Re: Spalding v. Sing, Spell, Read and Write (Classical Sources Message Board)

Re: Spalding v. Sing, Spell, Read and Write
Author: Vicki in Yugoslavia	June 5, 1999 at 14:21:25
in reply to: Spalding v. Sing, Spell, Read and Write* posted by Alison on June 3, 1999 at 10:16:07*

Dear Alison,

I have used BOTH Spalding and SSRW so I will describe their
similarities & differences.

Similarities: both teach handwriting, reading, spelling.
SSRW includes reading practice material, comprehension checks, and all those games. It is phonics-based but not as "scientifically" as WRTR. For example, it teaches phonograms like "oo", "ew", "ing", AND blends (br, gr, fl) but then explains most long vowel sounds with the two popular statements of "when two vowels walk together the first says its name" and "with the silent e it does the same). The kids like the games.
WRTR (Spalding) is VERY rule-oriented: It eschews the two-vowel rule. The children first learn all 70 phonograms and all their sounds. It does not teach blends (bl, gr, etc). Then the children are dictated words and write them, based on the sounds they have learned. This is heavily teacher=directed. (excuse typos, please). Children are expected to go spontaneously from writing/spelling to reading. There is no reading material included.
Personally, SSRW is much more fun for students and is geared toward learning to read, spelling is less emphasized. WRTR is geared towards learning to spell, and reading mechanics are less emphasized. WRTR is much harder to use. I learned a lot about spelling with WRTR so it was a useful purchase, but I am teaching my fourth kindergartner with SSRW. Any further particular questions, email me direct.

Vicki Surbatovich

Follow Ups

Post Followup

Name:
E-Mail:
Subject:
> Dear Alison, > > I have used BOTH Spalding and SSRW so I will describe their > similarities & differences. > > Similarities: both teach handwriting, reading, spelling. > SSRW includes reading practice material, comprehension checks, and all those games. It is phonics-based but not as "scientifically" as WRTR. For example, it teaches phonograms like "oo", "ew", "ing", AND blends (br, gr, fl) but then explains most long vowel sounds with the two popular statements of "when two vowels walk together the first says its name" and "with the silent e it does the same). The kids like the games. > WRTR (Spalding) is VERY rule-oriented: It eschews the two-vowel rule. The children first learn all 70 phonograms and all their sounds. It does not teach blends (bl, gr, etc). Then the children are dictated words and write them, based on the sounds they have learned. This is heavily teacher=directed. (excuse typos, please). Children are expected to go spontaneously from writing/spelling to reading. There is no reading material included. > Personally, SSRW is much more fun for students and is geared toward learning to read, spelling is less emphasized. WRTR is geared towards learning to spell, and reading mechanics are less emphasized. WRTR is much harder to use. I learned a lot about spelling with WRTR so it was a useful purchase, but I am teaching my fourth kindergartner with SSRW. Any further particular questions, email me direct. > > Vicki Surbatovich
Optional link URL:
Link title:
Optional image URL: