s/o Has Anyone Replaced R&S with MCT?

[TheAutumnOak]

I am assuming that they are meant to cover the same stuff...I am wondering if anyone here has made that switch?

[8filltheheart]

I am assuming that they are meant to cover the same stuff...I am wondering if anyone here has made that switch?

 

I'm not in the category of having used R&S and making the switch, but I think your actual question....meant to cover the same stuff.....is interesting.

 

I do not believe the answer is actually yes. If you consider the scope and sequence of a traditional grammar/writing program, MCT is going to leave out huge chunks. It isn't going to address topics like letter writing, mechanics/capitalization rules beyond sentence/paragraph/essay writing. The grammar cover is definitely not going to be as in depth as R&S. (My dd was way beyond the grammar of Voyage level last yr even w/o using a grammar textbook like R&S.) (ETA: I am basing this opinion off the Voyage level coverage. I have never used the lower levels.)

 

Conversely, R&S is going to teach in isolation. It is not going to intertwine writing, vocab, grammar w/ a smooth flow and big picture presentation.

 

MCT is more whole to parts and R&S is more parts to whole. R&S is going to spend far more time on the nitty-gritty details. MCT is going to to spend more time focusing on the "essence" of language.

 

I'm not sure that is clear. I really need another cup of coffee....or a nap. BUt, I know the kids won't let me have the latter!!

Edited July 1, 2011 by 8FillTheHeart

[radiobrain]

I think they are like apples and figs.

 

Both are fruit, but satisfy different tastes.

[Capt_Uhura]

 

 

MCT is more whole to parts and R&S is more parts to whole. R&S is going to spend far more time on the nitty-gritty details. MCT is going to to spend more time focusing on the "essence" of language.

 

I'm not sure that is clear. I really need another cup of coffee....or a nap. BUt, I know the kids won't let me have the latter!!

 

Bells went off in my head when I read the bold above......

[Lovin Learnin]

If you consider the scope and sequence of a traditional grammar/writing program, MCT is going to leave out huge chunks. It isn't going to address topics like letter writing, mechanics/capitalization rules beyond sentence/paragraph/essay writing. The grammar cover is definitely not going to be as in depth as R&S. (My dd was way beyond the grammar of Voyage level last yr even w/o using a grammar textbook like R&S.) (ETA: I am basing this opinion off the Voyage level coverage. I have never used the lower levels.)

 

MCT is more whole to parts and R&S is more parts to whole. R&S is going to spend far more time on the nitty-gritty details. MCT is going to to spend more time focusing on the "essence" of language.

 

 

I completely agree with this post. This is why we are leaving MCT (at least for this year) and going to R&S. Dd is a natural at language arts. Certifiably gifted. We loved MCT because we "got" it. It was like curling up with a good friend. But because she "got" it, she didn't really learn anything. Dd is comfortable writing anything and everything. She writes a lot and she's pretty darn good at it. But because her brain focuses on the content, she doesn't pay nearly enough attention to the mechanics. Not grammar so much but her punctuation and spelling are quite a bit behind her ability to generate a cohesive, interesting, piece. She really needs to be forced to pay attention to those nitty-gritty details when she's writing so we're moving on to focus on that for awhile.

 

ETA: That said, we are continuing with the MCT vocabulary and may add his literature program this year.

Edited July 1, 2011 by Lovin Learnin

[TheAutumnOak]

MCT is more whole to parts and R&S is more parts to whole. R&S is going to spend far more time on the nitty-gritty details. MCT is going to to spend more time focusing on the "essence" of language.

 

 

 

Is this really the case?...I have to look into that...

[Capt_Uhura]

I don't think they cover the same material although I must admit to having never seen R&S. MCT doesn't cover writing letters, I also don't think it covers word choice (there vs their, affect vs effect, bring vs take). He might cover those in the higher levels but I don't recall any of that in Island, Town, Voyage.

 

I try to keep in mind MCT's purpose. From what I gather, he has very limited time to teach kids the fundamentals of grammar since PS are moving to eliminating formal grammar instruction. He is teaching core grammar topics needed to be successful in college. hence, he's not covering letter writing, creative writing. His focus is grammar instruction and expository writing.

[8filltheheart]

Is this really the case?...I have to look into that...

 

:lol: Ummmm......yes, or I wouldn't have written it. :D

 

I am very familiar w/how to teach grammar/writing/mechanics. When I first started homeschooling, I used a very traditional grammar program all the way through the 8th grade level (Voyages in English). However, I decided that was not the way I wanted to teach the rest of my children.

 

I now teach my kids everything through copywork when they are little. Grammar, mechanics, capitalization to start off with (and never dropping a concept once it has been introduced) and then progress to how to write independent sentences, paragraphs, essays. When I started with MCT's Voyages last yr with my 6th grader, there was absolutely nothing in it that she didn't already know. Nothing. We enjoyed the beginning of the book and the sample voyager's essays. We never used a single writing assignment. We simply discussed what we read. Her actual in-depth writing instruction was more from editing/revising her writing assignments vs. anything else.

 

CE2 was the part that we enjoyed the most. It was a refreshing way to study vocabulary. By the end of the book, translating the sesquepedalian stories was quite challenging.

 

FWIW.....I see strengths and weaknesses in both approaches.....MCT's and a traditional textbook. I think that people that only use MCT are going to have rude awakening if they have to take standardized tests b/c a lot of the mechanics/grammar that are normally taught (no, I do not believe schools are not teaching it) is going to be absent from their instruction.

 

However, traditional textbooks teaching in isolation do not do justice in integrating concepts. It requires the teacher to make sure the concepts become daily usage vs. used in a lesson and then dropped.

[Capt_Uhura]

 

FWIW.....I see strengths and weaknesses in both approaches.....MCT's and a traditional textbook. I think that people that only use MCT are going to have rude awakening if they have to take standardized tests b/c a lot of the mechanics/grammar that are normally taught (no, I do not believe schools are not teaching it) is going to be absent from their instruction.

 

However, traditional textbooks teaching in isolation do not do justice in integrating concepts. It requires the teacher to make sure the concepts become daily usage vs. used in a lesson and then dropped.

 

:iagree::iagree: w/ the bold part.

 

I didn't believe folks who say grammar isn't taught in schools anymore. I recently had a long conversation about grammar with a friend. He teaches high school language arts in the neighboring district. They do not teach grammar. He teaches juniors and seniors. They can't distinguish between an adjective and an adverb. Don't know the difference between subject and object pronouns. He teaches an elective class where he teaches grammar and diagramming as well as SAT prep. He said he always have students return from first year in college saying that his elective class on grammar is what helped them the most. His Principal has suggested they find a way to put grammar back in the regular curriculum so there is hope. I gave him Practice Town and showed him what my 2nd and 5th grader are doing and how they also diagram the sentences. He said only 2 of his students could do that this year and they both came out of private Catholic schools. The ones how know grammar always come out of the private Catholic school.

 

My aunt was dismayed to find that her DD had no concept of subject-verb agreement. Granted, she's only in 6th grade (end of 6th grade) but has never had the parts of speech, subject, predicate, etc. And this is a solid middle to upper class district. She can write ok b/c she speaks proper English.

 

I've been using dictation and discussion while reading literature to reinforce grammar concepts. I think that works well for my boys and for me.

Edited July 2, 2011 by Capt_Uhura

[radiobrain]

nt

Edited July 2, 2011 by radiobrain

[LindaOz]

I completely agree with this post. This is why we are leaving MCT (at least for this year) and going to R&S. Dd is a natural at language arts. Certifiably gifted. We loved MCT because we "got" it. It was like curling up with a good friend. But because she "got" it, she didn't really learn anything. Dd is comfortable writing anything and everything. She writes a lot and she's pretty darn good at it. But because her brain focuses on the content, she doesn't pay nearly enough attention to the mechanics. Not grammar so much but her punctuation and spelling are quite a bit behind her ability to generate a cohesive, interesting, piece. She really needs to be forced to pay attention to those nitty-gritty details when she's writing so we're moving on to focus on that for awhile.

 

 

Your dd sounds so much like mine. She's a talented writer, but she got to the stage where she needed to focus on some of the nitty gritty details. We are using R&S for that.

[8filltheheart]

:iagree::iagree: w/ the bold part.

 

I didn't believe folks who say grammar isn't taught in schools anymore. I recently had a long conversation about grammar with a friend. He teaches high school language arts in the neighboring district. They do not teach grammar. He teaches juniors and seniors. They can't distinguish between an adjective and an adverb. Don't know the difference between subject and object pronouns. He teaches an elective class where he teaches grammar and diagramming as well as SAT prep. He said he always have students return from first year in college saying that his elective class on grammar is what helped them the most. His Principal has suggested they find a way to put grammar back in the regular curriculum so there is hope. I gave him Practice Town and showed him what my 2nd and 5th grader are doing and how they also diagram the sentences. He said only 2 of his students could do that this year and they both came out of private Catholic schools. The ones how know grammar always come out of the private Catholic school.

 

My aunt was dismayed to find that her DD had no concept of subject-verb agreement. Granted, she's only in 6th grade (end of 6th grade) but has never had the parts of speech, subject, predicate, etc. And this is a solid middle to upper class district. She can write ok b/c she speaks proper English.

 

I've been using dictation and discussion while reading literature to reinforce grammar concepts. I think that works well for my boys and for me.

 

I am wondering if this is a local issue vs. standard across the country. Grammar and mechanics are definitely part of the CAT test as well as the ACT/SAT. Considering how much most districts teach to the test, I would be surprised that it isn't at minimum taught as test prep.

 

Even my dd's 3rd grade CAT test this yr had at least 1/2 the capitalization/mechanics questions from letters, cities, states, days of the week, etc.

 

On the SAT/ACT sub/verb agreement and punctuation are key.

[Luckymama]

I don't think they cover the same material although I must admit to having never seen R&S. MCT doesn't cover writing letters, I also don't think it covers word choice (there vs their, affect vs effect, bring vs take). He might cover those in the higher levels but I don't recall any of that in Island, Town, Voyage.

 

Those are covered in Magic Lens 1 (level 4) :001_smile:

 

Karen, still reading through the book...

[Capt_Uhura]

I am wondering if this is a local issue vs. standard across the country. Grammar and mechanics are definitely part of the CAT test as well as the ACT/SAT. Considering how much most districts teach to the test, I would be surprised that it isn't at minimum taught as test prep.

 

Even my dd's 3rd grade CAT test this yr had at least 1/2 the capitalization/mechanics questions from letters, cities, states, days of the week, etc.

 

On the SAT/ACT sub/verb agreement and punctuation are key.

 

My aunt is in Texas. In my state, we do not take nationally normed tests - that's the work around. I'm not saying it is standard across the country - just anecdotal evidence. My friend was told in North Carolina that they don't teach grammar or spelling at any grade level. They briefly talked about action words, thing words, and descriptive words and that was up to 4th grade. So three different districts in three different states. My friend tells me in a neighboring district they teach very little grammar. She's a special ed teacher and has taught in nearly every school w/in our 4 districts.

 

I just checked our 5th grade ELA. It is only passages to read and answer questions about point of the paragraph, word usage, defining words. There are two paragraphs to edit but it's mostly ending punctuation (missing periods, period instead of a question mark, spelling error). There is a comma missing in a series. Perhaps that is age appropriate for most kids? I know my boys (2nd and 5th grade) can discuss why the author chose to put a word as the object of the preposition vs an indirect object based on where the author wants to put the emphasis. And they enjoy those types of discussions and love finding it in books we are reading. The Hobbit has been rich for grammar discussions.

 

I checked 8th grade ELA. It's all passages to read and answer questions about POV, reason for the passage, what happened first in a passage, word choice, word defining in context and essay questions to answer based on a story. There is no grammar formally tested. My friend said they also grade very easily on the written passages.

Edited July 2, 2011 by Capt_Uhura

[8filltheheart]

My aunt is in Texas. In my state, we do not take nationally normed tests - that's the work around. I'm not saying it is standard across the country - just anecdotal evidence. My friend was told in North Carolina that they don't teach grammar or spelling at any grade level. They briefly talked about action words, thing words, and descriptive words and that was up to 4th grade. So three different districts in three different states. My friend tells me in a neighboring district they teach very little grammar. She's a special ed teacher and has taught in nearly every school w/in our 4 districts.

 

I just checked our 5th grade ELA. It is only passages to read and answer questions about point of the paragraph, word usage, defining words. There are two paragraphs to edit but it's mostly ending punctuation (missing periods, period instead of a question mark, spelling error). There is a comma missing in a series. Perhaps that is age appropriate for most kids? I know my boys (2nd and 5th grade) can discuss why the author chose to put a word as the object of the preposition vs an indirect object based on where the author wants to put the emphasis. And they enjoy those types of discussions and love finding it in books we are reading. The Hobbit has been rich for grammar discussions.

 

I checked 8th grade ELA. It's all passages to read and answer questions about POV, reason for the passage, what happened first in a passage, word choice, word defining in context and essay questions to answer based on a story. There is no grammar formally tested. My friend said they also grade very easily on the written passages.

 

Wow. That is really sad. Looking at it from the big picture, students from those states will be competing against students from other states for admission/scholarships. I'm not sure how SAT/ACT prep makes up for yrs of educational neglect.

 

You did peak my curiosity, so I checked our state's standards. They do explicitly require instruction.

 

Here are bits and pieces from the 2nd-4th grade standards:

 

Recognize and use complete sentences.

Use and punctuate declarative, interrogative, and

exclamatory sentences.

Capitalize all proper nouns and the word I.

Edit writing for correct grammar, capitalization,punctuation, and spelling.

Use complete and varied sentences.

Use the word I in compound subjects.

Use past and present verb tense.

Use singular possessives.

Use commas in a simple series.

Use simple abbreviations.

Use apostrophes in contractions with pronouns.

Use correct spelling for high-frequency sight words,

including irregular plurals.

Edit writing for correct grammar, capitalization,

spelling, punctuation, and sentence structure.

Use subject-verb agreement.

Include prepositional phrases.

Eliminate double negatives.

Use noun-pronoun agreement.

Use commas in series, dates, and addresses.

Incorporate adjectives and adverbs.

Use the articles a, an, and the correctly.

 

That fits more of my experience based on the yrly standardized testing that we are required to submit.

 

Sorry for side-tracking your thread, OP. FWIW, MCT does teach grammar. I don't want anyone to think that this conversation is directly about MCT. MCT teaches targeted areas of grammar and mechanics w/in the context of the writing that he addresses. It is simply that his scope is limited to certain areas and traditional textbooks do cover a broader range and get into more focus on those concepts in general.

 

ETA: I'm going to see my niece on Sunday. She has been teaching 4th grade in NC for about 10 yrs. I'm going to ask her about how she addresses grammar in her class. I know she teaches it b/c I remember making a comment to her once when I was being berated by a homeschooling mom that insisted that you couldn't expect high schoolers to not have verb shifts. She told me that her 4th graders wouldn't get away with that. But how/what she teaches I don't know.

Edited July 2, 2011 by 8FillTheHeart

[Spy Car]

 

Here are bits and pieces from the 2nd-4th grade standards:

 

Recognize and use complete sentences.

Use and punctuate declarative, interrogative, and

exclamatory sentences.

Capitalize all proper nouns and the word I.

Edit writing for correct grammar, capitalization,punctuation, and spelling.

Use complete and varied sentences.

Use the word I in compound subjects.

Use past and present verb tense.

Use singular possessives.

Use commas in a simple series.

Use simple abbreviations.

Use apostrophes in contractions with pronouns.

Use correct spelling for high-frequency sight words,

including irregular plurals.

Edit writing for correct grammar, capitalization,

spelling, punctuation, and sentence structure.

Use subject-verb agreement.

Include prepositional phrases.

Eliminate double negatives.

Use noun-pronoun agreement.

Use commas in series, dates, and addresses.

Incorporate adjectives and adverbs.

Use the articles a, an, and the correctly.

 

 

Awfully low standards. And hardly ones (while they are mechanical things that need to be learned) that are the hall-mark of an exceptional education.

 

In contrast the MCT materials sizzle. I just got my box of Island Level (the entry level) materials today and have been obsessively been reading through them as fast as I'm able. It is an amazing program!

 

There is more grammar in this level that I'd bet most middle and high school ages students learn. The book on poetics is more than college students are exposed to, and the program generally appeals to the intellect and a sense of beauty.

 

If the MCT materials are not telling kid's to capitalize the first letter in a sentence or proper nouns (and that's the big problem) I'm thinking: Good grief! Kind of missing the whole point.

 

MCT is inspiring stuff. The other takes 10 minutes with a style book and zero imagination.

 

My little one goes to school. He learns that a question end with a question-mark. Big-deal. MCT has the education he would miss it we left it to the schools (alone) and I certainly would not want to replicate the grammar and language arts approach of the public schools at home.

 

I don't think your estimation of MCT is remotely fair. I am amazed at the depth of the content and the engaging manner in which it is presented. It is quite a contrast with some of the alternatives available.

 

Bill

Edited July 2, 2011 by Spy Car

[Capt_Uhura]

 

Sorry for side-tracking your thread, OP. FWIW, MCT does teach grammar. I don't want anyone to think that this conversation is directly about MCT. MCT teaches targeted areas of grammar and mechanics w/in the context of the writing that he addresses. It is simply that his scope is limited to certain areas and traditional textbooks do cover a broader range and get into more focus on those concepts in general.

 

 

:blush: Sorry...... you all can go back to the regularly scheduled programming......

 

PS: I wonder if more schools are integrating grammar instruction rather than having a separate grammar time? Is that integration falling by the wayside? Or is it happening but folks are told "We don't teach grammar" but it really means "We don't teach separate, formal grammar but it's integrated into the curriculum?" Anyhow, my high school teacher friend did say at the high school level they don't teach grammar. Kids can't parse or diagram simple sentences.

:lol:

[Capt_Uhura]

Those are covered in Magic Lens 1 (level 4) :001_smile:

 

Karen, still reading through the book...

 

Darn it - I never had a chance to look at that level at the conference!

[8filltheheart]

Awfully low standards. And hardly ones (while they are mechanical things that need to be learned) that are the hall-mark of an exceptional education.

 

In contrast the MCT materials sizzle. I just got my box of Island Level (the entry level) materials today and have been obsessively been reading through them as fast as I'm able. It is an amazing program!

 

There is more grammar in this level that I'd bet most middle and high school ages students learn. The book on poetics is more than college students are exposed to, and the program generally appeals to the intellect and a sense of beauty.

 

If the MCT materials are not telling kid's to capitalize the first letter in a sentence or proper nouns (and that's the big problem) I'm thinking: Good grief! Kind of missing the whole point.

 

MCT is inspiring stuff. The other takes 10 minutes with a style book and zero imagination.

 

My little one goes to school. He learns that a question end with a question-mark. Big-deal. MCT has the education he would miss it we left it to the schools (alone) and I certainly would not want to replicate the grammar and language arts approach of the public schools at home.

 

I don't think your estimation of MCT is remotely fair. I am amazed at the depth of the content and the engaging manner in which it is presented. It is quite a contrast with some of the alternatives available.

 

Bill

 

Bill, the standards for English document was 128 pgs long. That list was simply a pg I opened and copied a small snippet (not even the full pg). That said, I have no idea what is actually being taught in the ps since I have never sent a child to one. However, I do know what is on the ACT/SAT and the CAT. I also know what is in traditional grammar textbooks.

 

I can assert that there is no way that the Island level is more than most middle and high school students learn if they are attending a school that is actually teaching them appropriate grade level material. If they aren't, then yes, I guess it would be. But.....what some hypothetical public schools are not teaching is definitely not my standard.

 

Since the grammar in the Voyage level was significantly below my 6th graders level :001_smile: , that tells me that Island isn't middle school material according to my standards. ;)

 

FWIW, the only MCT material that I have criticized is AAW and the 2nd 1/2 of Essay. And w/o the slightest doubt I freely assert that criticism is absolutely justified. However, I have stated several times that I appreciated MCT's approach b/c his style so much echoes my own. I have also repeatedly stated that I enjoyed using his voyager's essay examples to teach from. A couple of them are delightful examples.

 

Discussing strengths and weaknesses of 2 completely different approaches is called conversation. Simply b/c you love it does not mean that is does not have any drawbacks. Nor does it negate the value of other approaches.

Edited July 2, 2011 by 8FillTheHeart

[8filltheheart]

Those are covered in Magic Lens 1 (level 4) :001_smile:

.

They are also covered in the back of AAW. However, I personally think that is an inappropriate level for that type of instruction. I consider that more of 3rd-5th grade level content.

 

Though, after reading some of the posts, I am getting confused as to what he thinks his target age level is for some of his materials. Someone posted that the thinks that AAW writing is for middle school. If that is the case, than Voyage is meant for 5th grade. I think the classic essay themes in Voyage are going to be lost on most 5th graders.....the exception being those that are extremely gifted.

[stripe]

I didn't believe folks who say grammar isn't taught in schools anymore.

 

When I was in high school 20 years ago, my class (honors) got a crash course in grammar by our (elderly) teacher. We used textbooks from the 60s that he had kept, plus sheets that he's typed up. I found these when I was going through my papers recently. Very concise, too. I think I was in the last year to get this instruction as he retired.

[Capt_Uhura]

Here is what I sent my teacher friend...

 

WHen is grammar taught in this area? I'm talking subject, predicate, indirect/direct objects, object of the preposition, action/linking/state of being verbs, subj-verb agreement, subject vs object pronouns, etc.

 

And here is her response:

 

I NEVER see grammar as you've listed being taught. Most of the time in 7th and 8th grade this is what I see..review of the parts of speech, subject, predicate and subject/verb agreement. Most of the teachers spend only 2-3 weeks on all this review and then move on...even if most of the class acts like they've never seen this stuff before! And they wonder why kids need remedial English when they hit college!

 

My friend says that the teachers who grew up in Whole Language times were not taught spelling rules or grammar so they do not feel comfortable teaching it.

[stripe]

Oh and do you know how difficult it is to learn a foreign language when you barely know what a noun is? .

 

Yes. In high school I learned quite a bit of grammar from studying another language. Actually I too remember our teacher looking a bit surprised at our ignorance but gamely giving us a crash course on parts of speech.

[gracyomalley]

I'm smiling as reading some of this, as I was in a gifted program in the 70s in public school, then transfered to Catholic school for middle school - and had to learn how to spell, write with proper cursive (not the made up stuff I was using), and parsing, etc....the first 2 months were a shock! I could always get great test scores on the "grammar" portions of standardized tests because I could read really well and had parents that insisted on proper English at home, but had I not had that natural gift and parenting, I certainly wasn't taught it. My guess is that many teachers today had the same public school education I was getting!

 

For what its worth, we are trying to do R&S AND MCT this year, in order to get both sides of the coin. R&S is dry as can be, but its something the kids can be pretty independent with (ds with LDs is going to work a "grade" behind in R&S....) and the MCT should meet the "love of language" goals. We really need the combo here - Now I just have to clone myself and the kids!

Erin

[8filltheheart]

I'm smiling as reading some of this, as I was in a gifted program in the 70s in public school, then transfered to Catholic school for middle school - and had to learn how to spell, write with proper cursive (not the made up stuff I was using), and parsing, etc....the first 2 months were a shock! I could always get great test scores on the "grammar" portions of standardized tests because I could read really well and had parents that insisted on proper English at home, but had I not had that natural gift and parenting, I certainly wasn't taught it. My guess is that many teachers today had the same public school education I was getting!

 

For what its worth, we are trying to do R&S AND MCT this year, in order to get both sides of the coin. R&S is dry as can be, but its something the kids can be pretty independent with (ds with LDs is going to work a "grade" behind in R&S....) and the MCT should meet the "love of language" goals. We really need the combo here - Now I just have to clone myself and the kids!

Erin

 

:lol: Well, Voyages in English was written by Loyola Press for use in Catholic schools. ;)

 

FWIW, I think your plan of blending them will enable you to focus on the strengths of each.

[Spy Car]

Bill, the standards for English document was 128 pgs long. That list was simply a pg I opened and copied a small snippet (not even the full pg). That said, I have no idea what is actually being taught in the ps since I have never sent a child to one. However, I do know what is on the ACT/SAT and the CAT. I also know what is in traditional grammar textbooks.

 

I can assert that there is no way that the Island level is more than most middle and high school students learn if they are attending a school that is actually teaching them appropriate grade level material. If they aren't, then yes, I guess it would be. But.....what some hypothetical public schools are not teaching is definitely not my standard.

 

Since the grammar in the Voyage level was significantly below my 6th graders level :001_smile: , that tells me that Island isn't middle school material according to my standards. ;)

 

FWIW, the only MCT material that I have criticized is AAW and the 2nd 1/2 of Essay. And w/o the slightest doubt I freely assert that criticism is absolutely justified. However, I have stated several times that I appreciated MCT's approach b/c his style so much echoes my own. I have also repeatedly stated that I enjoyed using his voyager's essay examples to teach from. A couple of them are delightful examples.

 

Discussing strengths and weaknesses of 2 completely different approaches is called conversation. Simply b/c you love it does not mean that is does not have any drawbacks. Nor does it negate the value of other approaches.

 

I know what is involved in "teaching to the test." That's what the public schools do. It is a pretty limited mandate.

 

I could not be less surprised that you would find you children's grammar education ahead of their purported level in MCT. You are obviously a grammar-maven (meant as a high compliment :001_smile:) who makes the study of grammar a core subject from an early age and is good at teaching it.

 

People who don't need a curriculum to teach a subject don't need a curriculum (how's that for a tautology? :D).

 

But even you seem to be saying your finding some of the materials inspiring, I think?

 

The Grammar education in the school (from my limited experience as the parent of a child in the local public school) is they "teach to the test." A child may (or may not) get a teacher who finds Grammar and a deep-study of Language Arts a passion. They do learn the "mechanics" of writing, but I have higher aspirations.

 

So much more to say, but duty calls.

 

Bill

[Capt_Uhura]

FWIW, I think your plan of blending them will enable you to focus on the strengths of each.

 

:iagree: I don't think I've ever found the perfect curriculum. I work w/ the strengths and shore up the weaknesses.

[8filltheheart]

I know what is involved in "teaching to the test." That's what the public schools do. It is a pretty limited mandate.

 

I don't have unlimited time to always type out exactly what I am thinking, but teaching to the test is definitely a distortion of my actual views. My actual belief is that if you provide a solid education, there is no need to teach to the test b/c whatever is on the test has actually been mastered.

 

In order to determine the mistake involving something like parallel construction, one would actually have to know that that even matters and what the proper grammar is that determines what is parallel and what isn't, etc. For the younger kids, basic mechanics need to be taught outside of just the realm of paragraph writing. I don't consider that teaching to the test. I consider it proper education.

 

I could not be less surprised that you would find you children's grammar education ahead of their purported level in MCT. You are obviously a grammar-maven (meant as a high compliment :001_smile:) who makes the study of grammar a core subject from an early age and is good at teaching it.

 

 

The sad thing is that I am NOT a grammar maven. My grammar education is the equivalent of an 8th grade Voyages in English education. The fact that that makes me even appear to be knowledgeable about grammar is simply a commentary on the state of proper grammar education. :tongue_smilie:

 

People who don't need a curriculum to teach a subject don't need a curriculum (how's that for a tautology? :D).

 

But I did when I first started. I do not think that I could have made MCT work my first couple of yrs of homeschooling. Why? B/c I didn't understand what parts actually went into constructinthe whole at that point. Once I understood the big picture and the parts, then teaching my kids both, the parts and the whole, became an easy process. I flip back and forth constantly. When I sit with my kids to revise and edit their work, half focuses on the "essence" of what they have written, but the other half absolutely deconstructs the piece. Grammar and mechanics are the tools that are required for the latter part.

 

But even you seem to be saying your finding some of the materials inspiring, I think?

Have you actually read what I have written? I have stated that I appreciated them multiple times. However, I lost considerable respect for MCT once I found out that the MLA papers were written the way they were on purpose and that he did not see a problem with how the paragraphs were constructed. I have more than 'issues" with the examples. The papers would never pass in my homeschool. My kids would have had to re-write every single one. When that is what is in 2 entire books worth of the writing portion of the program, yes, it is very problematic.

 

The Grammar education in the school (from my limited experience as the parent of a child in the local public school) is they "teach to the test." A child may (or may not) get a teacher who finds Grammar and a deep-study of Language Arts a passion. They do learn the "mechanics" of writing, but I have higher aspirations.

 

I can't imagine any poster not having the same objectives. I am sure everyone wants their children appreciate the beauty of language, see its elements in literature, and incorporate it into their own writing.

 

Yes, MCT does intertwine all those elements beautifully. But, he does not hold the market on uniquely developing those skills. Just like Singapore and Miquon are not the only way to learn and understand math, the same is true here. :lol: One can appreciate a method, see its strengths, and still recognize weaknesses and equally valid alternative approaches.

 

But......for myself personally, I can't get over the AAW hurdle. So.....I am back to

People who don't need a curriculum to teach a subject don't need a curriculum.

;)

[radiobrain]

I don't have unlimited time to always type out exactly what I am thinking, but teaching to the test is definitely a distortion of my actual views. My actual belief is that if you provide a solid education, there is no need to teach to the test b/c whatever is on the test has actually been mastered.

 

 

r

 

;)

 

Ok, I have to totally disagree with this. :D

 

You can be extremely well educated and do horribly on tests. You can also do very well on tests with a mediocre education if you have been taught how to do the tests.

 

These tests are not written very well. They are peculiar unto themselves. That is why there is so much focus on test prep.

 

Who knows who wrote a particular question, and the likelihood is that they had a mediocre public education. I doubt the cream of the crop are writing these tests, as it would be mind-numbing and probably not pay too well. It might even be by committee. :confused: I have found almost every section of each standardized test my children have done to be poorly written, full of oddities that make little sense, and errors.

 

JMHO, but I do not think that having mastered something, and being able to figure out what the person who wrote that particular question thought the answer was, are necessarily related.

 

Can you tell I am very opinionated about tests?

Edited July 2, 2011 by radiobrain

[Spy Car]

I don't have unlimited time to always type out exactly what I am thinking...

 

Trust me I know how you feel :D

 

...but teaching to the test is definitely a distortion of my actual views. My actual belief is that if you provide a solid education, there is no need to teach to the test b/c whatever is on the test has actually been mastered.

 

I never thought "teaching to the test" was YOUR VIEW, it is rather common is public schools.

 

The sad thing is that I am NOT a grammar maven. My grammar education is the equivalent of an 8th grade Voyages in English education. The fact that that makes me even appear to be knowledgeable about grammar is simply a commentary on the state of proper grammar education. :tongue_smilie:

 

As you will. Let's agree that the state of grammar education in our society tends to be quite low.

 

But I did when I first started. I do not think that I could have made MCT work my first couple of yrs of homeschooling. Why? B/c I didn't understand what parts actually went into constructinthe whole at that point. Once I understood the big picture and the parts, then teaching my kids both, the parts and the whole, became an easy process. I flip back and forth constantly. When I sit with my kids to revise and edit their work, half focuses on the "essence" of what they have written, but the other half absolutely deconstructs the piece. Grammar and mechanics are the tools that are required for the latter part.

 

So maybe I'm just getting to where you once were. I just know looking prospectively I could not be more excited to start any program with my child than I am with MCT. I marvel at what I'm seeing.

 

If I find I need to add a supplement on "mechanics" I can live with that. But what other program comes close to MCT in making the subject alive, creative and fun?

 

Have you actually read what I have written?

 

Every chance I get. You strike me as a pretty sharp cookie. I read your posts with interest.

 

I have stated that I appreciated them multiple times. However, I lost considerable respect for MCT once I found out that the MLA papers were written the way they were on purpose and that he did not see a problem with how the paragraphs were constructed. I have more than 'issues" with the examples. The papers would never pass in my homeschool. My kids would have had to re-write every single one. When that is what is in 2 entire books worth of the writing portion of the program, yes, it is very problematic.

 

We have spoken of this. We are like-minded in believing an introductory sentence followed by (and concluding in) a long quote is an insufficient paragraph. This was drummed into me, and it would not fly. If I have to correct this (not having faced it yet) I can, and will.

 

What I could NOT do is invent the wealth of an inter-related Language Arts program like MCT. I'm really impressed!!!

 

For me MCT is a "dream program." If it is not "perfect" I will deal. What else is this extraordinary?

 

I can't imagine any poster not having the same objectives. I am sure everyone wants their children appreciate the beauty of language, see its elements in literature, and incorporate it into their own writing.

 

If they do shouldn't they consider MCT? I have not seen another LA program that compares on these grounds. I would assume R&S would give a child strong grammar skills, but would it inspire an appreciation for the beauty of language? I dunno. Maybe it is something that works for some, but I can't image it working in my home. To each, his or her own.

 

Yes, MCT does intertwine all those elements beautifully. But, he does not hold the market on uniquely developing those skills. Just like Singapore and Miquon are not the only way to learn and understand math, the same is true here. :lol: One can appreciate a method, see its strengths, and still recognize weaknesses and equally valid alternative approaches.

 

I know the comparisons to Miquon and Singapore are a good-natured jab, but they are GREAT comparisons none-the-less ;)

 

There are a lot of ways to teach subjects. Math and Grammar have a long history of being considered dreadfully dull (if necessary) subjects that have been the bane of school children for generations. But one doesn't have to teach these subjects in an odious spirit-killing fashion. There are alternatives. You know what they are :tongue_smilie:

 

Bill

Edited July 2, 2011 by Spy Car

[Karie]

I use MCT and really like it. From a grammar perspective, I find that I like the way they do the 4 level analysis, but I also like traditional diagramming, so my kids do both MCT AND Growing with Grammar. We (yes, me too) are learning grammar from 2 different perspectives-making for a richer understanding of grammar.

 

I also use 2 different writing programs-MCT and whatever strikes my fancy for the year (I'm trying Jump In this year), because I want them to have different perspectives on the writing process as well.

 

Am I overdoing it?? I don't believe so. It doesn't take a lot of extra time to add in GWG, and I can work the writing assignments between 2 writing programs in such a way that they are not overwhelmed with writing too much at one time. I find that mixing MCT with other curriculum has been an excellent balance for our school.

[StephanieZ]

Yup. I did. Several successful but dull years with R&S. . . 18 mos into a blissful MCT journey. Some days I miss being able to simply hand the kids their books (one fab. thing about R&S) . . .

 

But every day we use MCT, I am struck by the elegance and complexity of his approach to language. He is just a genius, IMHO. MCT is just *so* much deeper and more sophisticated. I love it.

[NittanyJen]

Dang it, Bill, you are not going to cost me more money...

[Spy Car]

Dang it, Bill, you are not going to cost me more money...

 

It is not an inexpensive program. But does it ever shine! We will start up in 3 or 4 days (post birthday) and I can't wait. Until then I am covertly reading the books. For me this is a dream-come-true type program. I have never seen anything like it.

 

Could one get some of the job done by other means? Sure. But I've never seen another Language Arts program that has the appeal to my tastes that MCT has. So, despite the cost, it looks well worth it.

 

Bill

[TheAutumnOak]

We started the grammar part today...My son liked it alot...We should be finished "launching the grammar" by the end of this month :001_smile:

[Finnella]

I didn't believe folks who say grammar isn't taught in schools anymore. I recently had a long conversation about grammar with a friend. He teaches high school language arts in the neighboring district. They do not teach grammar. He teaches juniors and seniors. They can't distinguish between an adjective and an adverb. Don't know the difference between subject and object pronouns.

 

 

I only started homeschooling my younger son this year when I pulled him out of 6th grade. My older DS just finished 9th grade in the largest school district in North Carolina. He's been in the Spanish immersion program since first grade. Neither of my children have learned any grammar, except for a misnomered two week "review" my 9th grader had at the beginning of this school year. So he's fluent in two languages and totally ignorant of grammar in either.

 

I had to teach my 9th grader at night, and I've started him on Latin this summer to help with both his grammar and his vocabulary for SATs.

[Capt_Uhura]

Finnela - Kudos to you for teaching it at night! I'm sorry you found he had such a hole in his education.

 

A friend who tutors kids at the $25K/year elite private school is finding huge holes in the writing instruction. A tough pill to swallow when you pay huge amounts in taxes to the public school, and an additional $25K/year to the private school, and then more money for a tutor!!! It can happen anywhere.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Originally Posted by Capt_Uhura

I didn't believe folks who say grammar isn't taught in schools anymore..

In theory, it is taught in Georgia schools. This is from the sixth grade standards:

 

ELA6C1 The student demonstrates understanding and control of the rules of the English language, realizing that usage involves the appropriate application of conventions and grammar in both written and spoken formats. The student

a. Identifies and uses the eight basic parts of speech and demonstrates that words can be different parts of speech within a sentence.

i. Identifies and uses nouns – abstract, common, collective, plural, and

possessive.

ii. Identifies and uses pronouns – personal, possessive, interrogative,

demonstrative, reflexive, and indefinite.

iii. Identifies and uses adjectives – common, proper, and demonstrative.

iv. Identifies and uses verbs – action (transitive/intransitive), linking, and

state-of-being.

v. Identifies and uses verb phrases – main verbs and helping verbs.

vi. Identifies and uses adverbs.

vii. Identifies and uses prepositional phrases (preposition, object of the

preposition, and any of its modifiers).

viii. Identifies and uses conjunctions – coordinating, correlative, and common subordinating.

ix. Identifies and uses interjections.

b. Recognizes basic parts of a sentence (subject, verb, direct object, indirect object, predicate noun, predicate adjective).

c. Identifies and writes simple, compound, complex, and compound-complex sentences, avoiding fragments and run-ons.

d. Demonstrates appropriate comma and semicolon usage (compound and

complex sentences, appositives, words in direct address).

e. Uses common spelling rules, applies common spelling patterns, and develops and masters words that are commonly misspelled.

f. Produces final drafts that demonstrate accurate spelling and the correct use of punctuation and capitalization.

However, in practice, it doesn't really work that way. I learned this the hard way: by teaching.

 

I had last taught school in 1993, and I had primarily taught math and science—only occasionally teaching other subjects (I'm certified in middle grades math, science, language arts, and social studies, and I also taught high school math on a probationary certificate one year). I was used to knowing what needed to be taught, making my own plans, and implementing them. I worked other jobs after I quit teaching, including a job as an installer/trainer, which required traveling. After my son was born in 1998, however, I didn't return to work; I just helped my husband with his job.

 

Then in 2007, dh's job was among the first to be affected by the recession, so we were in a mess. I felt I had no choice but to return to the classroom, so I went through the process of renewing my certification and then began the application process. I was interviewed and hired so quickly that I should have known to run. I had not been in a classroom in 14.5 years, and, boy, was I in for an eye-opener.

 

Anyway, while all the other sixth grade teachers each taught one subject all day, I was hired to teach all the major academic subjects. Each main subject was given the same amount of time. In other words, I had my social studies students just as long every day as I had my language arts students; yet I had far more I was supposed to cover in language arts.

 

We were all supposed to be teaching the same thing at the same time, so all the teachers of each subject in each grade met together each week to plan. I'll just say that there wasn't a lot of input allowed. We just did the same thing they had done for the past few years. This meant that the reality was that we only had a couple of weeks to try to pack in all the grammar, punctuation, etc.

 

During one of our so-called planning sessions, I asked, "Are we not going to cover comparatives and superlatives?" (They were in our book.)

 

The head of the department said, "No, that's not on the test."

 

Much of our time was taken up by the kids' taking benchmark tests and doing a variety of other things to make sure the kids were ready for "the" test. Let's not forget that at one point all of our other materials were cast aside so that we could use the Coach books to further prepare the kids for "the" test. (In case you feel left out, most likely your state has them, too. ;))

 

Truly all that mattered all year was "the" test (actually I started teaching on December 3rd of that school year). In one of our faculty meetings, one of the assistant principals said, "I don't know why y'all complain about having to teach to the test. It's a good test."

 

Then she went on to say that "the" test was based on Georgia's standards and that Georgia's standards had been rated near the top in the country (number four, if I recall correctly). Without thinking, I said, "Well, that's depressing," and she, not surprisingly, gave me a dirty look.

 

Nothing really seemed to be taught in any logical sequence. It was very frustrating for me, and I'm sure it was frustrating for the kids as well.

 

Add to that the fact that worse than no preparation, my students had had poor preparation. They had been allowed to develop very bad habits. They were allowed to use what their elementary teachers had called "kid spell" (the kids just guessed at the spelling, and their errors weren't corrected). Likewise, the elementary schools taught that all that was important was to write, write, write. Structure nor anything else like that mattered. The teachers didn't correct the students' papers because they didn't want to "ruin their creativity or self-esteem." I would much rather have started from scratch than to have dealt with that. I should add that one of those elementary schools got national recognition for its writing program. I didn't know if I should laugh or cry.

[Capt_Uhura]

JudyJudyJudy - I'm speechless. WOW. Can you tell me the demographics of your school? Was it predominately middle to upper class? Low SES? Predominately white? Mixed?

[JudyJudyJudy]

The school itself is in a rural area and is over 90% white (state average is 46% white). As a whole, 46% of the students are economically disadvantaged (state average is 50%). The other teachers got to choose which students to send to the new teacher (a teacher before me, who only lasted nine weeks—and then, ultimately, me), so I had more students with problems than most of the other teachers had.

 

A number of my students had at least one parent in prison, and a large percentage of the kids didn't even live with one parent. Because of location (an easy drop point for drugs), the area has a high drug rate. All that said, the school generally rates around a 5 on a scale of 1 to 10, which is based primarily on test scores. (I've taught in a school that rated 1 and in a school that rated 10, so I've covered the range.) All the teaching to the test usually gets the school to make AYP, but barely.

Edited July 11, 2011 by JudyJudyJudy

[TeaCookiesBears]

I believe it. I grew up in Whole Language times and I didn't learn much grammar. We learned the parts of speech (barely). That was about it. We didn't even learn phrases and clauses. I am literally learning this for the first time now. It's ridiculous.

 

Oh, but it's funny because as an accelerated student we went over diagramming one year. Diagramming is pretty difficult and useless when you only barely know the parts of speech. I had no idea what the purpose of diagramming was.

 

It's a wonder why anyone asks me the reasons I homeschool. :blink:

 

:iagree::iagree:

 

 

I remember learning nouns, subject and predicate in second grade and that was the end it. Then I received remedial grammar in 8th grade for a few for summer school and I was totally lost. Fast forward to college and my teachers biggest complaint from my teachers(and husband :D) was my grammar and took remedial grammar again. What a disaster this was for me and others who learned this way.

 

I didn't even know what parsing or diagramming was until I recently (2wks) when I was looking around the forum for a good grammar program for my girls. Now, I homeschool because I saw the school system (supposedly a good school) was taking my dd down that same road. The sad part was that I thought she was doing OK because the standardize test said that she was above average in Language Arts. That was until something did not add up and I became suspicious and got her tested only to find out found other wise:cursing::mad::crying:.

 

The sad part of all this is that schools, today, just want to teach kids to pass a test. So,that the school does not lose funding from the federal government and this was told to me by several teachers.

Edited August 2, 2011 by dyana17
Bad grammar

[Spy Car]

My son goes to a public elementary school, and one considered the best (or one of the best) in one of the nation's largest school districts.

 

Believe me, there is a reason we are doing a comprehensive grammar program at home.

 

Bill

[TeaCookiesBears]

My son goes to a public elementary school, and one considered the best (or one of the best) in one of the nation's largest school districts.

 

Believe me, there is a reason we are doing a comprehensive grammar program at home.

 

Bill

 

How very true indeed. My bad grammar is the poster child for grammar reform in schools:D. Soon I will be right there learning with " a comprehensive grammar program" with my girls.:tongue_smilie: