60-day returns • free shipping on USA orders $129+
"English Lessons Through Literature" curriculum?
- This topic has 20 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
Hello All. I’m coming back to a more CM way of doing things, after a year’s break. I’ve recently come across and wonderful looking resource, which is self published and available on Amazon and lulu.com. It’s called English LEssons Through Literature, by Kathy Jo DeVore. Cathy Duffy reviewed it, and I’ve seen one or two folks on a CM fb group review it. I’m just wondering if anyone hear has used it or heard about it? I really really like the looks of it, and I’m thinking it’s what I will use next year. FYI: this used to be titled Language Lessons through Literature, but it was getting confused with LLATL and Queens LL. Anybody know anything?
I’m also interested in her Reading Lessons Through Literature program too. It looks great…I’m thinking of putting several of my other kids through it for some spelling help.
Thanks for any help or insight.
Amy
I’m planning to use ELTL this comign year, too. I don’t have a review for it, because I haven’t used it before, but I was able to get the table of contents, sample chapters, etc. from lulu.com.
We are using both ELTL and RLTL. My kids enjoy it and I love how simple it is to use. I purchased the workbooks and I print them out, but we read the lessons on our iPad. If you have any questions I’ll be happy to try to answer. You may also want to join the yahoo group. Kathy Jo is very prompt in answering questions, and she has been giving some great advice about simplifying our homeschool.
Hi Amy, I’m doing Reading Lessons Through Literature with my third son. I’d used AAR and ETC with my older two boys and just wasn’t thrilled with either of these programs; both format and results did not hit the mark for us. I can’t tell you how pleased I am now with RLTL – easy to figure out, teaching notes are wonderfully written (concise, right to the point, yet you are getting all the info you need), the whole program and the routine of activities was amazingly easy to grasp and implement, materials are extremely user friendly (I bought the whole program as a download, printed on my own, made the flashcards…sounds like a hassle but it was EASY, easy, easy), outline of schedule/format is perfect for us. She provides a terrific summary on exactly what to do on a week by week basis, according to the child’s age (different schedule/pace if your child is 4 yrs old versus 7 yrs old)…it’s just incrdebly easy to implement. I could go on and on. Your idea to use it for your older kids as a spelling program is brilliant – I really think the way the RLTL lists are structured gives amazing challenge to the student to think about all the different letter and phonogram sounds in order to construct the spelling.
I’d never heard of the author, but now, having used the program these past six months, I am a fan!
I’m not using ELTL because I’m not required to do grammar this young where I live. If I DID have to do grammar, you can bet I’d be looking very seriously at ELTL because I’d guess the same easy to grasp, easy to implement qualities would likely be present.
HTH – Feel free to let me know if you have any other questions!
Angie
I started using RLTL around Christmas and have been very happy with it! I tried using SWR, but would become overwhelmed and not get to it. RLTL uses the methods of SWR but in a much easier to follow format (at least for me)
I am planning on using ELTL this coming year. I already have it and have looked through it and am very excited to use it. We have to start testing this coming year (end of 3rd grade) and I think (hope) that it will be plenty of practice for the grammar with out just being “drill… drill…. drill…” or just fill in the blank type answers.
I’m wondering if we should switch to RLTL. We’ve been using AAR with ds6.5 but we seem to be stuck with rules in level2. He doesn’t want to be bothered with the rules. He is very good at sounding out and the rules seem to hinder his ability to do that. I’ve been following the yahoo group for months and I am seeing so many rave reviews. What I don’t want to do is switch without giving AAR enough time as she states in her introduction. I also don’t want my son to lose interest in learning to read.
For those of you using the e-book, how do you organize it (binder?)? Also, are you using the workbook?
I’m using the e-book. I printed off the pages and took them to Staples and had them spiral bound with a sturdy cover so that it would feel (and have the durability) of a real school book (I seem to have very bad luck with binders/pages ripping).
I did purchase the workbook but am not using it with my just turned 7year old (might use it for my next child however, she will likely start younger and will probably need the practise). I felt we didn’t need the practise for my 6.5 year old (this was his age when we started) because he just GOT it so quickly. He’d had 8 months or so with AAR, so the familiarity with phonograms and the skill/concept of sounding out was basically there. My (albeit brief) look through the RLTL workbook led me to feel that it was for reinforcing the phonogram sounds and how they work in words – in yet another format. I figured we had enough with our notebook, doing it orally, and for fun I still have in write in rice once in a while. In addition, I use the AAR magnets. I have my son alternate the days that he writes his dictated spelling words in his notebook versus on the magnet board using the AAR tiles. It works quite nicely.
mrsmccardell – overall, my feeling is that RLTL moves at a better pace than AAR. We were spelling and reading fairly challenging words, and a high variety of words, quite early on. We weren’t stuck at short vowel words for what seemd like forever. On rules — Yes, the rules are there, but the focus on rules seems less intensive than in AAR. For us, the rules are helping us, but they are NOT “getting in the way”. In AAR, we got bogged down in the drill, drill, drill, whereas in RLTL we’re feeling as though the rules are truly helping to understand how to apply to reading/spelling.
HTH!
I have a question. I really like the marking of the phonograms in RLTL but don’t want to buy the program bc we’re using other things that are working pretty well (AAR is working well enough and Pathway Readers we adore). Is there a workbook that leaves out the actual reading and focuses on marking of phonograms? Or a little guide for me somewhere with this information about how to teach this?
Thanks.
@Shannon, I meant to reply to this ages ago. If you go to Lulu.com (the online store that sells all the Barefootmeandering books) you should be able to find an option for Flashcards only. (and I think it’s FREE). If you print the flashcards front and back properly, you’ll have the phonogram on one side and the marking scheme on the back of the card.
This thread has been very helpful! Thank you!
I hope it’s ok to ask this here instead of starting a whole new thread! I purchased ELTL to use with my 7 yr old and we are absolutely loving it. We’ve only been using it for about 2 weeks, but seriously it is so great! It starts with reading Beatrix Potter and is super easy to begin using and very enjoyable!
I had planned on also purchasing RLTL, but didn’t and have been having her just read from the Pathway Readers, but since starting ELTL, am starting to wonder if I should purchase it to use with my 7 yr old and my 5 yr old…who I’m currently using delightful reading with? It’s not that DR is not good, but I’m wondering if RLTL is more of what I am looking for in a reading program. Has anyone used both that could weigh in on this?
Also, are ELTL and RLTL overwhelming together…as in are the readings similar at all…or are they completely different all around?
Thank you all so much in advance!
RLTL is based on the Elsie Readers. No overlap with ELTL content. The stories are cute in Level 1, and by level 2 there are many adaptations of aesop’s fables, russian tales, etc. All classics – very well done.
As for whether the two programs together would be overwhelming, hard for me to guess as I don’t do really do much grammar until closer to age 10, so am not using ELTL. (if I did opt for early years grammar you can bet ELTL is the one I’d be using!)
I can tell you that with RLTL, it’s as easy as dictating 10 words a day (assuming your child already knows the 75 phonograms of the program).
– you say the word and then dictate the spelling phonogram by phonogram
– as you dictate, you indicate to your child exactly where to break the syllables. The syllable breaks are laid out in the teacher’s guide. (this habit of regularly breaking down syllables is a beautiful aspect of the program…constant reinforcement on how to break words into syllables so that they can apply this skill once they are independent readers and need to figure out new words on their own)
– after the dictation, which takes us about 10 minutes, you sit and read the story from the reader portion of the guide – this is a story with all the words from your dictation. (on the day you do dictation 37, you read story 37 — which has all the words you just studied plus all the words you’ve study in the previous 5 lessons…) Very brilliantly laid out!
If your child is not yet at the stage where the 75 phonograms are well learned, you would add one step to what I’ve outlined above, and that is simply doing a flashcards drill of the phonogram cards once a day. (I usually do this at a different time than our regular reading lesson….keeps things shorter, and gives variation to another part of our day)
Only other point worth mentioning…for my 5 year old I dictate only half the list (5 words per day). We “spell” them on my magnet board (left over from my AAR days), as well as writing them, and then we do the next five words the next day. So we have two days of “work” before we get to read the “list words” story. On the day in between we read from our other reader (this is where you would use Pathway on alternating days).
HTH — Good luck!
- The topic ‘"English Lessons Through Literature" curriculum?’ is closed to new replies.