MCT scope and sequence

[Roadrunner]

I keep reading that MCT grammar is very repetitive. While I am only just getting ready to purchase the Town level, I would love to know where all the levels eventually lead. Can you help me figure out scope of each grammar level? I will start with the Island.

MCT Island - parts of speech, subject, predicate, prepositional phrases.

Town -?

Paragraph -?

???

 

Also in the Island level everything taught in the Grammar Island was retaught in the Sentence Island. Is it te same for the Town level?

My son is halfway through the Killgallon Elmentary Sentence Composing book and I really don't want a lot of duplication.

[Chrysalis Academy]

I don't own Grammar Island, so I can't tell you exactly where it leaves off, but I know it doesn't teach phrases - at least not verbal and appositives, IDK about prepositional.  Verbals & appositives are introduced in Town.  Grammar Town & Grammar Voyage teach exactly the same stuff.  Exactly.   We ended up skipping GV for the most part.

 

I think MCT grammar is great beginning grammar for young kids, but I'm beginning to see its limitations.  We did Sentence Island, the whole Town level, skipped most of Grammar Voyage, and are now working quickly through the Practice Voyage sentences while I decide where to go next.  The problem I'm seeing at this point is that while you ID the parts of speech and parts of the sentence, you don't talk about the relations between sentence parts - i.e., what is that prepositional phrase modifying?  or the functions - i.e. - is the prep phrase behaving like and adjective or an adverb?  There is none of that.  There is discussion about misplaced modifiers,  and whether verbals are behaving as nouns or adjectives, but the linear 4-level analysis method doesn't really give a mechanism for seeing the relations between sentence parts.  This is where I think diagramming has an advantage over 4-level analysis, and I'm thinking that's where we may go next with grammar.

 

I'm really, really glad we started with 4-level analysis, and I think it will make diagramming very easy to learn, but I think that it's limited all by itself. 

[Penelope]

Chrysalis Academy is right about what the first three levels cover.

 

However, I would not say that it is repetitive of the Killgallon elementary and middle school books. I don't really think of the Killgallon books as grammar instruction beyond the fact that they are fabulous for introducing clauses and getting them to see how the various types of phrases operate in sentences. Killgallon is part of our writing program, not grammar so much. But MCT is sentence analysis, including parts of speech, parts of the sentence, and phrases (in the town and voyage levels).

[Roadrunner]

What about grammar town and paragraph town? Does Paragraph Town repeat what's in Gramnar Town (Sentence Island and Grammar Island taught he same material)?

 

Any uses of Magic Lens series? Do upper levels cover ramp up in a meaningful way?

[Spy Car]

The problem I'm seeing at this point is that while you ID the parts of speech and parts of the sentence, you don't talk about the relations between sentence parts - i.e., what is that prepositional phrase modifying? or the functions - i.e. - is the prep phrase behaving like and adjective or an adverb? There is none of that.

That's not accurate. There is a good bit of this in the Town level, especially in the Practice books, and if memory serves the same was true of Island.

 

Bill

[Chelli]

We're using Island right now and the only phrase that is introduced is the prepositional phrase. It does teach how to identify what the prepositional phrase is modifying and thus if it's acting like an adverb or adjective.

[Roadrunner]

Do I need both Paragraph Town and Town Grammar? 

I really regret getting both Sentence island and Grammar island. We could have just done fine with Sentence Island. I don't want to make that mistake twice. 

 

Also, nobody uses Magic Lens? 

[Chrysalis Academy]

That's not accurate. There is a good bit of this in the Town level, especially in the Practice books, and if memory serves the same was true of Island.

 

Bill

 

I'm not sure what your referent is for "this".  A good bit of what?  I don't mean its never mentioned in the grammar books, but what I'm referring to is the 4-level analysis you do in the practice books.  First line, parts of speech.  Second line, parts of the sentence.  Third line, phrases.  Fourth line, clauses.  There isn't any explicit visual or other type of representation connecting the modifiers to the modify-ies.  

[Chelli]

I'm not sure what your referent is for "this".  A good bit of what?  I don't mean its never mentioned in the grammar books, but what I'm referring to is the 4-level analysis you do in the practice books.  First line, parts of speech.  Second line, parts of the sentence.  Third line, phrases.  Fourth line, clauses.  There isn't any explicit visual or other type of representation connecting the modifiers to the modify-ies.  

 

I added that in myself by having my dd draw an arrow from the prepositional phrase to what it's modifying, then she labels the arrow adjective or adverb.

[Chrysalis Academy]

I added that in myself by having my dd draw an arrow from the prepositional phrase to what it's modifying, then she labels the arrow adjective or adverb.

 

 

Yeah, we do this too. I think there is more than one way to skin a cat - diagramming is one way, and 4-level analysis is another, but unless 4-level analysis is modified, it does miss this piece you get from diagramming.  OTOH, with diagramming you don't explicitly label the parts of speech.  So I think they both are both useful.  I'm not trying to knock MCT, I've really enjoyed using it, I was just disappointed that for the price the Voyage level seems to add nothing to the Town level.  This makes me disinclined to continue with the upper levels of the grammar program.  

 

There is definitely new info between Island and Town - just not between Town and Voyage.

[Spy Car]

I'm not sure what your referent is for "this". A good bit of what? I don't mean its never mentioned in the grammar books, but what I'm referring to is the 4-level analysis you do in the practice books. First line, parts of speech. Second line, parts of the sentence. Third line, phrases. Fourth line, clauses. There isn't any explicit visual or other type of representation connecting the modifiers to the modify-ies.

I'm sorry, but you are incorrect on this point. Whether phrases are acting as giant adjectives or giant adverbs is covered in Town, and I'm pretty sure that was the case in Island.

 

ETA: MCT does not include a special notation (at this level anyway), we add "as adj." or "as adv." but the concepts are covered, and included in many of the "Comments."

 

Might it have been better for MCT to add a "notation feature" to the phrases? Yes, I could see that. But is isn't like it isn't covered or discussed.

 

 

Bill

[Chrysalis Academy]

Where?

 

This seems like a dumb argument to keep having, but I just looked in Practice Voyage, and I don't see it.  

[Spy Car]

Where?

 

This seems like a dumb argument to keep having, but I just looked in Practice Voyage, and I don't see it.

It is all over the place, but especially in the Practice notes. We had one today (not the clearest example but easy for me to find since it was today's work).

 

Completely exhausted by their labors, they anticipated a long repose.

 

In the "Comments" the "Phrases" (Level 3 of the analysis is discussed):

 

In this sentence we see and introductory participial phrase that contans a propositional phrase. The participle is exhausted, a verb form used as an adjective to modify the grammatical subject they.

 

Not the best example, but phrases acting as giant adverbs or giant adjectives are covered repeatedly in MCT. Is it an intrinsic part off the formal parsing structure? No. Would it be better if it were? Think so. So we include it. Did we know to include it because it was covered and discussed in the works? Yes, we did because it was.

 

Bill (who is glad he does grammar on Sundays :D)

[Crimson Wife]

Do I need both Paragraph Town and Town Grammar? 

I really regret getting both Sentence island and Grammar island. We could have just done fine with Sentence Island. I don't want to make that mistake twice.

If you're really on a tight budget, you can absolutely skip "Grammar Town" and just use "Paragraph Town" and "Practice Town". Especially if your kids are familiar with the various phrases and clauses from Killgallon.

[Luckymama]

Also, nobody uses Magic Lens?

We used Magic Lens but not after any other MCT levels, so I can't answer your "ramping up" question from a message before this.

[Chrysalis Academy]

It is all over the place, but especially in the Practice notes. We had one today (not the clearest example but easy for me to find since it was today's work).

 

Completely exhausted by their labors, they anticipated a long repose.

 

In the "Comments" the "Phrases" (Level 3 of the analysis is discussed):

 

In this sentence we see and introductory participial phrase that contans a propositional phrase. The participle is exhausted, a verb form used as an adjective to modify the grammatical subject they.

 

Not the best example, but phrases acting as giant adverbs or giant adjectives are covered repeatedly in MCT. Is it an intrinsic part off the formal parsing structure? No. Would it be better if it were? Think so. So we include it. Did we know to include it because it was covered and discussed in the works? Yes, we did because it was.

 

Bill (who is glad he does grammar on Sundays :D)

 

 

Ok, I think I get where we are crossing our wires.  I did say in my first post that he does talk about when verbals are used like nouns and adjectives, there is actually quite a lot of discussion of that, you are absolutely right. Because figuring out how the verbal is used is key to identifying it.

 

But what I've been noticing lately is that there isn't the same kind of analysis of prepositional phrases (when are they acting like an adjective? when are they acting like an adverb? are they modifying the verb, the subject, the object?).  I also think that the relationship between clauses is harder to see with a linear analysis.  Whereas with diagramming, the relationships of the phrases & clauses with the other parts of the sentence is crystal clear.

 

I'm really not trying to be stubborn in sticking with this discussion - I've actually been thinking about this pretty intensively for the past week as I try to decide where to go next with dd's grammar and writing.  We hit a wall with WWS, and we're almost finished with Voyage and I'm trying to figure out what to do next for grammar, too.  So I was listening again to SWB's writing lectures, and it's funny, because this time, she actually convinced me that diagramming was worth it - I"ve listened to that lecture a bunch of times, and I've always thought "ah, diagramming is over-rated, 4-level analysis is plenty" but I'm actually starting to change my mind about this.  So, there are a lot of grammatical thoughts (and ungrammatical ones too ;) ) bubbling about in my brain as I look at all the different grammar and writing options out there - again - after I had thought I had a long term plan for both of these subjects!

[Spy Car]

Ok, I think I get where we are crossing our wires.  I did say in my first post that he does talk about when verbals are used like nouns and adjectives, there is actually quite a lot of discussion of that, you are absolutely right. Because figuring out how the verbal is used is key to identifying it.

 

But what I've been noticing lately is that there isn't the same kind of analysis of prepositional phrases (when are they acting like an adjective? when are they acting like an adverb? are they modifying the verb, the subject, the object?).  I also think that the relationship between clauses is harder to see with a linear analysis.  Whereas with diagramming, the relationships of the phrases & clauses with the other parts of the sentence is crystal clear.

 

I'm really not trying to be stubborn in sticking with this discussion - I've actually been thinking about this pretty intensively for the past week as I try to decide where to go next with dd's grammar and writing.  We hit a wall with WWS, and we're almost finished with Voyage and I'm trying to figure out what to do next for grammar, too.  So I was listening again to SWB's writing lectures, and it's funny, because this time, she actually convinced me that diagramming was worth it - I"ve listened to that lecture a bunch of times, and I've always thought "ah, diagramming is over-rated, 4-level analysis is plenty" but I'm actually starting to change my mind about this.  So, there are a lot of grammatical thoughts (and ungrammatical ones too ;) ) bubbling about in my brain as I look at all the different grammar and writing options out there - again - after I had thought I had a long term plan for both of these subjects!

 

Whether prepositional phrases are acting as "giant adjectives" or "giant adverbs" is covered in MCT (starting in Island, if I'm not brain dead—which is possible :D). Because it was/is we just started adding "as adj." or "as adv." as a standard part of our 4 Level Analysis with Phrases (Level 3). 

 

I'm sympathetic to the idea that it would have been a good thing for Mr Thompson to have included this as a formal part of the rubric, but he does cover and discuss the concepts. Personally I think MCT covers these concepts quite well. My son fully understands phrases working as adjectives or adverbs. We've diagrammed many of the MCT sentences, just because, but they haven't added anything (other than understanding the "form" of diagrams.

 

I think the MCT way (and the overall approach of the program) is perfect for us. For us it is a "dream program."

 

Bill

[Chelli]

Yeah, we do this too. I think there is more than one way to skin a cat - diagramming is one way, and 4-level analysis is another, but unless 4-level analysis is modified, it does miss this piece you get from diagramming.  OTOH, with diagramming you don't explicitly label the parts of speech.  So I think they both are both useful.  I'm not trying to knock MCT, I've really enjoyed using it, I was just disappointed that for the price the Voyage level seems to add nothing to the Town level.  This makes me disinclined to continue with the upper levels of the grammar program.  

 

There is definitely new info between Island and Town - just not between Town and Voyage.

 

This is good to know. We might stop using MCT after Town then. My dd LOVES MCT, but it's not a cheap program especially if there is nothing new at the higher levels.

 

Whether prepositional phrases are acting as "giant adjectives" or "giant adverbs" is covered in MCT (starting in Island, if I'm not brain dead—which is possible :D). Because it was/is we just started adding "as adj." or "as adv." as a standard part of our 4 Level Analysis with Phrases (Level 3). 

 

I'm sympathetic to the idea that it would have been a good thing for Mr Thompson to have included this as a formal part of the rubric, but he does cover and discuss the concepts. Personally I think MCT covers these concepts quite well. My son fully understands phrases working as adjectives or adverbs. We've diagrammed many of the MCT sentences, just because, but they haven't added anything (other than understanding the "form" of diagrams.

 

I think the MCT way (and the overall approach of the program) is perfect for us. For us it is a "dream program."

 

Bill

 

The bolded is true. We are in Island right now and how prepositional phrases are used is covered in Grammar Island, Sentence Island, and Practice Island.

 

I do agree about not having explicit instructions on how to include this teaching in the 4 level analysis, but it was easy enough to add.

[Roadrunner]

If you're really on a tight budget, you can absolutely skip "Grammar Town" and just use "Paragraph Town" and "Practice Town". Especially if your kids are familiar with the various phrases and clauses from Killgallon.

I can afford it, but my kid will revolt if there isn't any new material. I want to be efficient and avoid jugling too much of the same. He loooooved Mud, but his interest was roused more by Killgallon because it introduced new things. I feel a bit lost with MCT right now.

[Roadrunner]

We used Magic Lens but not after any other MCT levels, so I can't answer your "ramping up" question from a message before this.

Can you tell me what Magic Lens 1 covers?

[Chrysalis Academy]

Whether prepositional phrases are acting as "giant adjectives" or "giant adverbs" is covered in MCT (starting in Island, if I'm not brain dead—which is possible :D). Because it was/is we just started adding "as adj." or "as adv." as a standard part of our 4 Level Analysis with Phrases (Level 3). 

 

I'm sympathetic to the idea that it would have been a good thing for Mr Thompson to have included this as a formal part of the rubric, but he does cover and discuss the concepts. Personally I think MCT covers these concepts quite well. My son fully understands phrases working as adjectives or adverbs. We've diagrammed many of the MCT sentences, just because, but they haven't added anything (other than understanding the "form" of diagrams.

 

I think the MCT way (and the overall approach of the program) is perfect for us. For us it is a "dream program."

 

Bill

 

I would have said the same thing a year ago, but I'm starting to hit a wall with it, along with WWS which I really wanted to love.  It's disconcerting.   :huh:   I'd love to find something that works now, and keeps on working.  I'm a neurotic planner that way.  ;)

 

I still think it's MCT is great, and I am looking forward to starting SI with dd7.  Just trying to figure out where to go next with dd10.  And, I'm on a much tighter budget now than I was when I first started using MCT, which may very well affect my judgement.

[Crimson Wife]

I can afford it, but my kid will revolt if there isn't any new material. I want to be efficient and avoid jugling too much of the same. He loooooved Mud, but his interest was roused more by Killgallon because it introduced new things. I feel a bit lost with MCT right now.

"Grammar Town" is a very brief overview of the material that is covered much more in depth in "Paragraph Town". From what you've described, I think you'd be totally fine skipping it.

[Chrysalis Academy]

"Grammar Town" is a very brief overview of the material that is covered much more in depth in "Paragraph Town". From what you've described, I think you'd be totally fine skipping it.

:iagree:

[Penelope]

I keep hoping someone who has used the upper levels will come and post about the grammar therein.

 

But have you looked at the Magic Lens samples? I just did, and they look really, really good. They do include diagramming. And a more thorough discussion of parts of speech in the practice sentences. And excerpts from great literature. And just general fabulous-ness. :D Now I need to rethink my English plans for next year.

[Roadrunner]

I keep hoping someone who has used the upper levels will come and post about the grammar therein.

 

But have you looked at the Magic Lens samples? I just did, and they look really, really good. They do include diagramming. And a more thorough discussion of parts of speech in the practice sentences. And excerpts from great literature. And just general fabulous-ness. :D Now I need to rethink my English plans for next year.

I have, but the table of content just isn't very detailed. I always thought MCT would meet higher level (everything but mechanics) grammar needs, which is why I am so agitated over the recent comments in other threads about MCT only covering basics. I thought I had it all figured out :).

I am also surprised how few people use upper levels of this program for grammar.

[Spy Car]

I have, but the table of content just isn't very detailed. I always thought MCT would meet higher level (everything but mechanics) grammar needs, which is why I am so agitated over the recent comments in other threads about MCT only covering basics. I thought I had it all figured out :).

I am also surprised how few people use upper levels of this program for grammar.

 

I think that relatively few people use it at upper levels because it hasn't been all that long since MCT became "known" on this forum. I remember very well when Moira (nmoira) was the only person I knew on this forum that was using MCT. I took one look. and thought: Wow, if it's as good as it looks on preview (and PMs with Moira lead me to believe) I've found the sort of program I'd dreamed about. But nobody else I was aware of was using it, which seemed weird to me.

 

Only later (in the last couple years) has MCT "blown-up" on this forum, when it became so discussed it qualified as "the flavor of the month." But before that? Crickets.

 

So more many more people have used Island, Town, and (now) Voyage, since jumping in "late" in a program is not most peoples first move, and the program has not been in the WTM "awareness" (as hard as that is to believe now) all that long. It is not even mentioned in TWTM book as an option. 

 

Bill

[SunnyDays]

I'm glad for this discussion.  We really enjoyed the Island and Town levels of MCT, and I've been wondering whether to get the whole enchilada for Voyage, or just do CE II... that piece, obviously, is non-negotiable here.  :D

 

We *can* afford to get the package, but I don't want to be wasteful if DS isn't going to get much new out of it.  He's actually doing really well with Hake... we combined the two last year.  He got his parts of speech and sentence down cold with MCT and has a pretty good grasp on the phrases... Hake is hitting all the mechanics, as well as getting into phrases, clauses, etc. 

 

So, if Voyage doesn't really have a lot of new material, we might just skip it.  It's sad because DS loves it, but it'll frustrate him if it's mainly a repeat... and it'll frustrate me that I paid that much for a completely unnecessary supplement, LOL!!

 

[thebacabunch]

The magic lens covers all of the parts of speech in depth.  It is a very rigorous program.  It is best done with Word within the Word, the poetics, and the literature.  They pull examples from each other.  This is a program for very gifted junior high students.  It could pass muster as college prep (at least) for high school as well.  I did a lot of the same kinds of work in my Honors and AP classes in high school.   I had easier college English courses, lol.  I highly recommend the upper levels of MCT.  My 7th grader is really enjoying it (as much as any kid enjoys school) and learning a lot.  She is a gifted student with a high iq and this is perfect for her.  I would say that a teacher  should be really honest about their kids ability to do high level language arts before choosing the upper MCT levels.  My middle kiddo is autistic and excels in math.  I highly doubt that she will be able to be successful with the upper MCT levels.  The important thing to decide is whether a kid likes language, can read and understand the classics appropriate to the level of the books in the upper MCT trilogies, is a fairly good writer, etc.  As an example, the grammar book is to be covered completely in the first quarter with  practice analysis of pretty complex sentences taken from classic literature for the rest of the year.  At the same time a kiddo is studying about 30 pages a week in the grammar text the student would also be memorizing a list of about 30 Latin and Greek roots a week with different practice activities for those roots during the week (including SAT level analogies, figuring out word meanings based on its roots, etc.)  After the grammar book is finished and the practice sentences begin, the reading and analysis of poetry and classic literature begins.  The 30 root a week lists continue throughout the year.  In my opinion the program works best with all of the elements.  The only part of the program that I swap out is the writing portion as I favor WWS which is also rigorous.  It is a beautiful program and has all of the elements I was looking for based on my experiences in AP and honors classes.  I read the poetry texts for fun because I think they are wonderful.

[8filltheheart]

Yeah, we do this too. I think there is more than one way to skin a cat - diagramming is one way, and 4-level analysis is another, but unless 4-level analysis is modified, it does miss this piece you get from diagramming. OTOH, with diagramming you don't explicitly label the parts of speech. So I think they both are both useful. I'm not trying to knock MCT, I've really enjoyed using it, I was just disappointed that for the price the Voyage level seems to add nothing to the Town level. This makes me disinclined to continue with the upper levels of the grammar program.

 

There is definitely new info between Island and Town - just not between Town and Voyage.

Rose,

 

I am confused by the statement that in diagramming you don't explicitly label parts of speech. How are they diagramming if they haven't explicitly identified each part of speech? Simply by location in the diagram, you have already identified the part of speech. I guess I don't see why writing subject is more explicit than putting the subject in the subject location of the diagram bc they would have to know in order to do it and are therefore labeling it via form. But, my kids tend to write labels and bracket before diagramming anyway, so they are doing both.

 

But, I do agree that Voyage's grammar is just bleh. Dd had already mastered the concepts so we simply moved on.

[Chrysalis Academy]

Boy, I am communicating so badly on this thread, aren't I?

 

I just meant that in MCT and diagramming you represent the information differently.  With the 4-level analysis, level 1 is identifying the part of speech in each word, and level 2 is identifying the functional parts of the sentence.  Then you id the phrases (and discuss what they are modifying, although you are not asked to explicitly, physically connect the modifying phrases, people have pointed out that it is discussed in the TM and you are meant to talk about this) and you id the clauses and decide what type of sentence it is.  

 

For us at least, we need to do step 2 before step 1.  If you haven't id'd the core of the sentence - what is the subject, what is the verb, what kind of verb hence will it have an object or complement - then you can get led astray in step 1, because with verbals you have a word that looks like a verb being used as a different part of speech.  You can't see this till you look at the sentence as a whole.  So word-by-word linear parsing may not be the best way to see this, IMO.

 

Whereas in diagramming - you don't do Level 1 - the labelling of each part os speech, as opposed to identifying the parts of the sentence, which is step 2.  You need to do the 2nd level of MCT's analysis first, so you can draw your basic stem with the core parts of the sentence.  Then you attach the modifiers to the stem.  Yes, absolutely, you have to know what part of the sentence each thing is before you can put it on the diagram.  What you don't do in diagramming is id each part of speech separately first - as you do in MCT  Level 1.  But, like I said above, we don't do that Level 1 part first anyway, because as the sentences get more complex and include verbals, you really can't do a linear, word-by-word parse.  So I don't think it's much of a loss.

 

So what I was trying to say is that with diagramming, you skip Level 1 word by word part of speech id.  With MCT, you don't explicitly, visually represent the relations among the modifiers and modify-ees, although as has been pointed out exhaustively in this thread, you are supposed to discuss it!

 

 

Anyway, I have no idea if this is clear.  I seem to be speaking in a muddle.  My only real point with all this is that the methods are different, and that you get different kinds of mental (and physical) representations with them.  I would imagine that the different styles - 4 level analysis and diagrmming - might work better for different students.  I am just newly recognizing what I believe to be a limitation of the 4-level analysis method, used alone.  Maybe MCT realizes this, too, and that's why he includes diagramming in Level 4 of the program????

 

The original question of the OP was about redundancy in the first three levels of the program, and I think that we have established that there is, a lot. Some kids may need that repetition, some may not.  I would also love to hear more about the upper levels, because at the price, if it is also very redundant, it doesn't make sense to purchase it if you are on a tight budget. 

 

[Roadrunner]

The magic lens covers all of the parts of speech in depth.

What else does the grammar component cover?

I know vocab portion is very rigorous, but I am trying to figure out if my plan of MCT grammar + daily paragraph editing would be enough over the years to cover all that we need to learn about grammar, or if we need to eventually work through Warriner's (or another resource).

 

Rose, I looked up some of the books you mentioned in another tread for applied grammar. Keep the suggestions coming :)

I do know what you mean about diagramming versus four level analysis, so we might eventually work through Rex Barks.

 

We love MCT and absolutely adore Mud, but I still need to make sure I am covering all ends. I don't want to be blinded by cuteness :) Also, English is not my native tongue, so I really, really, really need the best there is for grammar for my boys.

[Spy Car]

What else does the grammar component cover?

I know vocab portion is very rigorous, but I am trying to figure out if my plan of MCT grammar + daily paragraph editing would be enough over the years to cover all that we need to learn about grammar, or if we need to eventually work through Warriner's (or another resource).

 

Rose, I looked up some of the books you mentioned in another tread for applied grammar. Keep the suggestions coming :)

I do know what you mean about diagramming versus four level analysis, so we might eventually work through Rex Barks.

 

We love MCT and absolutely adore Mud, but I still need to make sure I am covering all ends. I don't want to be blinded by cuteness :) Also, English is not my native tongue, so I really, really, really need the best there is for grammar for my boys.

 

Have you considered just diagramming the MCT Practice Sentences? Learning the mechanics of diagramming is easy, and (since MCT teaches the concepts well) it just takes a moment to see the sentences another way by diagramming them. Then the skills build sequentially.

 

Rex Barks is from an "Objectivist" (Ayn Randian) publishing house, if that is an issue for you.

 

Bill

[Roadrunner]

Have you considered just diagramming the MCT Practice Sentences? Learning the mechanics of diagramming is easy, and (since MCT teaches the concepts well) it just takes a moment to see the sentences another way by diagramming them. Then the skills build sequentially.

 

Rex Barks is from an "Objectivist" (Ayn Randian) publishing house, if that is an issue for you.

 

Bill

I know :)

It's been 20 years since I last diagramed a sentence :) I need a book for the peace of mind to know I am doing the right thing. I now it's Randian, but apparently it's very good. Yet it still only solves the diagramming question and leaves the bigger issue (is MCT in depth at the higher levels) unanswered :)

[Kuovonne]

For us at least, we need to do step 2 before step 1. If you haven't id'd the core of the sentence - what is the subject, what is the verb, what kind of verb hence will it have an object or complement - then you can get led astray in step 1, because with verbals you have a word that looks like a verb being used as a different part of speech. You can't see this till you look at the sentence as a whole. So word-by-word linear parsing may not be the best way to see this, IMO.

 

When we do MCT 4 level analysis we do not do word-by-word linear parsing. We bounce back and forth among the lines, filling in parts as we figure them out. That makes it easier for us than diagramming. We also draw arrows from modifiers to what they modify, and we label objects of prepositions and verbals.

 

I do think that MCT 4 level analysis has its limitations, but it works for us.

[Spy Car]

I know :)

It's been 20 years since I last diagramed a sentence :) I need a book for the peace of mind to know I am doing the right thing. I now it's Randian, but apparently it's very good. Yet it still only solves the diagramming question and leaves the bigger issue (is MCT in depth at the higher levels) unanswered :)

 

There are a myriad of websites that show the mechanics of diagramming. It is dead-simple if you understand the grammar. MCT does a great job, IMO,  teaching the grammar so diagramming the practice sentences is a cinch!

 

I have no reason to doubt that MCT is the deepest Language Arts program available. One will hear negative comments about any program on this forum. My experience is limited to Island and Town. Godsends, both. What else comes remotely close?

 

Is there overlap between the levels? Yes. In a perfect world I wish the tilt was slightly towards new grammar material, but understand the practical considerations behind why some concepts are covered in review. My boy, who sounds like yours in liking new things, gained—I believe—at having some of the previous level treated again (so it gets throughly inculcated).

 

There is plenty of new (and challenging) material in Town. Grammar Town can be read in "no time." If it has "review" (which it does) it is not "endless review." It is short and sweet.

 

Bill

[thebacabunch]

To answer the question about what the upper levels of MCT cover in grammar  I really don't know how to answer any other way than I have.  The mechanics of grammar are really only 8 parts of speech with some in depth analysis of each part. There isn't anything new, it is just covered in a way that is for higher level thinking.  Honestly, I think a lot of people cover grammar to death when it is a subject that is most appropriate as a full subject for grammar level students (meaning before jr high).  After grammar grades everything should be review of harder texts and sentences.  A good language arts program for upper levels should do a good REVIEW of grammar but focus on language, literature, and writing.  MCT is not what I would consider an open and go workbook type of curriculum.  It is beautiful and hard and requires a lot of student and teacher.  At the upper levels serious consideration of writing SAT and college entrance essay writing should be more important than grammar;  the grammar should now be a tool for considering literature and for writing excellent papers.  Grammar can be used to wonder at the beauty of good writing.  MCT is very focused on Latin and Greek stems, reading classic literature, and writing excellent papers.  I think someone who only uses the grammar portion of MCT after the elementary levels is completely missing the point of what MCT is about.  I would stress again that the upper levels of MCT are for gifted students.  Even hard working kids would be completely at sea with MCT if they aren't able to read and understand appropriate vocabulary and classic literature that goes with each level.  It is a curriculum that is gaining steam amongst classical homeschoolers because it is rigorous and classically based, but it is written for honors level kids.   If a kiddo still needs intensive grammar instruction and can't see that the 4 level analysis teaches everything that is needed to write well (which is the whole point of grammar)  it is not the right program.  I would say that it is a different beast than the town, island, etc., levels and should feel like hard but rewarding work for the kids who have natural talent in the language arts.  I seriously hope that this post does not come across as condescending.  I don't know how I can better explain.  MCT is part of a group of a publishing house for gifted and talented kids. 

 

Of all of the hours spent reading, studying, and writing in jr high and high school honors and AP courses I would say that, maybe, 5 percent of our time was spent on grammar.  That may be a high estimate.

[Roadrunner]

There are a myriad of websites that show the mechanics of diagramming. It is dead-simple if you understand the grammar. MCT does a great job, IMO,  teaching the grammar so diagramming the practice sentences is a cinch!

 

I have no reason to doubt that MCT is the deepest Language Arts program available. One will hear negative comments about any program on this forum. My experience is limited to Island and Town. Godsends, both. What else comes remotely close?

 

Is there overlap between the levels? Yes. In a perfect world I wish the tilt was slightly towards new grammar material, but understand the practical considerations behind why some concepts are covered in review. My boy, who sounds like yours in liking new things, gained—I believe—at having some of the previous level treated again (so it gets throughly inculcated).

 

There is plenty of new (and challenging) material in Town. Grammar Town can be read in "no time." If it has "review" (which it does) it is not "endless review." It is short and sweet.

 

Bill

I understand that, but not having any new material in grammar books between level 2 and 3 is worrisome (it wouldn't be if there was nothing else new to cover, but that's not the case). I am trying to make sure that isn't the case in upper levels. My son loves MCT, but his interest drops when new material is absent. I don't have a problem with MCT (in fact it's the best part of our day), but I do need to make sure I don't duplicate too much. 

 

If anybody feels that MCT is lacking in grammar instruction, I would love to know what it is that's missing. Rosie's perspective is very helpful. I am glad to hear that so far nobody has posted a list of MCT grievances (deducting from this that there aren't many). Thebacabunch, if each level goes deeper, that means there is new material in each level. I am simply trying to understand what's coming without having to shell out a thousand dollars all at once to take a look at it myself.  

[Spy Car]

I understand that, but not having any new material in grammar books between level 2 and 3 is worrisome (it wouldn't be if there was nothing else new to cover, but that's not the case). I am trying to make sure that isn't the case in upper levels. My son loves MCT, but his interest drops when new material is absent. I don't have a problem with MCT (in fact it's the best part of our day), but I do need to make sure I don't duplicate too much. 

 

If anybody feels that MCT is lacking in grammar instruction, I would love to know what it is that's missing. Rosie's perspective is very helpful. I am glad to hear that so far nobody has posted a list of MCT grievances (deducting from this that there aren't many). Thebacabunch, if each level goes deeper, that means there is new material in each level. I am simply trying to understand what's coming without having to shell out a thousand dollars all at once to take a look at it myself.  

 

 

But where do you get the idea that there is nothing new in Voyage (level three of the program)?

 

How would this make sense? I have not used Voyage, so I can not ally your fears with first-hand experience. but my experience is I read a lot of things on this forum that ain't so. And this goes against common sense. 

 

I know "8" has big issues with MCT's use of quotations and deviation from MLA standards (in her view), which I am somewhat sympathetic to (like not letting a paragraph end with the "quote" making the point) but I get no sense MCT doesn't handle grammar well at upper-levels, and (as thebacabunch says) the rest of the LA program seems really deep.

 

We will see.

 

 

Bill

[Roadrunner]

But where do you get the idea that there is nothing new in Voyage (level three of the program)?

 

How would this make sense? I have not used Voyage, so I can not ally your fears with first-hand experience. but my experience is I read a lot of things on this forum that ain't so. And this goes against common sense.

 

I know "8" has big issues with MCT's use of quotations and deviation from MLA standards (in her view), which I am somewhat sympathetic to (like not letting a paragraph end with the "quote" making the point) but I get no sense MCT doesn't handle grammar well at upper-levels, and (as thebacabunch says) the rest of the LA program seems really deep.

 

We will see.

 

 

Bill

It wasn't 8. I think Rosie was the most recent one to say that Grammar Town and Grammar Voyage was duplicative (Rosie, I hope I am not misrepresenting you here :) ). I have seen others supporting this view on this board. Apparently there is lots of new material between Island and Town, but not much between Town and Voyage. This doesn't apply to vocab and writing books.

[Penelope]

I wouldn't even say there is a lot more grammar in town than in Island. Except for introduction of phrases, it's a repeat.

 

That isn't to say that repetition is bad. It's pretty typical for elementary grammar to repeat the same things, adding little bits at a time each year.

[8filltheheart]

I know "8" has big issues with MCT's use of quotations and deviation from MLA standards (in her view), which I am somewhat sympathetic to (like not letting a paragraph end with the "quote" making the point) but I get no sense MCT doesn't handle grammar well at upper-levels, and (as thebacabunch says) the rest of the LA program seems really deep.

 

:)

 

From my perspective it calls into question any review which claims that writing excellent papers is applicable to AAW 1 and 2. ;)

 

It wasn't 8. I think Rosie was the most recent one to say that Grammar Town and Grammar Voyage was duplicative (Rosie, I hope I am not misrepresenting you here :) ). I have seen others supporting this view on this board. Apparently there is lots of new material between Island and Town, but not much between Town and Voyage. This doesn't apply to vocab and writing books.

I have never seen the lower levels, but if your student knows the basic parts of speech and can identify verbals, prep phrases, etc, there will be nothing new in VG.

[Crimson Wife]

If anybody feels that MCT is lacking in grammar instruction, I would love to know what it is that's missing.

I find MCT's grammar instruction deep but overly narrow. It is rigorous and "meaty" for the topics that it does cover, but it skips over a number of topics that students will encounter on standardized tests. Sure, it's easy to supplement MCT in the areas where the grammar instruction is lacking, but it annoys me that a relatively expensive program requires supplementation rather than being complete by itself.

[Chrysalis Academy]

Yes, it was me who said that Grammar Town and Grammar Voyage cover exactly the same material.  They do.  Verbals are added in Town, but nothing new is added in Voyage.  My kid is like yours, Roadrunner, she doesn't need that much repetition of the same thing.  Grammar Voyage felt like deja vu all over again.   Another long chapter (1/4 of the book) dedicated to parts of speech?  and then parts of the sentence - again?  Thanks, after two previous levels, we got it already, we need to move on.  

 

I will give this caveat - I have the Grammar Voyage that is copyright 2007, March 2010 printing.  I believe there is a more recent revision.  Perhaps that has something added that the original GV lacked.  I can't speak to that, I can only talk about the book I have in front of me.

 

There isn't any argument here about whether Town covers more material than Island.  It does.  the question is does Voyage cover new information than Town, and do the upper level/Magic Lense books cover more than Voyage & Town.  So, thebacabunch is telling us that Magic Lense includes diagramming.  That's cool.  And she says it covers things more deeply.  That's cool too.

 

But I do notice when I look at the sample that it is exactly the same structure as the previous books - there are 70 pages covering the 8 parts of speech.  Again.   This does give me pause.

[Kuovonne]

Does anyone know if a student could do Town level, and then skip Voyage, and start Magic Lens?

[Lara in Colo]

I am chirping in here because (as it so happens) I have every MCT level (except the last) in house--- but we are only up to the end of town and will be starting voyage an a couple of weeks. 

 

I have the 2007/2010 printing version of voyage.  It does seem to be repetitive of town. However, it does look as though it goes into more depth with more examples.

I guess I would liken it to pre-algebra, where you use all the information you gave gone over in the past and review.  If you really got every thing in Island and Town, you can skip Voyage-- if some things were shaky and need more work (for us that is phrases) then doing the review will cement things. 

 

Looking at the ML1 (2013)--- I see diagramming included the and the book seems to go more in depth with mistakes to avoid (affect vs effect), misplaced modifiers

ML2 covers punctuation rules and loops (whatever those are)

 

Actually ML1&2 look HARD and I am not so upset that my 8th grader (who I thought was behind) is doing them so late-- it looks as though she is probably at the right level.

 

I haven't looked at the other books deeply (since this thread was mainly about grammar) but I am confident they will prepare us for high school level writing with little or no supplementing.

 

 

 

[Chrysalis Academy]

Thanks Lara, that is helpful!  

 

I agree, if a kid doesn't have it all down, the repetition in Town & Voyage may be helpful.  

[Lara in Colo]

After further thought, I would recommend skipping Town and doing Voyage. 

[8filltheheart]

After further thought, I would recommend skipping Town and doing Voyage.

I have never seen Town and it has been 3 yrs since we used Voyage, but iirc, he spends something like an absurd 3 pages on articles and then covers all verbals in something like 8?? (I really don't remember exactly anything other than the ironic disproportion of coverage and difficulty of concept).

 

I am wondering if the verbal coverage is enough inVoyage for someone who may have no idea what they even are. Of course, you could simply use the Internet for explanations and use the exercises from V.

[Roadrunner]

So if I buy Voage level + Paragraph Town and CE1, I am good to go?

We are covering in Killgallon prepositional phrases, participle phrases, appositives, as well as adjective and adverb clauses.

[Lara in Colo]

There are 9 pages (in a large font) on phrases in Town

There are 8 pages  (in a smaller font) in Voyages.

 

I went over and over and over those 9 pages and we are (including me) still confused.

I finally asked here about phrases and was led to a decent web page that helped more.

I am REALLY hoping that voyage does a better job-- I can only tell you once I have done it, but from glancing it looks better than Town-- it cannot be worse.