user20725: From here:
What is the best age to learn chess?
it seems that consensus is that that kids can start learning chess at almost any age. From around 5 years old they are big enough to learn the names of the pieces and the rules for how each piece moves.
Here:
https://chess.stackexchange.com/a/6225
it is suggested to not push kids to learn chess, but to lead by example.
Here
Where can I start to learn?
there are tips for how adults can learn chess.
My question is: Assuming you have an interested child age 5 - 10, how do you practically suggest teaching chess? Does it make most sense to just start playing with setting up all the pieces, or are there smaller "games" that one can/should start with?

user18738: Teach them how the pieces move. Teach them checkmate with two rooks. Let them play some ridiculously easy computer for a while. Gradually introduce more advanced stuff (K+R vs K, K+Q vs K, the idea that you should put your pawns in the middle, the four move checkmate, the two move checkmate)
Mini games are also very good for kids - putting a queen in the middle of the board and giving them a knight and asking them to do lots of knight paths, for example putting the knight on a3 and asking them to get it to f1 without going on a square the queen can take. For more advanced ones you can get them to do it mentally but that requires co-ordinates
https://chessplus.net/the-bishop-and-pawns-game/ is another good one
Once they've got a bit more experience (can do four move checkmate and the two rooks vs king etc) then making up very simple mate in twos helps their calculation a lot. Then maybe they are ready for Seirawan's Winning Chess Tactics and How to Beat Your Dad at Chess. Both really good books but not for absolute beginners.

user-1: I learnt to play chess around that age with Pritchard's Begin Chess, later moving on to "The right way to play chess". Both of these books should be available on amazon, and although they were written in the 1970s they stand the test of time in my opinion. I can highly recommend them.
Begin Chess starts off teaching the ways different pieces move, full of exercises that have solutions at the back (e.g. place 4 queens on a 4x4 corner of the board so that none attacks any other one), and then goes into more detail on openings and endings. My own experience was that I found the openings part a bit confusing (I had a lot of "why" questions that the book didn't answer) but the part on endings was really logical and made sense, at least after spending several afteroons on King + Pawn vs. King.

user20728: I started playing chess with 4y old - by just observing.
My father played with himself and used books to replay Grandmaster games (and he still does it nowadays he's 82y old). - , at first I was not allowed to touch the pieces but he explained me the game slowly, until I understood everything, and started to play against him.
So in my opinion, just play the game and the kid will learn - learning by doing, it's not magic.

user18993: You teach them chess the same way chess has always been taught: you give them the board, tell them the rules, and let them figure it out from there. As the saying goes, "10 minutes to learn, a lifetime to master". If they want to go into more detail to become a competitive chess player, provide them with the resources to do so, but there's no need to teach them about strategies or tactics otherwise.

user19877: I tend to disagree with the other answers that suggest starting with just a few pieces.
Kids absorb so much, so quickly. When my daughter was 4, she used to just watch me so she got some familiarity with the shapes of the pieces, but there was no teaching at this time. When she was 5, I taught her the names of the pieces, and then how they all moved. I did this all at one time. This took only a day or two of short sessions, and she had it. Then I taught her the special moves, castling and en passant, so she knew the game already, at least the rules.
We would play regularly, but the only problem is, and this varies from child to child, she really did not have a great interest in the game. If you can solve this, that is something because I am not the only parent, who I have heard say this. In middle school, the chess club at her school had an amazing 40 kids, so she would go to that and play. She would be proud when I would teach them, but even then, she only wants to play very sporadically.

user4418: 
Does it make most sense to just start playing with setting up all the
  pieces, or are there smaller "games" that one can/should start with?

It doesn't really matter the age of the person learning to play, there is no point in starting with a full set. There is just far too much to take in and make sense of. The first thing to do is to teach them how to win!
So, first teach them how king, queen and rook move and then teach the basic mates -

KRR v K
KR v K
KQ v K

And I would do it in that order because it is the easiest and it is the way to introduce concepts like checkmate, king not allowed to move into check, two rooks working together, opposition, king and one rook working together, stalemate (to be avoided with KQ v K).
Next I would go on to KP v K, when you can win, when it is a draw and how to win.
Then I would go on to a game which many people start with (but there is no checkmate, so less fun IMHO) and that is 8 pawns v 8 pawns. Winner is the first to get a pawn to the other side or to "stalemate" the opponent - i.e. the opponent is the first to run out of moves.
After that I would reintroduce the kings and major pieces before finally going on to the full game.
You can see I'm working backwards here because that way the learner first learns where they should be aiming to get to and what to when they get there in stages starting from the destination.

20725: <p>From here:</p>

<p><a href="https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/8095/what-is-the-best-age-to-learn-chess">What is the best age to learn chess?</a></p>

<p>it seems that consensus is that that kids can start learning chess at almost any age. From around 5 years old they are big enough to learn the names of the pieces and the rules for how each piece moves.</p>

<p>Here:</p>

<p><a href="https://chess.stackexchange.com/a/6225">https://chess.stackexchange.com/a/6225</a></p>

<p>it is suggested to not push kids to learn chess, but to lead by example.</p>

<p>Here</p>

<p><a href="https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/5208/where-can-i-start-to-learn">Where can I start to learn?</a></p>

<p>there are tips for how adults can learn chess.</p>

<p><strong>My question is</strong>: Assuming you have an interested child age 5 - 10, how do you practically suggest teaching chess? Does it make most sense to just start playing with setting up all the pieces, or are there smaller "games" that one can/should start with?</p>
 18738: <p>Teach them how the pieces move. Teach them checkmate with two rooks. Let them play some ridiculously easy computer for a while. Gradually introduce more advanced stuff (K+R vs K, K+Q vs K, the idea that you should put your pawns in the middle, the four move checkmate, the two move checkmate)
Mini games are also very good for kids - putting a queen in the middle of the board and giving them a knight and asking them to do lots of knight paths, for example putting the knight on a3 and asking them to get it to f1 without going on a square the queen can take. For more advanced ones you can get them to do it mentally but that requires co-ordinates<a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/H7P6p.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/H7P6p.png" alt="enter image description here"></a>
<a href="https://chessplus.net/the-bishop-and-pawns-game/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://chessplus.net/the-bishop-and-pawns-game/</a> is another good one</p>

<p>Once they've got a bit more experience (can do four move checkmate and the two rooks vs king etc) then making up very simple mate in twos helps their calculation a lot. Then maybe they are ready for Seirawan's Winning Chess Tactics and How to Beat Your Dad at Chess. Both really good books but not for absolute beginners.</p>
 -1: <p>I learnt to play chess around that age with Pritchard's <a href="https://www.amazon.co.uk/Begin-Chess-Right-David-Pritchard/dp/0716021005" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Begin Chess</a>, later moving on to "The right way to play chess". Both of these books should be available on amazon, and although they were written in the 1970s they stand the test of time in my opinion. I can highly recommend them.</p>

<p>Begin Chess starts off teaching the ways different pieces move, full of exercises that have solutions at the back (e.g. place 4 queens on a 4x4 corner of the board so that none attacks any other one), and then goes into more detail on openings and endings. My own experience was that I found the openings part a bit confusing (I had a lot of "why" questions that the book didn't answer) but the part on endings was really logical and made sense, at least after spending several afteroons on King + Pawn vs. King.</p>
 20728: <p>I started playing chess with 4y old - by just observing.
My father played with himself and used books to replay Grandmaster games (and he still does it nowadays he's 82y old). - , at first I was not allowed to touch the pieces but he explained me the game slowly, until I understood everything, and started to play against him.</p>

<p>So in my opinion, just play the game and the kid will learn - learning by doing, it's not magic.</p>
 18993: <p>You teach them chess the same way chess has always been taught: you give them the board, tell them the rules, and let them figure it out from there. As the saying goes, "10 minutes to learn, a lifetime to master". If they want to go into more detail to become a competitive chess player, provide them with the resources to do so, but there's no need to teach them about strategies or tactics otherwise.</p>
 19877: <p>I tend to disagree with the other answers that suggest starting with just a few pieces.</p>

<p>Kids absorb so much, so quickly. When my daughter was 4, she used to just watch me so she got some familiarity with the shapes of the pieces, but there was no teaching at this time. When she was 5, I taught her the names of the pieces, and then how they all moved. I did this all at one time. This took only a day or two of short sessions, and she had it. Then I taught her the special moves, castling and en passant, so she knew the game already, at least the rules.</p>

<p>We would play regularly, but the only problem is, and this varies from child to child, she really did not have a great interest in the game. If you can solve this, that is something because I am not the only parent, who I have heard say this. In middle school, the chess club at her school had an amazing 40 kids, so she would go to that and play. She would be proud when I would teach them, but even then, she only wants to play very sporadically.</p>
 4418: <blockquote>
  <p>Does it make most sense to just start playing with setting up all the
  pieces, or are there smaller "games" that one can/should start with?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>It doesn't really matter the age of the person learning to play, there is no point in starting with a full set. There is just far too much to take in and make sense of. The first thing to do is to teach them how to win!</p>

<p>So, first teach them how king, queen and rook move and then teach the basic mates -</p>

<ul>
<li>KRR v K</li>
<li>KR v K</li>
<li>KQ v K</li>
</ul>

<p>And I would do it in that order because it is the easiest and it is the way to introduce concepts like checkmate, king not allowed to move into check, two rooks working together, opposition, king and one rook working together, stalemate (to be avoided with KQ v K).</p>

<p>Next I would go on to KP v K, when you can win, when it is a draw and how to win.</p>

<p>Then I would go on to a game which many people start with (but there is no checkmate, so less fun IMHO) and that is 8 pawns v 8 pawns. Winner is the first to get a pawn to the other side or to "stalemate" the opponent - i.e. the opponent is the first to run out of moves.</p>

<p>After that I would reintroduce the kings and major pieces before finally going on to the full game.</p>

<p>You can see I'm working backwards here because that way the learner first learns where they should be aiming to get to and what to when they get there in stages starting from the destination.</p>
