because my DD, who probably has stealth dyslexia, needs extra handholding and review. So I have created posters and flashcards to supplement the program for her. We also have 3-D cut-out wooden letters and sandpaper letters for her to feel and trace and reference when she is trying to avoid reversals in her writing. But writing is still difficult enough for her, that most composition is done digitally using talk to type, which makes any book-based curriculum more stuff-y.

[EKS]

I think the only thing of this sort that we used was All About Spelling.  I used it because I was desperate to find something that would move my dyslexic son's spelling level beyond the fifth grade.  I'm not sure if it worked, but he is now 28yo and his spelling is good enough.

My son tolerated the program for almost an entire school year and then informed me that it was for babies and he wasn't going to do it anymore.  He was I think 13 at the time.  We never did formal spelling after that.

The stuff drove me kind of nuts.

[Lori D.]

NO "stuff-y" ELA program used here.

But, in answer to these questions:
 

22 hours ago, Gil said:

1. Do you find yourself adding in additional "stuff"?
2. Do your kids like the "stuff"?
3. Did it hold their attention long-term or did the appeal wear-off fairly quickly?
4. Have you noticed which types of the stuff are most beneficial to your kids learning in ELA? 

1. Yes -- in the first 2 years or so of early elementary, we did use some hands-on supplements 1-2x/week that were useful in support of learning. That included things like magnetic letters, plus several LA-based board games and card games. We also made a few of our own games/activities.

2. Yes, BUT -- we did the hands-on supplements as fun extra just 1-2x/week, so both DSs continued to enjoy playing board/card games.

3. Yes, BUT -- since we only used the supplements 1-2x/week, and I rotated through them to match up with what we were learning that week, and we only used those particular supplements for a year or so, the use of hands-on items wasn't often enough/long to have "appeal wear off".

4. DS#2 with mild LDs did not mind using the hands-on items (mostly magnetic letters), and did better in that first year when he could actually manipulate and move around the tactile/tangible items as part of supplemental learning activities. And using board/card games took the stress and pressure off so he actually absorb the concepts.

Overall, yes -- the hands-on items we used for that limited time in early elementary was useful, worthwhile, and continued to be enjoyable (since it was supplement and not every day).

Edited July 19 by Lori D.

[Xahm]

The letter tiles in AAS/AAR were very helpful to my kids who was writing averse but needed more ways to interact than just looking at things. We did include writing still, but I didn't want to make learning to read and spell unnecessarily miserable, so we kept it minimal and increased it slowly. Now he's still doing AAS, but it's just a whiteboard and marker, pencil and notebook kind of thing.

My next one was remarkably quick to learn to read but was young for grade, so he liked colorful things, games, etc, and I didn't feel a need to be efficient since he was ahead of grade level expectations. At this point he will be sad if we are home and don't use the AAS tiles but is fine if we are out and about and just use pencil and paper. 

The main non-book thing that I've appreciated for LA is having the alphabet clearly viable whenever my younger elementary students are writing. They frequently check which direction the letters go in order to get it right. 

We use more "stuff" for math in the early years, but I assume that's normal.

[ScoutTN]

I used AAS, but not exactly as it is written. I have a natural speller, for whom I did a super-abridged version. I also have a poor speller who is a get ‘er done sort of student, who needed the detail and the multi-sensory aspect. For him we did the first few levels as written, then adapted, using less stuff. 

No stuff here for reading, writing, or grammar. 

[Clarita]

I will admit I had a horrible attitude about the letter tiles for All About Reading. DS might have used the tiles for longer if I had a better attitude. DD just wanted to write so she didn't want the letter tiles. 

[Momof4sweetkids]

I find I end up not using the stuff. We use AAR and AAS but often read the words straight out of the book or on a whiteboard instead of the tiles. My oldest doesn't like math manipulatives but I think my second will.

That being said, I did just buy a Spanish learning curriculum (Homeschool Languages) that came with a globe, board games, puppet, flashcards and book. I'm hoping I keep up with the "stuff" for this to keep it fun.

[almondbutterandjelly]

My dd was a visual picture learner.  We used Abeka for 1st through 3rd grade.  I absolutely needed the "stuff," which included many sets of colorful, picture-filled flash cards.  

Throughout the entirety of her schooling, I used posters and bulletin board sets to give visual images to hang her knowledge on.  I taught figurative language with those, at least initially.  Super Duper Publications made great flashcards, too, of idioms, or past tense verbs, or what have you.  Those were great.  Oh, and they had a great set of word roots flash cards that we used.

Also, from a young age through even high school, we used red file folders to make "book reports" of a sort, where I bought all those fun shaped notepads from the teacher store and she filled them out: On the pencil note paper, she wrote the author's name.  On the globe note paper, the setting.  On the red flag, the problem or conflict.  On the people cutouts, the characters.  Main characters on the bigger ones, lesser characters on the smaller ones.  On the train engine, car, and caboose, she wrote the beginning, middle, and end of the story/book.  On the trophy cutout, she wrote the Conclusion.  On the ant cut out, she wrote the "ant"- agonist.  Stuff like that.  Those were fun for both of us.

[AnneGG]

We use a very bland LA curriculum specifically so I can add variety to it.
 

I just finished making a grammar escape room and prefix scavenger hunt for us to do this week. Last week we had poetry picnic in the living room, complete paper plate poetry writing and themed snacks to teach poetic elements. 

I’m in deep with the “stuff”. And we all love it. 

😂 

 

[Gil]

So, for those among us who get great results utilizing STUFF-y ELA programs with their students what do you think makes something useful vs 3D busy work?

In your experience, what's a STUFF-y curriculum that's done poorly?
In your experience, what's a STUFF-y curriculum that's done well?

Is it the tight integration of the Stuff that makes the curriculum well done?

What element of STUFF do you find most beneficial?
What element of STUFF do you find most versatile?

[Clarita]

2 hours ago, Gil said:

So, for those among us who get great results utilizing STUFF-y ELA programs with their students what do you think makes something useful vs 3D busy work?

The simple answer is to remember to teach the child in front of me and not the curriculum.

Second is to read the introduction and beginning methodology stuff in the teacher guide. A lot of the stuff-y curriculums don't actually expect you do it all. Sometimes they'll tell you how to evaluate your child to see how much of the stuff to do. Often it'll tell you what all the stuff is there for and sometimes how to tweak it for the needs of your child (some of the tweaks are for struggling children and some of the tweaks are for children who need less practice).

Even non-stuffy curriculum can be busy work if you put doing the curriculum over teaching the child. 

2 hours ago, Gil said:

In your experience, what's a STUFF-y curriculum that's done poorly?
In your experience, what's a STUFF-y curriculum that's done well?

Curriculum done well vs done poorly I can judge by the front matter. Whether they think I can should just follow them page by page vs. whether they'll give me a clue where they are going with all their lessons. There shouldn't be any "magic" involved. It can be magical to your child but it shouldn't be mysterious to you.

Usefulness of any given stuff I think always depends on the child. I think you already know the baseline of what you need there (from your boys). 

[Rosie_0801]

The stuff in CSMP was invaluable here. 

Stuff of the cut and paste sort, lap books or any of that, would have been of no use here past the scissor skills/ fine motor stage. For some kids, that sort of thing makes them pay attention. For some it makes them tune out. Some will go back and re-read their little book over and over, others will leave it under their bed for years.

A mate of mine was on about wanting to buy frog shaped objects to use as counters because they were so cute. We just used c-rods or whatever was lying around or cheap from the local shop because we have low cuteness needs.

[Lori D.]

4 hours ago, Clarita said:

The simple answer is to remember to teach the child in front of me and not the curriculum.
Second is to read the introduction and beginning methodology stuff in the teacher guide. ...
Even non-stuffy curriculum can be busy work if you put doing the curriculum over teaching the child...

Yes!

4 hours ago, Clarita said:

... Usefulness of any given stuff I think always depends on the child. I think you already know the baseline of what you need there (from your boys). 

Absolutely agree with "depends on the child."

But:  "you already know the baseline... from your boys" -- well, except, now he has a little girl, so he can pretty much throw most of his past expectations out the window... 😉 

[Clarita]

1 hour ago, Lori D. said:

But:  "you already know the baseline... from your boys" -- well, except, now he has a little girl, so he can pretty much throw most of his past expectations out the window... 😉 

Well...yea because my boy didn't care for the cutesy at all. The little girl though cutesy makes all the difference. Adding becomes magical when it includes woodland animals and stuffies.

[Gil]

9 hours ago, Lori D. said:

But:  "you already know the baseline... from your boys" -- well, except, now he has a little girl, so he can pretty much throw most of his past expectations out the window... 😉 

Nah, Round 2's curriculum is already set for several stages to come. I don't want or need the Hive Minds guidance on selecting curriculum for my personal use at this point, unless I have a specific question about a specific book/material that someone else may have seen in person (ie an out of print book that I haven't been able to procure yet or a Piano Curriculum)

I started this thread as a sort of a Curriculum Design Inquiry to try and satisfy my curiosity about something in particular. However, this is not really the right audience for this type of inquiry because very little traffic and very few on-topic responses. However, I leave it here because a person may wonder by later and answer my questions or leave a bread trail to something very particular that will be beneficial to me.

[LostintheCosmos]

23 hours ago, Gil said:

So, for those among us who get great results utilizing STUFF-y ELA programs with their students what do you think makes something useful vs 3D busy work?

In your experience, what's a STUFF-y curriculum that's done poorly?
In your experience, what's a STUFF-y curriculum that's done well?

Is it the tight integration of the Stuff that makes the curriculum well done?

What element of STUFF do you find most beneficial?
What element of STUFF do you find most versatile?

This is perhaps a more general thought than you are looking for, but I think whether "stuff" is educationally valuable or not depends on what the student is actually thinking about while using it. For example, a moveable alphabet seems potentially useful because it mostly requires thinking about letter-sound correspondences and how words are built, with just a little effort thinking about manipulating the "stuff" itself whereas with a lapbook about apples or some other /a/ sound words or something, that is reversed - the kid is mostly thinking about manipulating the "stuff" (cutting and pasting, etc) and only thinking a little bit about letter-sound correspondences. 

[Clarita]

8 hours ago, Gil said:

I started this thread as a sort of a Curriculum Design Inquiry to try and satisfy my curiosity about something in particular.

Have your read "Why Don't Students Like School" by Daniel T. Willingham? It's really a great discussion on this (not specifically for reading curriculum but in general). This book help me realize which parts of curriculum are the learning parts. 

The addition to that is that students do need breaks is the midst of efficient learning and to me the difference between whether a student wants all the cutesy and stuff vs not is what type of learning breaks work for a child. By works, I guess I mean which they can easily come back to focus from and that is different even between my two students. My son is definitely like run around, stretch his legs, or do something physical. My little girl is cutting, pasting, coloring, writing, or something else that is sedentary.  

Good stuff for reading, letters to manipulate, a white board (just saves the paper) and books. 

[Ting Tang]

We used the letter tiles with AAR.  My dog liked to take them and chew on them, lol.  

When we first started homeschooling, I chose Abeka, and I used it last year with my youngest.  Lots of STUFF.  I barely used it, and pieces would get lost, no matter how many bins, boxes, and bags I used...    The giant phonics flash cards were helpful, but I put them in page protectors in a binder, so that worked out.

I wish I had time to use all the stuff. I think we just need to be a get-it-done family.