If you have seen Bravewriter and MCT...

[Monica_in_Switzerland]

How do they compare, philosophically speaking?

[Five More Minutes]

I have both programs here. I am using MCT Island currently but I read through TWJ about a year ago. Hopefully someone with more Bravewriter experience will jump in.

 

I'll start with Bravewriter. I like the philosophy, but so far implementation has seemed to be too much to me. TWJ talks about adopting a writing lifestyle. For example, at the younger levels, she advocates reading good literature and pausing to talk about the writing that makes it great. Copywork, dictation, and narration from good books are also part of the younger grades' activities. Grammar and spelling are taught in context via the writing process.

 

I wholeheartedly agree with the Bravewriter approach, but I find WWE is just plain easier for me to implement. With WWE passages are selected, the dictations are set, and I can open and go. Also, I had been using WWE for a year before I discovered Bravewriter, and I was (am) reluctant to switch programs when WWE has been working so well here.

 

MCT is a language arts curriculum that has a very strong (and lovely) grammar component. Each level begins with students studying grammar, and then reinforcing what they've learned for the rest of the year with practice sentences. ("Studying grammar" isn't the best way to describe the grammar book, because it's a read-together-and-discuss, enjoyable book.) Ideally, once the grammar text is completed, the student starts adding in other elements of the LA program: vocabulary building, writing, poetry, and literature. All of these books reference the grammar learned at the beginning of the level.

 

So I see MCT as more of a grammar-based program, although it also contains some excellent writing exercises. (For example, "Describe something using sentences that have the same number of words in both predicate and subject.") The writing activities have made my dd really see that writing is constructed and she has had a lot of fun trying out new ways to make sentences.

 

I use MCT in conjunction with WWE, and continue to read great books with my students.

[Monica_in_Switzerland]

Thank you for your comparison!

[Crimson Wife]

TWJ is very "big picture" and more of self-education for me than an actual writing curriculum. MCT has open-ended assignments, but they are still assignments, KWIM?

[Farrar]

We use BW. I've seen and looked at MCT but not used it.

 

I would say BW is about integrating language arts and bringing everything together. MCT is about parsing things and breaking them down, though in an interesting and engaging seeming way. So while a lot of people use them together and may find them complimentary, I think they're very philosophically different when it comes to what they're each trying to do.

 

In terms of method, BW is flexible and loose. MCT is much more structured and rigid. Not rigid in a bad way per se - but it tells you what to do. BW just tells you things you could do and why you should do them. BW is about making a routine part of your school week. MCT is specific assignments and steps.

[dbmamaz]

yes, exactly . . . MCT is a rigorous curriculum. You go through the grammar book first, then do a schedule of 1 day poetry, 1 day writing, 1 day grammar practice, 1 day vocab. (4 separate books). The story in the younger 2 levels is really sweet, as the levels increase they use very high quality, high level writing samples (level 3 included the Gettysburg Address for example). Rich language, enough work that it took us more than a year to finish voyage even tho i was using it with a 9th grader (who is 2E and had been in special ed so he was behind)

 

Bravewriter is more a manual of how to teach your children to love language and learn to find their own voice. She has very light assignments you can purchase separately and i've heard great things about the classes, but its primarily about how to teach writing so that kids will love it.

 

i've loved them both, with different kids

[Chrysalis Academy]

Hmm, that is the first time I've seen someone describe MCT as structured and rigid and telling you what to do . . . or that it parses and breaks things down instead of bringing everything together. Since I have a different perspective on MCT, I'll try and share it:

 

What I like about MCT is how it integrates the various parts of LA: why do we care about grammar? Because we want to write beautiful sentences and paragraphs. Why do we want to learn vocabulary? So that we can read and enjoy great literature, and use interesting vocabulary in our own writing. But, you can't use vocabulary properly unless you understand the grammatical functions the words can play . . . .it's all like that. And in the writing books, you review grammar, and in the grammar books, you review vocab, and in the vocab books, you review grammar and writing . . . and poetics is woven through the whole thing.

 

The assignments, such as they are, are very open-ended, too. It's mostly done orally, via discussion. So I don't think it's at all rigid, or telling you what to do, at least in the sense that a workbook-based grammar program like FLL is. It's not nearly as prescriptive or directive as WWS, either, nor are the assignments as explicit - in fact, the slipperiness of the assignments gives people a pause sometimes.

 

Anyway, there's another take on MCT. I've just started looking at Bravewriter, and have had a hard time getting my mind around it. My dd writes wonderful, multi-paragraphs reports on a lot of topics with very little trouble, and she loves creative writing, but when we tried a "Freewriting" exercise described in BW, it just came out as a page of unconnected, reptitious, and not very interesting random stuff. I'm not sure what the point was, exactly, or if it would be that helpful where we are at, but I am interested in hearing other people's experience with it.

[Crimson Wife]

Hmm, that is the first time I've seen someone describe MCT as structured and rigid and telling you what to do

 

Well, if there is a continuum, then TWJ would be on one end, WWE/WWS would be on the other, and MCT would be in between. Compared to WWE/WWS, MCT is loosey-goosey. Compared to TWJ, it is structured.

[dbmamaz]

also the only year of MCT i used fully was voyage ... there was a lot of written assignments, at least for our standards, and it got very dry and tedious after a while. I loved the idea, but we came to really loathe the writing samples in essay voyage. and my son got really tired of doing the practice book - he could do it pretty well, but would literally cry when there was something he didnt know - the practice book stretches what you learned in the text book, so often we had to read the 'notes' to figure out what something was. The poetry book was absolutely lovely and I think paragraph town was one of the best investments I made. I also guess I dont use repetitive workbook-style programs at all, aside from upper level math and science, so for me, it was one of the most laid-out, spelled-out, textbookish thing I used outside of math and upper level science.

[Farrar]

I didn't end up using either of them, but my impression wasn't that MCT would be loosey-goosey compared to WWE/WWS. I think the storybook quality to it is deceptive. Underneath, you've got that in depth language analysis and using grammar structures as the jumping off point for writing. It's couched in a loosey-goosey shell, but what's under there seems just as in depth as WWE.

 

TWJ is as rigorous as you make it to some extent, though she's definitely advocating for going at a child's pace and being okay with not pushing too hard. Instead of grammar being the base, developing voice is the jumping off point for writing.

[Trillian]

I have used both. I think what they both have in common is that a love of language and an unusual, less restrictive way of presenting it.

 

I am no longer using MCT. I have been tempted, but for me, it is not worth the cost. That said, DS loved it and would be happy if we were using it again. I foung the writing (in Island), the weakest portion. IMO, it was not a complete LA curriculum because of that.

 

Bravewriter requires, again IMO, a lot of work to make it work. I kind of feel like I'm operating without a net and doubt myself about writing a lot. DS took an on-line class from them this year and I felt like it gave me the confidence to keep going. I plan to re-read TWJ soon, maybe even this next week, as I'm deciding for next year. Certainly, he will take another Bravewriter class. Whether I will be brave enough to continue as is or if I will succumb to the siren song of a more formal curriculum remains to be seen.

[hcrocker]

I have only used TWJ a little bit over the past year, have spent more time using MCT. I think MCT gets challenging very quickly - my dc were not ready to get excited about subject complements and direct objects in third grade (Island level). That said, I do really love the materials, and there is not a lot of drill and kill type work outside of the grammar practice books. We switched this year to WWS for my 7th grader. It's a bit below her in terms of outlining instruction, but it the assignments are less overwhelming for her than the MCT - she was using Voyage level. We were at a point where we needed more step by step, breaking the process down. MCT does that but in a very different way, and the end of chapter assignments are very open-ended. That is something I liked, but my dc didn't. To be fair, my WWS/Voyage child does not like writing, though she does a decent job. She just wants to get through it, unless it's totally creative writing. We use TWJ to address the more free-flowing element, to keep the joy in writing. It comes out periodically when we need a break from the more structured/challenging material. So that's about as clear as mud. But I'd say TWJ can be used very early - my first grader participates. I would assess readiness for MCT to get the most out of it, but agree with the person who said it's also about joy of language. I'd say WWE/WWS is the most utilitarian, and does a good job of breaking the process into manageable steps. Less conceptual, more applied, if that makes sense.