I'm very new to the classical approach in homeschooling. I've read many books before about unschooling, and how many children learn grammer rules and such simply by being exposed to language.

I have The Well Trained Mind from the library, but I haven't found a section that explains exactly what the point is to learning all the rules of spelling and grammar. I don't remember much of that from my own childhood, and yet I'm able to write fairly well and clearly, simply from being exposed to many, many books.

Is grammar and spelling and language arts really necessary, beyond their use in Mad Libs? lol

If someone could explain the importance of these to me, it would help. I currently don't have any of that in my homeschool, beyond what TOG offers.

Thanks!

Although I have always done well in school, and rather easily I might add, I benefitted from language arts lessons. Then I had children! My dd had developmental delays, including speech. The speech therapist could tell dd was smart; long story short, she was merely late. She told me not to correct every single word; she would catch on by listening to stories, my talking, etc. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. By the time she was 6, her best sentence might be 4 words long. I would be amazed by other children who were longer who had complex sentences and vocabulary. Not so in our home, even though dd was surrounded by wonderful books and story time. I've since learned that dd does best by a thorough explanation. Phonics lessons were a great beginning. Language lessons helped in the grammar years. Latin is cementing all of that now. She is now 14. Other factors have played a role in major improvement for her, most of which involves using a Classical Curriculum. In essence, the nuts and bolts of analyzing language helped her to put everything sequentially together in the more global realm of conversation and writing. DS had some delays too, not as bad, but has also benefitted from grammar lessons, etc. HTH

I once embraced the ideas you are talking about. I thought my children would learn grammar and much of the "language arts" by being exposed to great literature. My oldest daughters were avid readers and were exposed to very advanced literature at an early age. This did improve their vocabualry and they have always tested well above average in "language arts" on standardized test. Their spoken grammar is almost flawless.

However, testing well did not make them excellent writers and spellers. My oldest daughter read "Pride and Prejudice" when she was eleven...the same year I started her on a remedial spelling program. My second daughter was a natural speller and never needed a formal program, but I did use a spelling program with the rest of my children because of my experience with my oldest daughter.

When I began having my children write, we came to a big impass. I realized that I could not communicate the difference between good writing and excellent writing without going back to the nuts and bolts of grammar. They needed more confidence and knowing the rules of grammar gave them that confidence. My girls had read many of the "great books", but were unable to write complex sentences. They were frozen because they were very familiar with grammar usage, but had never analyzed it. Until we examined the parts of speech and diagrammed sentences, they did not understand WHY I was picking apart the more immature sentences in their writing. When I said a sentence or paragraph was not well written and I could back it up with grammar rules, the correction went over more easily.

I have also been teaching writing in our co-op this year. There are some students who struggle to write complete sentences. They are very well read and have even completed grammar workbooks each year. Yet, when I circle a sentence fragment in their writing, they can't even guess what the problem may be. I feel like many of these children have been mindlessly doing grammar exercises every day, but have never obtained a full understanding of the rules, and do not know how to apply them.

There are many complete grammar programs, but I also know there are many programs that I have tried that I did not TEACH well. I am trying to change my methods with my younger children and teach grammar more classically: memorization in the "grammar" years, review and application in the "dialectic" years, and mastery through writing the "rhetoric" years.

Hope this helps,
Leanna

Most children will intuitively pick up *some* of the nuances of grammar/spelling by mere exposure. Few will be able to articulate those rules. Also, I've noticed when looking back at my own experiences, it is easy for me to assume I learned something without being taught because I don't remember being taught; that is not necessarily true. I just means that once I learned an important concept, I didn't need to remember *how* I learned.

A *teacher* who knows the ins and outs of grammar, good writing, spelling rules, mechanics, usage, and more *could* teach it all through a child's regular reading and writing, making it seem casual, almost incidental. But in reality, it means the teacher is very aware of 1. what the child knows, 2. what the child should know, and 3. how to explain new concepts so the child learns and applies them.

Most of us don't know what our child knows, what he should know, and how to explain, so we opt for a good, solid program that will help us.

I've learned (and mastered) so much in teaching my own children that I probably can teach my future grandchildren without a text, but I needed a solid program to get grounded myself.

Also, like others have shared, I've noticed that while extensive reading improves vocabulary, it does little to nothing for spelling, grammar, and writing. However, learning grammar (and spelling) improves reading (more complex material), writing (ability to talk and write intelligently about complex sentences), and foreign language learning (grammar mastery is a must).

HTH,

Vicki in Crna Goar

Thank you ladies! The Lord has lead me to do more reading on the topic, because of your posts. I'm now convinced of the importance of grammar and spelling ... my only question is, when?

The Classic school of thought says start right away, while the Charlotte Mason road says wait until they're about nine ... I can see the benefits of both. Which do you do?

We used A Beka, and with that program, as I recall, we did phonics first, and then by 2nd or 3rd grade we started grammar. We slowly eased into it, and each year reviews while building a bit more. Then 14yodd started Latin this year and it has been great because she had a solid English grammar base. Latin is allowing her to look at English grammar from a different angle and therefore is solidifying her grammar. So, I like the idea of doing phonics first (that can be tough enough to master). Then by the time that is mastered, or at least well on its way (for us that was age 8 or 9), a building grammar program sounds good.

Today we did our Y1U3 Celebration and my children did a play they put together from Aesop's fables...the Tortoise and the Hare. The moral..."Slow and steady wins the race." It didn't occur to me until today, that that has been our homeschool motto. My kids have needed to take things at a slower pace...and this year their school mastery has grown more than any other year. I'd apply that motto to the grammar plan above; it has worked well for us!

This topic has been close to my heart lately and we've made a lot of changes in our homeschool due to investigating WHY we're studying spelling and grammar in 1st and 2nd grade.

Yes, certain classical models have a child doing grammar and spelling as soon as basic phonics instruction is done but is that really the right time?

We've dropped formal grammar and spelling this year in 2nd and will start spelling in 3rd with Simply Spelling by Laurie Hicks which is based on dictation exercises instead of word lists. From my research, I learned that a child will learn more thoroughly how to spell through writing and practice instead of memorizing lists of words which will soon be forgotten. Another important aspect is for the child to know why to spell a word a certain way. If a child is not given the tools (practice within their writing, spelling in context, and thorough coverage of phonetic rules and how they apply to words) then they are not receiving the adequate preparation to be able to spell correctly on their own.

Grammar is another area where a child will learn through doing, that is why copywork is effective with a teacher's guidance. Until a child is reading fluently, which is rarely right after basic phonetic instruction, formal spelling and grammar may prevent the child from developing as quickly in their reading skills and may actually feel overwhelmed at having to read, spell and learn grammar.

Just to share, my dd7 said to me a few months ago that the reason she didn't desire to read was because she disliked not knowing the words, how to read them as she came upon them in reading. I looked at our language arts that we were doing at the time and did some research. I realized I was frustrating my own child by not providing more phonetic instruction to help her gain fluency. I was already having her read 2x a day with books under & on her level of reading.

In just 2 months of abandoning spelling and grammar and bringing in more phonetic instruction, she is reading much better and will more confidence now. I imagine she'll be reading at 6th-7th grade level by the end of 3rd grade and ready to tackle novels.

I just wish I had known all this from the beginning but I think we depend too much on the guides and curriculum we use to provide all the answers for us. It has improved our homeschool by leaps and bounds to discover the HOWs, WHYs and WHENs of what we're using instead of just following what someone else has prescribed.

Hope this helps