The Latin-Centered Curriculum

What seems to happen for people who are switching over to a Latin-centered model is that they do Latin and English grammar until they hear their kids saying, "But we already learning that in Latin!" ;) In other words, there's no need to let go of English grammar until you feel ready and see evidence that it's redundant. Doing both will make your day longer, but there's certainly no harm in reinforcing grammar concepts!

PL only introduces a little bit of grammar: definitions for the parts of speech and a few paradigms toward the end. LC does require more by way of formal grammar, and LC II even more. Neither, as far as I know, teaches diagramming, although Henle does.

Yes, you would still want a separate composition program, either CW or CC (Classical Composition). I really like the progymnasmata-based curricula, as the progym were developed to prepare a student for formal rhetoric. And if it helps, CW does integrate formal English grammar instruction, so if you're not ready to let go of English grammar, you can at least save time and money by rolling it together with composition.

HTH!
-Drew

***
"Hardly any lawful price would seem to me too high for what I have gained by being
made to learn Latin and Greek. —C. S. Lewis
***

and think Drew's advice is good. I wanted to comment that we went to R & S 3 after FLL and have had a great year with R & S. It's a solid program, and I'm glad we went through it.

You could, however, go to CW once you finish FLL. I've been asking questions about the grammar in CW at http://www.classicalwriting.com (forums). Grammar is light, but applied throughout in CW-Aesop, and then grammar is covered and applied more intensely in CW-Homer (with Harvey's grammar text). I'm seriously considering dropping R & S for next year and just going with the grammar covered in CW & LC1.

HTH!

In fact, I think this was the first question I posted on the LatinClassicalEd group. :) We had completed FLL and we were working on R&S 3, and we hadn't progressed very far into LfC A at that point.

Several things convinced me to go ahead and drop R&S.

1) We hated it. Yes, it's a great English grammar program, but it's still dull as ditch water. My son loved FLL, but he sighed every time I took R&S off the shelf.

2) There's a great deal of repetition from year to year in English grammar books. So, I knew that if we dropped English grammar, we wouldn't actually be "behind" if I decided we needed to have a separate program after all.

3) I found out that CW also covered some grammar. (After FLL, most if not all of the grammar in CW-Aesop is review, but so was much of R&S 3.) So I decided that CW could be my "safety-net" for letting go of R&S.

4) Around this time, we'd spent several days in R&S learning the correct usage of these/those (*yawn* and *duh*) and we'd had some practice in learning how to form a sentence. And in LfC, we were learning about predicate nominatives and predicate adjectives.

I dropped R&S with a sigh of relief (which was echoed by my son), and we haven't looked back.

As for diagramming, we're going to add a diagramming book since it's not included in our Latin program. I know of two that both come highly recommended: A Workbook of Sentence Diagramming and The First Whole Book of Diagrams. I don't expect to spend a great deal of time on this. We will either just go through the book as written or use it to reinforce the grammar that we learn in Latin.