While we're celebrating the new year's eve

Here is a lovely rendition of Auld Lang Syne with the original melody. Tradition has it that this, not the well-known melody, is the tune Burns intended for his lyrics. Whether that's so or not, I do think this old Scottish folk tune is prettier and more fitting than the one everybody knows (which, as far as I can find, is also an old Scottish folk tune).

C. S. Lewis on Christmas

Found this through NarniaWeb. Devin Brown writes about Lewis's belief in sacred merriment rather than religious dreariness or commercialized celebration.

...How can we exult in a world where there is so much to lament? Where can we find joy in a world where hate is strong, as Longfellow has written, and mocks any expression of peace on earth and good will to men? In the “jocund” Psalms—where music, festivity, and agriculture are not things separate from religion, nor is religion something separate from them—Lewis claims, “I find an experience fully God-centered, asking of God no gift more urgently than His presence, the gift of Himself, joyous to the highest degree, and unmistakably real.”

Read the full article on the C. S. Lewis Blog.

New Photoblog!

I am moving my Blogger photoblog, de Lumine, to a new account with a dedicated photoblogging host. Blogger has proved to be unwieldy; I guess it wasn't really made for photoblogging. My new host is Aminus3, and I already love the features they have: archives, and a portfolio page, and automated updates, and more, all for free! My new photoblog is http://delumine.aminus3.com/. Check it out!

Aaand I just figured out how to put a feed from my photoblog on our sidebar, so now if you scroll down you can see a slideshow of pictures from de Lumine!

New Kitchen!

I loved this post at The Common Room. Miss M loved it, too. But we don't have an old entertainment center hanging around. And, in fact, she already has a pretty nice little toy kitchen.

She got this almost exactly four years ago. Look how adorable she was, just turned two years old:




The kitchen was cute, but the oven opened sideways, not really like a real oven that opens out, and it wasn't very practical for organizing stuff to put away. But the examples inspired me to put some work into remodeling her kitchen. We had some cup hooks, old wire shelving and an old towel rack. I splurged and spent ten dollars on a couple of wire baskets to hang on doors, and Mr. B did the labor, including changing the way the oven door opens -- here is the result:



Look how much she's grown in four years!! She used to not be able to reach the microwave; now she can reach the very top of the unit.



Note the cup hooks for hanging utinsels over the stove-top, old towel rack over the sink, and baskets hung on doors. The baskets under the sink are for silverware. The oven opens the right way, and it even has a real oven rack.

Miss M insisted on pictures of her cooking and eating. Since we did the remodel, she has played non-stop with her kitchen. (It probably didn't hurt that we also got down some dishes and things that had been boxed up because she was too little and/or didn't like to pick up toys.)

Norms and Nobility ch 9 and 10

PART II: The Practice of a Classical Education

9 - A Curriculum Proposal (What Might Have Been)

Theorists who have little experience have been allowed to ruin education with new-fangled objective experiments and ideas that leave a lot of important aspects out of education. But humans engaged in real learning can't be measured with objective, testable results. Relationships between student and teacher don't work that way. In order to be certified, teachers are required to take dull classes that don't make them better teachers. After WWII, we were finally able to provide education for all people of every social class - but then schools began to detour from training the whole person to live well, to political objectives of materialistic success and equality that would eliminate poverty. Education began to focus on material rather than spiritual growth. The focus turned to lowering academic standards and raising poor people's skills to get them better jobs. But, for all that, utilitarian education has not ended financial or class inequality. We teach students to desire wealth, but we deprive them of the knowledge that will bring them true contentment. David Hicks then lists suggested books in his ideal curriculum, such as Beowulf, Churchill's history, Keats and Tennyson, Tolkein and other recognized classics.

-----------------------------------

10 - Some Questions and Assumptions (What Ought to Be)

I

The chapter opens with a quote by Jose Ortega y Gasset dividing the world into two kinds of people: "those who make great demands on themselves, piling up difficulties and duties; and those who demand nothing special of themselves" because they can't be bothered trying to improve themselves.

Every educational plan is based on some foundational assumptions. The amount of thought put into the questions and assumptions determines the quality of the resulting education and its goal/vision, and the assumptions need to be regularly assessed and re-evaluated if the plan is going to stay on course rather than dissipating in different directions, catering to the whims of parents, teachers, board members and everyone else. We must ask what ought to be done rather what can be done - we mustn't confine our vision to practical limitations.

Administrators should ask themselves:
What are our priorities?
Does our school reflect those priorities?
Are we influencing/inspiring our surrounding community to grow spiritually/intellectually?
Do we keep our goal/vision for educating the whole person at the forefront, rather than obscuring it with methodology and details?

Teachers should ask themselves:
How are we teaching better writing and communication skills?
How are we teaching students to think critically and clearly?
Are students learning the differences between poetic, scientific, religious and historical truth, and why they are all needed?
What are the important questions, and are students encouraged to ask them?
Does our faculty communicate well together, and do we know what our students are reading/learning outside of school?
Am I a good teacher? Am I still learning and teachable? Do I accept that I don't know everything and encourage my students to seek answers elsewhere?
How well do I really know my students?
How can I get my brightest students to translate knowledge into responsible action instead of arrogance?
Am I accessible to my students? Do I make time for them to seek me outside of class?
Do I assess my teaching and share what I've learned about teaching with other teachers?
Do I understand that education is a whole, and am I a whole person? Do I teach with vision and passion, or am I simply teaching to the test?

Administrators and teachers should ask:
What is the role of parents/home in our school?
Do we allow for change, or are we afraid to grow?
Do we have clearly articulated reasons for our curriculum? Does it fit our vision?
Do we encourage teachers to continue learning, even if it means taking a sabbatical?
Is our school leading the way in some area?
What are our school's ideals for its students? For its teachers? Do we encourage/work towards that?
What is our goal for our graduates? What do we hope to leave them with; what can they look back on later in life?

II

After reminding us that our assumptions are influenced by attitudes and preconcieved ideas that have unwittingly become a part of who we are, David Hicks lists his own "idealistic" assumptions that his ideal education is based on. I don't trust that I've done a fair job summarizing these points; in fact, I suspect I've misrepresented his point at times and oversimplified to the point of butchering. If this looks intriguing, you'll need to read the chapter yourself.

1. Liberal education prepares a person for any job and is more important than training students for a job.
2. No one can do everything; better for students to do a few things well than to fritter time exposing them "to a kaleidoscope of new ideas."
3. Teach basic skills early and refine them later.
4. If taught well, any subject can be learned at any age. (so, start grammar at age 5??)
5. Selectivity of subjects should be done as a school with its vision/goals in mind, not haphazardly by individual teachers/departments.
6. "Begin with the best," teach excellence by using excellent resources and examples.
7. Books are fine, but inspiration comes from a great relationship with the teacher.
8. The bond between teacher and student eliminates the tension between educational freedom and discipline.
9. Provoke questions and stimulate curiosity; don't jump to provide answers too quickly.
10. Teaching students to ask the right questions is more important than being an expert in your subject.
11. Isolating subjects encourages analytical criticism (bad); integrating them encourages wholeness (ggod).
12. Team-teaching, with each teacher only knowing his own subject, discourages integrated wholeness of education.
13. Curriculum must be structured to correspond to the continuity of development (does he mean that difficulty should progress as students mature?)
14. If the curriculum is well-structured and cohesive, students will learn more in less time and retain it better.
15. This kind of cohesive, well-rounded education should eliminate the need for guidance counselors who must fit utilitarian-educated kids (pegs) into the job market (round holes).
16. God and religion are part of the cohesive whole and shouldn't be isolated and removed from education.
17. Schools shouldn't mirror popular culture. They should stick to their own vision.
18. Teachers should reflect the school's commitment to learning by seeking to grow and learn themselves.
19. Education's purpose isn't to prepare us for a job. It is to teach us to live "fully in the present, while we grow in wisdom and in grace, in conscience and in style, entering gradually into 'the good life.'"

C. S. Lewis college underway in Massachusetts

Saw this news over at NarniaWeb. The C. S. Lewis Foundation has become the owner of the Northfield Mount Hermon school in Northfield, Mass., as a major step in its plans to start a C. S. Lewis College. The college will be a private Christian liberal arts undergraduate school. It doesn't look like it will be devoted specifically to studying Lewis and his works. Rather, it will have a great books curriculum with fine arts programs, with Lewis as the patron saint, so to speak.

The C. S. Lewis Foundation is an American non-profit organization which wants to start a "renaissance of Christian scholarship and artistic expression within the mainstream of the contemporary university," according to their website. They don't have direct ties with Lewis—i.e., they're not connected with Douglas Gresham or the C. S. Lewis Company Ltd. which owns the rights to Lewis's works—although they do own the Kilns Association which takes care of Lewis's old home in Oxford.

The funds for the purchase came from HobbyLobby, which is dedicated to supporting Christian ministries. I didn't know that about them before; we have a HobbyLobby in our area and shop there occasionally, but I might have been more eager to support them had I known their company background. I also noticed some references to D. L. Moody in the articles about the new college. As it turns out, Northfield Mount Hermon was originally a private school founded by Moody, and his birthplace is near or on the campus.

I almost wish this had happened a few years ago, so I could have attended school there. I say almost; I like my current school. But the C. S. Lewis College interests me, so I may keep an eye on the project.

Norms and Nobility ch 8 - The Promise of Christian Paideia

No, I didn't forget this book. It's just been busy and I haven't had the time for it. I've also been reading a couple of King Arthur books, which meant that this took a back seat.

8 - The Promise of Christian Paideia (paideia=education)

Why should anyone strive to improve himself through education and morality? The pagan Greeks could never answer this. Their best attempts at self-improvement and balance made them ego-centric, elitist and materialistic. But modern [Christian] classical education has its foundation somewhere between humanism and Christianity, creating a tension between the two. Christ embodied logos (rationality) and mythos (story/parables), which brings both together in a way that I'm skimping too much to explain well.

Greek pagans and Christian both agree that self-centeredness is a big problem. Ancient classical education strived to make students focus on something other than self, like duty and sacrifice. Ancient philosophy tried to help men focus outside the self through reason. Ancient rhetoric sought to build character through literature examples. Ancient art tried to draw man out of himself through focus on a better ideal and inspiration to live divinely. They had the right idea, but they lacked Christ to empower them and make them able to be better people through love.

Christ gave men the 'why;' the purpose for being better: in order to be perfect, like Christ. Christianity answered the questions the Greeks had been unable to reconcile, such as whether man is good or bad (the answer is that he was created good in God's image, but sinned and fell from perfection.) Man can choose to live according to God's law, but he more often chooses to be self-centered. His errors are avoidable sins rather than noble, fated tragedies that are out of his control. Christianity offered hope instead of unescapable fate.

Modern utilitarian education doesn't offer any high-striving idealistic attempt at self-improvement, or a Christian hope-based striving to be better. It offers a value-less secular model of relativism. There's no ancient complexity or Christian mystery; it's all analytical data. In trying to get away from the religious blind faith of a divine God, modern educaton replaces it with the religious blind faith of science that disconnects responsibility from what is learned/known. The student's education doesn't help him live better or be better.

But Christian classical education offers a focal point apart from self (Christ), a reason/purpose for being a better person, and an ideal to strive for (again, Christ). There's a whole-ness to it. Learning isn't an end in itself for the sake of knowledge; it's means to holiness and right living. It teaches love for God rather than egotism.

Modern education doesn't acknowledge any supernatural force; the mind and facts are all that matters. But ancients and Christians recognized something beyond the chemical/physical/material world. Christians relate it to faith and divine revelation. Faith is regarded as an aid to understanding, not a hindrance that opposes fact and intellect.

Ancients wanted the intellect to influence the will - learning truth should make people want to do the right thing. But it took Christianity to connect knowledge with will. After Christ, there were no mythological supernatural heroes because he was the perfect and ideal person -- he couldn't be topped. After him, saints were the new heroes. They were like Christ, the new hero, but not quite as ideal. They combined faith and knowledge with their will by trying to live out what they knew was right.

We can see the final results of ancient classical education in the book of Acts: in Athens by that time, the people only cared to hear the latest ideas. The focus wasn't on truth anymore. Learning had become trivial, and the people had become superstitious. Christianity gave them something worth learning, and something worth learning for. We need Christian classical education today to prevent students from becoming smug in their knowledge of data but incapable of being wise and responsible.

What would you do with $10 of Sharpies?

How about some interior decorating?

An article about charter schools' performance

versus that of public schools. From the Wall Street Journal. The article is a few months old but still interesting. It's about the performance gap between students from charter schools vs. students from public schools. Some recent studies show that charter schools do not, as some critics say, cull the best students from public schools; they simply educate their students better. So, not only are charter schools cheaper than public, but they work better too. (Surprise!)

A Frog with Inner Light

I saw this on National Geographic's photo of the day. Some things have to be seen to be believed. Perhaps he was just trying to get into the Christmas spirit? Or rather, get the Christmas spirit into him...

Norms and Nobility ch 7 - The Ennobling of the Masses

Classical education has traditionally been only for the privileged. But even the masses need more than a wage-earning job. "There must be some nobler purpose and a higher sense of value infusing society's material efficiency and informing common people, whose lives are consumed in the daily contest for material well-being." Some say that an educated elite preserves the culture (art, politics, religion, etc) and thus the elite require a classical education. But in our technical society, this could cause a rift between the elite and the masses. After all, who decides which people get to be elite, and on what basis? And the working class may view the elite and culture as unnecessary to their lives and to the world.

In a democracy, every person has the same right to education and access to culture. Democracy runs the risk of too much freedom, causing anarchy, or too much privilege, causing laziness. Democracy can only flourish if everyone is educated and uses their leisure time worthily to reach his full potential. Culture is the right and property of everyone, not just an elite few. Man is neither the custodian of culture, nor a utilitarian worker bee. He is an individual who needs to know how to make right decisions and manage himself, and such a population is a benefit to any society.

What is the purpose of giving everyone in a society a classical education?
1) It addresses the needs "of the whole man" (a very CM objective!), bringing balance to his individual, political and religious sides so that he will be happy to cooperate because he recognizes that his cooperation helps everyone (a cyclical relationship?)
2) It teaches people to weigh and consider all sides of an issue by making use of accessible information, and make logical judgments. When information is freely accessible and people are conscientious and confident about making careful decisions for themselves, democracy works.
3) It helps people to value the greater reason for democracy rather than simply insisting on their own personal freedom for self-interest. Currently, in the name of freedom and democracy, individual rights and special interest groups can tyrranize everyone else. That's not what democracy is supposed to be for.
4) It teaches students to value the rights they owe to others, not just their own rights (another idea CM talked about.) Only a person with self-control who knows truth and acts responsibly should have the freedom to act on what he knows is right. Freedom shouldn't be a license to do "whatever." People need to be trained for this kind of responsibility; the alternative is this: "The state and the marketplace, looking upon education as a means of ensuring a pliant and productivity citizenry, will insist that the school offer a utilitarian education in keeping with their greedy desires." Democracy without responsible people regresses to people concerned only with comfort and self-satisfaction, even at the expense of others.

CLUSA-AOU 2009 Conference Report

On the first evening of this year's ChildLightUSA Charlotte Mason conference, a half-dozen nervous teens found their way into a rather intimidating board room at Gardner-Webb University. Their numbers did not even begin to fill the space. They gathered around one end of the table, settled into the large mahogany-and-leather chairs, and cautiously made small-talk. This was the inauspicious beginning of the first annual ChildLightUSA-AmblesideOnline Unlimited Conference.

The plans for this year's teen conference began almost as soon as last year's conference ended. At last year's conference three of us teens met, and we hit it off so well that we decided we needed to get other Ambleside high-schoolers and college students involved and have our own mini-conference. When we went home that summer we started an internet forum for Ambleside students and grads called AO Unlimited, and the conference plans grew as we talked with the other AO students there. We tossed around ideas for sessions and decided what we wanted to do the most. By the time summer came we had a schedule of events, and ChildLight graciously worked with us to reserve rooms and time slots. That was how a group of Ambleside students found themselves in a specially reserved room at this year's conference, meeting—many of us—for the first time.

Later that first night, after the opening plenary session was over, five of the teens sat down together in the fireside lounge and chatted for a couple of hours. It didn't take long to find out that we had a lot in common. Conversation came easily: we talked about Pride and Prejudice, Star Trek, homeschooling, Narnia, eschatology, and everything in between. (And every combination thereof. Just what were Mr. Darcy's views on the End Times, for instance?) After that we weren't so shy, so we went back to our shared apartment and played Beatles Monopoly until the wee hours of the morning.

It was so uplifting and downright fun to find so many like-minded people my own age there. I laughed harder and longer than I had for a long time. It's something special when you meet people that you click with in an hour. Sometimes when we're by ourselves surrounded by teens who go to a public high school it can be hard to find good friends who are so much like you. This conference has been the highlight of my year, and some other teens said the same. I have so many plans for next year, and can hardly wait to see my friends again!

- Hannah, 18

On Thursday, after the morning lecture, two of the teens joined some CM teachers on the panel for the workshop "Exploring CM for the High School Student." A lot of the discussion focused on how to continue learning by CM principles in college. We talked about nurturing relationships with our studies; finding life in dry textbooks; taking the initiative to go on field trips to nearby museums and fairs and rallies; finding other active minds to discuss with after class; and even finding alternatives to traditional college. It seemed helpful for the moms and teachers there to hear about the experiences of CM graduates. I know we enjoyed sharing with them and discussing how to carry CM's methods into the upper years and beyond.

Thursday afternoon, the teens had a Jane Austen discussion over tea and cakes, hosted by the Broad River Coffee Company across the street from the campus. We spent a good two hours talking about Austen's characters and couples. Why do her pairings work? Which seems like the most unlikely couple? What is the difference between a Brandon and a Willougby—and how can you tell them apart? We also talked about what it's like for a guy reading Austen: guys identify more with the heroes, even though Austen gives so little of their perspective in the books. (Guys can still identify with the heroines, but we identify with their personalities rather than their roles.)

Later on Thursday we attended the Eve Andersen Tea lecture, "On Time," about living life deeply instead of just by a schedule. That evening, we stood on the balcony of our apartment and watched a thunderstorm. As the rain flooded the parking lot and dripped off the balcony, we sang songs about the weather and talked of this and that. That night we went to the book discussion about Tolkien's short story Leaf by Niggle, led by Gardner-Webb's own professor Christopher Keene.

I don't think I can remember ever meeting so many people with whom we had so much in common. It was good for all of us to meet and hang out with like-minded peers. ...The CLUSA conference is a great opportunity for us teens, most of whom have been raised on CM, to learn about her ideas from experienced teachers and thinkers and writers. It is a chance for us to learn more about Charlotte Mason's philosophy, so that we can understand why we were raised as we have been, and why CM education is still important for us even as we're graduating and going out into the world.

- Tim, 18

On Friday two of the teens led matins at 8:00 a.m.. I mention the time because it seems extremely early when you've only had 4 hours of sleep. (But we have things to do at 3:00 in the morning--like watching The Hunt for Gollum and eating popcorn!) Yes... *cough* well... after matins we went back to our rooms and acted out some scenes from Shakespeare, and then took a traveling production of Pyramus and Thisbe to one of our moms who was alone in her room. I do not profess to be any judge, myself, but she thought it quite entertaining. This may have had something to do with our switching characters: the girl played Pyramus, the guy played Thisbe, and hilarity ensued.

Friday afternoon we had a Lord of the Rings discussion, led by Professor Keene. I heard some say that that discussion was the highlight of the conference. Professor Keene had prepared a list of questions to ask everyone—favorite character, favorite moment in the story, things like that—and went around the circle giving everyone a chance to answer. The questions provoked a lot of good discussion: some of the things we talked about were the differences between the races; the burden of immortality; the differences between characters, especially from books to movies; the appeal of Rivendell; and the importance of certain elements in the story, such as the Scouring of the Shire. It was the sort of discussion you seldom get to have at home except maybe with a friend or two who shares your obsession, whereas here we had a full turnout of nearly a dozen teens. After we finished our LotR discussion, Professor Keene gave us a tour of the theater department and showed us some prosthetics he was making, including some rather graphic but very cool wound applications.

I had a great time at the teen conference. I felt the events were organized and there was a good amount of them to participate in.

- David, 16

After that we rushed to find music and a CD player for our Regency dance lesson. The lesson went well: we had half a dozen couples and learned two dances, including Mr. Beveridge's Maggot which they danced in the A&E Pride and Prejudice. However, the lesson took longer than we thought it would, so we had less than an hour afterwards to eat dinner and change into costume before we returned for a Regency Ball. Dancing Elizabeth and Darcy's dance at the ball was another highlight of the conference. Hannah, 18, wrote this about the ball:

It reminded me of the experience of 'Prom' that public schooled high schoolers have their senior year. I had seen my sister dress up like a glamor girl for her prom, and seen her take pictures with her boyfriend, and imagined (like Cinderella in her kitchen) what it must have been like. It was Brittani's senior year too, and she had never had a prom either. I imagine a lot of Charlotte Mason teens don't. That's probably a good thing, but the importance the culture attaches to it was felt even in our separation from the culture. That is why the ball was so important to me. For that one night, I got to dance real dances with real gentlemen, and feel like the princess all girls read about when they're growing up. We had so much fun at that ball that it has been absolutely decided to make it an annual event.

After the ball we changed out of costume—or not—and went to the Broad River Greenway for a walk in the woods. (The conference does this every year; usually there are trail guides, live music, and an astronomer with a telescope.) Our walk in the woods that night proved to be the scene of some lively plotting which spawned yet another project: a film adaptation / parody of Northanger Abbey which is now halfway through production. (Which just goes to show that you can't be too careful at these conferences. You never know what brilliant or crazy ideas you might be inspired to turn into reality.)

The Charlotte Mason Conference was, for me, a wonderful chance to connect with other similar-thinking teens. For the first time in my life I was perfectly able to chat about Jane Austen, Tolkien, current politics and events, all with people my own age! And when I wasn't being stimulated by the company of my peers, I was able to be instructed on a variety of subjects by fascinating speakers. Everywhere there was a great medley of people to discuss ideas and theories with. It has inspired me to once again look on school as a wonderful opportunity and chance for knowledge, rather than as something that must be done. Overall it was a very worthwhile and very enjoyable experience—I will certainly be returning next year.

- Kaley, 16

That night, after we got back from the Greenway, we met in one of the apartments and read Sherlock Holmes and Edgar Allen Poe. Despite the fact that we read The Adventure of the Speckled Band and The Black Cat, two of the scariest stories ever written, this was actually a lovely evening. We snacked and rambled and read in character voices till deep into the night. No nightmares were reported.

That was our last official meeting. Saturday morning, before the last plenary session, two of the teens performed a piece of music from Swan Lake. Saturday afternoon, before everyone headed their separate ways, our apartment crew—the six of us and our families—met for a last farewell at the local ice cream parlour (hence the picture at the beginning). Indubitably, this conference was a wonderful experience for us all. We made new friends, got to know old friends better, and got to enjoy our favorite things with people who shared our interests. And I, for one, can't wait till next year!

Note: The ChildLightUSA Conference took place in June 2009. The first draft of this report was written right after the conference, but it has been stuck in draft for several months waiting to be published. My apologies to the contributors.

While the day is still here...

...let's not forget C. S. Lewis's birthday. Our beloved author was born eleventy-one years ago today, November 29, 1898. I don't have an appropriate quote for the occasion, so I'll just share one of my favorites.

You and I who still enjoy fairy tales have less reason to wish actual childhood back. We have kept its pleasures and added some grown-up ones as well.

- C. S. Lewis, Letters to an American Lady

Norms and Nobility ch 6 - On the Necessity of Dogma

Quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, harmonics, astronomy) and trivium (grammar, rhetoric, dialectic) were the seven liberal arts of ancient classical education. In the middle ages, logic replaced dialectic because they thought they already had truth and didn't need to continue wondering and searching for it. Teens still go through this process of questioning and re-assessing their beliefs -- that's what dialectic is, though on a smaller and less deliberate scale. Socrates asked his students questions to niggle at their beliefs in a softened way, because anything heavy-handed is rejected without consideration by the mind. In the process, the conscience is fine-tuned. Dialectic helps the student to sort dogma from truth. (Hicks goes into 'dialectic' a lot more in this section.)

Dialectic starts with dogma. It's the opposite of Descartes, which starts with nothing and slowly adds whatever can be proved. A classical student has to accept (and love?) some dogma early on to give him material to be dialectic about later, as he seeks to verify it. The ancient classical student was expected to take on his teacher's beliefs and assess them for himself when he matured. These days, Descartes is our modern educational model (Descartes is analytical; assessing beliefs is based on doubt first) and today's teachers aren't supposed to display any bias, much less expect students to follow suit. Dialectic students never stop questioning their own beliefs and ideas. Unlike Descartes, dialectic questioners must choose one side of an argument before they can dialect about it. Descartes stands aloof, analyzing without committing to any one side, and without making value judgments before analyzing. The Descartes value-free analyzing is useful in science, but not a good way for organic beings to live and find meaning or purpose. Hicks explains how this kind of analyzing encourages knowledge without ethical responsibilty, but I'm not sure how that works, and I don't care enough to re-read to figure it out; I'll trust his conclusion.

Modern teachers sometimes think they can get students to think and reflect dialectically with classical literature, but then they ruin it all by handling the literature analytically, requiring students to tear it apart. (If you're busy analyzing literature, you're not being dialectic or asking the right questions.) Analysis is far too easy for teachers to revert to because it can be tested. Everyone is so afraid of teachers sharing their own belief for students to question, that students are taught nothing and instead asked to analyze everything as if it was all science.

Communists have focused solely on man's class status and material needs/abilities, while Americans (until recently) have accepted every individual's right and ability to think dialectically and ask the important questions about life and meaning -- regardless of their social class. Hegel, Marx and Mao viewed man as all chemical reactions and physical sensations. Education in their opinion, even reading, is to teach utilitarian skills. They ignored man's need to find purpose beyond his immediate utilitarian activity. But man is more than his utilitarian role in society and he has a right to find meaning in life.

Norms and Nobility ch 5 - Saving the Appearances

Science as a school subject is a relatively new concept. Philosophically, the changing nature of the world made the ancients doubt the reliability of repeatable observation, which is the basis for scientific experiment. They put more stock in man's reason than in nature's stability. Truth was to be found in logic, not empirical evidence. They wanted to rationalize a simple explanation for what they saw in nature. Technology and devices were seen as hands-on -- inferior to the mind.

Man's mind and spirituality were seen as being parallel to God (because He made man in His image). Thus, intellect was seen as being on a higher plane than physical. Nature and technology just weren't as important to the ancients, unless you had a need to know (such as a doctor's need to know anatomy). If you had leisure, it was considered more blessed to spend it contemplating than experimenting.

Math was thought to illustrate God's divine mind (example: a perfect triangle), so it was acceptable to think about math because it helped men to understand God. In a classical curriculum, math is not mainly a practical subject you learn to balance your checkbook or double a recipe. Its purpose is to draw men closer to the mind of God.

Ancient thinkers felt that science and technology led to greed and laziness (inventions ease man's work and make him money.) If science was studied, it was to make what they observed line up with what they had reasoned to be true or find a way to make it parallel something in man's Ideal character. Bacon and Descartes were the first to value science for itself. We view technology as a way to control and get ahead; ancients only valued it if it helped inspire worthy character. Modern technology has allowed man to sin more -- birth control, nuclear weapons, media haven't really brought us closer to truth. Modern man hopes that technology will fix man, but ancients thought man should focus on self-improvement rather than ways to ease his workload or increase productivity.

Modern man doggedly tells himself that his gadgets and progress are making the world a better place, but man is really losing something he once had as technology makes us more rushed and confused. We can put a man on the moon, but we're worse than ever at controlling our greed. Our view of education is strictly utilitarian -- to help students get better jobs.

But today's educators see classical education as old-fashioned and irrelevant. They don't care what a student reads as long as he's reading. They never ask whether a student's book is making him a better person, making him ask the right questions. Thinking through issues isn't testable, though, so such learning is deemed not worth doing.

Norms and Nobility ch 4 - The Tyrannizing Image

Ancient teachers strived towards being as close as they could to the Ideal, and everyone knew what the Ideal was, and knew whether the teacher was living up to it or not. Even today, although we don't acknowledge the Ideal, we judge teachers by how well they live up to it. But few can really define what exactly that Ideal is. It's a perfect balance between the mythologized hero and reason. Although we can't always describe it, we recognize it when we see someone who embodies it.

You can't teach it by having student memorize its characteristics. But you can show examples of it in stories -- such as mythological heroes. Discussion clarifies what makes a person heroic and challenges students to imitate. The goal is for students to reach as close to the Ideal as they can.

Times change, and some might argue that the Ideal man changes, too -- but it really doesn't. What's good and right and true in one culture will always be good and right and true. The Ideal has been questioned and challenged over history so that we think it's out-dated. Even truth itself is thought relative. Descartes maintained that only what can be proved scientifically should be believed -- and not all truths can be proved scientifically. An Ideal can't be proved scientifically, therefore, it's considered a relative concept.

Our modern education demands measurable success. Our dilemma is that we can't prove sucess on tests by raising examples of Ideal men so we claim that such a concept has little value, yet in the back of our minds, we admire strive for that Ideal.

Ch 3 - Teaching the Father of the Man

More on Norms and Nobility (David Hicks)

Before the Roman era, classical teachers weren't as caught up in political power and money. Their focus was on ideas and balance and curiousity - much like Socrates. Socrates didn't resignedly accept things the way they were as the Sophists did. Sophists were more concerned with appearances.

Isokrates was another teacher. He rejected the idea that children needed their free, uninhibited childhood sheltered from the demands of adulthoods. Isokrates looked ahead at what kind of adults they needed to be, and focused on preparing their minds for the rigors of thinking maturely. Our own experience tells us that children usually want to be grown-ups, and trying to keep them in childhood is a bad idea. Children cherish memories of progress and achievements they made in childhood more than their memories of carefree play, and that period is the ideal time to instill virtue rather than fritter away their time on idle pleasure. Isokrates gave students an ideal image of adulthood to rise to, not a pampered existance of frivolity -- nor a child-centered education that makes children self-centered.

Ancient people knew which qualities were valued in a man, so they knew what to teach. Teachers had a goal they could urge their students toward, unlike moden man who doesn't exactly know what makes a man virtuous. The period of childhood was just a step towards the all-important adult the child would become. Childhood wasn't an idyllic place to stop and dwell. Teachers would sometimes teach the hardest things first (whereas we would wait until the child was older.) David Hicks remembers his friend's piano teacher who made his friend learn a Mozart minuet as his first lesson instead of learning simple beginner pieces. But his friend went on to playing Bach and Chopin, while Hicks lost interest because of his banal lessons. Knowledge-based education places more importance on the value of what's being learned (and the child's ability to rise to the occasion) than on the child-led concern of the child's readiness to learn it.

Knowledged-focused learning (rather than child-focused) gives teacher and student a common bond of shared content and shared activity as they learn together. Ancient teachers became real mentors; there was a real emotional bond between them. Our perverted society views all bonding, passionate love as physical mating, so we can't understand the love between teacher and student as they did. Within that love, teachers expounded knowledge by talking rather than by having students read books. The teacher was fully trusted to make his students wise and virtuous. Today's teachers learn how to appeal to the immature mind instead of expecting the child to try to grasp the teacher's more educated mind. Today's lesson plans that expound the tiniest details of information give the appearance of knowledge rather than truly helping the student to learn the balanced whole.

A Classical Understanding of Language

My summary of Norms and Nobility by David Hicks

2 - The Word is Truth - A Classical Understanding of Language

Myths show that, however much myths themselves don't make sense, man has a drive to make sense of what he observes in the world. Mythos (man's imagination trying make sense of the world) and logos (man's reasoning attempts to make sense of the world) are two sides of man's mind. Myth, as far as I can make out from this chapter, is like poetry in capturing everyman's feelings and giving them added dignity and beauty. Job's suffering couldn't be rationalized, but in the poetic terms of his dialog with God, Job was able to come to terms with his 'why' questions.

Plato defined and clarified the difference between mythos and logos. It's hard to express reasoning with words because old stigmas and associations stay with words even after their meaning has changed. Words are too fluid and evolving to pin them down and make them express reason, except when words are used in a legal or scientific sense. In education, words have to be used in that precise sense to have any testable standard. So science becomes emphasized over literature, which is more emotional. Schools find it easier to teach scientific principles than vague values like bravery and justice.

Classical education recognizes the power that a word has to inspire, even when the results aren't testable. Character is caught, not taught, through imaginative words rather than rigid scientific terms. Words have power that goes beyond what's observable on a graph.

Interesting Post About Worship

I was looking for a line from a song and stumbled on this blog post. I've sort of wondered the same things in the back of my mind that he posts -- about the line between personal introspection and corporate worship (and, for myself, of feeling emotionally manipulated when everyone is supposed to sing publicly one songwriter's personal confession). I notice that the blogger is a fellow INTJ, so maybe it's a personality thing?

Norms and Nobility ch 1 Virtue is the Fruit of Learning

Part I - The Idea of a Classical Education

1 - Virtue is the Fruit of Learning (another four part-er)

In Victorian England, only the wealthy received some version of a 'classical education,' so classical education and privilege came to be seen as the same thing. By 1900, others started coming up with various theories (mostly utilitarian) to educate the less privileged, and their models were far removed from classical and its stigma of luxury. But real classical education, which is based on "inquiry" that involves curiosity and imagination, isn't limited to any one time or place or class. It trains the mind to keep asking so that a classically trained student never stops learning, and is able to follow a concept to its logical conclusion and pronounce it good or bad. Since "nature doesn't tolerate a void," the young mind is first filled with a core of knowledge using a set curriculum. That way his mind has raw material to inquire about. The curriculum should encourage logical reasoning and spark curiosity and inquiry. The student will probably be taught the right thing to do according to his culture's highest ideals (which might be considered dogma), but he will be invited to test whether it really is right against alternative viewpoints.

Aristotle is "our best introduction to the idea of a classical education." He thought that the goal of education was to produce "happy, well-adjusted individuals" with leisure time to enjoy a good life, and he saw this happening in state-run schools so that it wouldn't be limited only to the privileged classes. Learning and knowing must result in right actions, because knowing isn't passively collecting data, but actively doing. Happiness comes from recognizing good, loving beauty and pursuing excellence and moderation -- harmony with the laws of the land, and virtue. The community's political system is obligated to provide this kind of education to ensure this happiness for the sake of the community's corporate good, but not for utilitarian uses (utilitarian: making productive workers). The state owes the individual a good life of harmony. It's not the other way around: the individual is not a cog in the wheel of the state to be trained/indoctrinated to be its servant or slave.

Cultures down the ages have always taken it for granted that virtue is something that can and should be learned at school. That was never questioned or doubted. Everything else (math, science, language) was secondary. Today, that's reversed: teaching virtue is pushed aside to make room for facts and disciplines. We tell students that they can have luxuries that will buy them happiness by learning technical skills that will result in a good job. In so doing, society has shot itself in the foot -- virtue and constant self-improvement have given way to practical utilitarianism, and the result is greedy, selfish people who don't care about charitable works that benefit the community. The only virtue we demand and teach anymore is basic reasonable civility so as not to be an annoyance to society.

Ancients cultures debated whether virtue was inherent in man and only needed saving out of flawed society and bringing out the virtue within him, or whether man lacked virtue and needed it to be taught and developed in him. Technology might develop more virtue in man if it's already there, but technology could be dangerous in the hands of men who have no inherent virtue. Plato's dialectic method of questioning was supposed to bring out the wisdom already in men, and it was only the man living the unexamined life, no longer questioning and analyzing his own motives, who unwittingly did evil acts because he was ignoring the virtue inside him. Aristotle, on the other hand, thought that right actions were what developed goodness in man. Just thinking about goodness does nothing; it's the bodily behavior that makes a person good. That debate kept everyone focused on the nature of virtue and how best to produce virtuous people. Today, we no longer debate it. We just ignore virtue altogether and teach uniformity -- everyone the same.

Miss M Becomes an Author

Miss M got some animals stickers in her Chik-Fil-A kids meal, so she was inspired to write a book with a story for each sticker. She made up the words and I wrote them down for her. One sticker on each page served as the illustration, and the words were written around the stickers.

Animals Nature

Ornate Box Turtle - Mr. Turtle was out one day and saw Mrs. Alligator. He said to Mrs. Alligator, "Who are you?" She said, "Mrs. Alligator. Who are YOU?" "Mr. Turtle. I pastor people." "Oh, I see. And how well do you preach people?" "I don't know. But well enough." "Why aren't you in the ocean, Mr. Turtle?" "I'll tell you later. Good-bye."

Wyoming Toad - Mr. Toad was out one day. He ran into Mrs. Alligator. She said, "Well! Where have you been, Mr. Toad?" "Out on a summer field." "Well, where's your wife?" "She has died." "Shouldn't you be sad if your wife has died?" "Well -- I'm sorry, but I meant -- my mother." "Then you should be sadder. Mr. Toad, do you have babies?" "They live somewhere else. My wife has them."

Fawn (she liked this sticker, so she took greater care to make it a pretty story) - Miss Fawn was out one day in a meadowy field. And the grass was sweet. She ate. And the beautiful, beautiful flowers were gazing at her face. The daffodils were beautiful at the gaze. She loved to see the beautiful blue sky pointed at her face. The beautiful sky was beautiful at her face. And the day was sweet with pleasure. She said to Mrs. Alligator that she was beautiful in the sunlight. And Mrs. Alligator said that Miss Fawn was beautiful behind the wind and her white dots went away. In the daylight she went home and saw her beautiful babies eating, and she said, "My babies are cute."

Scarlet Kingsnake [which is obviously poisonous, so she worked that into the story] - The day was beautiful. We went to a restaurant. Mr. Snake said, "Ooh, what good food this is! I'll go out to the meadow. The day is so beautiful in the meadow and so I'll go to the Arctic and poison some animals. My wife will be surprised how I poison some animals," said he. "The wolves are beautiful; I won't poison them," said he. "The day is beautiful. Good-bye."

Gray Wolf - A family was born at Mrs. Wolf's house. And she loved them dearly. And she took care of them so much and loved them. "Now I'll feed them. You must stay here, little babies. Now I'll go to Papa." The beautiful wind shook her head side to side. The wind shook as hard as it could and blew their fur side to side. "Now I shall see my friends. Good-bye, beauties."

Polar Bear - The day was beautiful. And Polar ran into Mrs. Alligator and said, "I'll go to Mrs. Seal. Good-bye."

Hawaiian Monk Seal (she was excited when I told her this was a Hawaiian animal)- Beautiful days were spread upon her. The day was beautiful. She knew it. Her name was Sarah and her middle name was Maria and her family name was The Quilts. The beautiful skies were so beautiful that she gave herself a nickname -- it was Kerry.

Woodpecker - "My name is Woodpecker. What is yours, Mrs. Alligator?" The day was beautiful. She knew that. And she gave birth to two little eggs -- Sarah and Lovehearted. And the day was shining like gold. Good-bye.

Southern Florida Alligator - The day was hot and it burned the animals. They all got sunburned and they jumped into cold water and got cold and they went home. Good-bye! Mrs. Alligator threw her head to the door of her cage and said, "Well, that's the end of nothing. That's the end of that."

Snowy Owl (she insisted on seeing the numeral "3" when I had written it)- "The day is bright," said Mrs. Owl. And her beautiful sigh became a happy smile . . . because she had 3 eggs. And she said, "Oh, my, what a beautiful day," and she jumped into the lake and got cool like the others -- and then she got hot and then she got perfectly warm. Good-bye!

Norms and Nobility Prologue

I've just started Norms and Nobility by David V. Hicks. I think the book is going to make a case for classical education. This is a 4-part Prologue.

David Hicks begins by talking about a book called "The Rector of Justin" by Louis Auchincloss, in which a man tries to build a school where students will learn to know, serve and reproduce what is good and realize that their knowledge carries responsibility. But the school fails. In our materialistic culture, is such an education possible? Social theories, important-sounding scientific research and faddish educational models have replaced life's important questions about truth and justice, and old fashioned common sense. Today's people are more fluent in computer language than with age-old questions about what really matters. Our experts are not only inexperienced about wisdom; they aren't even asking the right questions, but people are too awed by their intelligence to notice. They are like raw college graduates steering a ship who are too full of their books and technical skill to respect time-honored experience. We know schools are failing and students are getting involved in drugs and bullying, but we don't know what to do about it. Hicks is going to offer a solution based on ancient classical education. Science should serve and supplement education, not the other way around.

Education reflects what its culture believes about the nature of man, and, whether stated or not, every person who writes about education is influenced by and espouses what he believes to be man's nature, value and purpose. Ancient cultures had an ideal heroic model that they felt man must aspire to, although they varied about whether that ideal was based on bravery or loyalty or duty or whatever. Art, history, science were tools to encourage bravery or duty in the student. But today's experts call such ideas unscientific. The ancients thought that attempts to improve the world with science were arrogant. It was man who needed the improvement. Even math was thought useful only as far as it helped to transform man. Our modern emphasis on using technology to change the world -- and even society and man himself -- is the wrong priority and "can only lead to mental confusion, physical destruction, and spiritual damnation." The problem isn't the world; it's within man himself. Educating man to fix his opinions or environment or circumstances won't fix the evil nature within him.

Our education strives to control our environment [engineer bridges, re-route rivers, genetically modify crops, cure disease, build a business empire] rather than answer age-old questions about our purpose in life. 'Ought' has been replaced with 'can.' Focusing on what seems do-able with science seems more productive than reflecting over questions that make us uncomfortable. Medieval men saw God as being perfect and far off, and their own world as corrupt, they were looking in at heaven from outside God's realm. Modern man sees himself as enlightened and looking from the inside out. Older cultures saw man as a servant who dared not exalt himself to the heights of his deities. Modern man doesn't feel he is out of place to rule nature and rule others.

Education today focuses on the operation of 'can' instead of the normative 'ought:' we exhaust possibilities without questioning whether such a thing ought to be done. And our lives reflect this - the same thinking was at the root of the 1960's attempt to use technology to subdue inequality in Vietnam without asking whether it was a good idea, or simply presumptuous. We teach communication skills to score well on the SAT (and other utilitarian reasons) and rarely ask why communication is necessary for us as people and as a society. [If a person can get a decent job and raise a family, does it really matter if he's illiterate?] We raise brilliant intellectuals who are too prideful to let a bad idea go. We strive to make men more efficient and productive at building and carrying and figuring, as if this present existence is all there is, and ignore his spiritual side. Good education shouldn't just teach what people want to know -- it should teach them what is right to want.

A new blog and some entries for this one

A couple of months ago, being off on my own at school, I started a blog to post thoughts and poetry and news. It's called Old Path, New Feet, if you want to look (name and location subject to change). I'm still off on my own at school, but after some thought I've decided to continue posting most of that stuff here as well. Over the next few days, I'm going to bring old posts from my new blog here to Rusticanda, and thenceforth I shall be cross-posting a lot of entries. Post-dates may fluctuate in the meantime, since I'll be posting old posts from the blog here and then editing their post-dates to match the days I wrote them.

(The moral of the story: scroll down!)

An All Hallows' Eve Tale

Once upon a time—a time not so unlike our own—there lived a man who, like all men, was a traveler. This man loved a maiden, as many men do; and the maiden loved him in return, which is more than many men can say. Nor was she an ordinary maiden, though she was a commoner, for she was as fair as autumn and as faithful as the seasons. But there are other powers in the world than Love, and not all are powers for good. So it was that the man and maiden were parted, and both were laid under binding spells that they might not go and seek one another. They remained many days in duress; but upon All Hallows' Eve Day, the man broke the spells that bound him and set forth upon a journey to find the maiden again. Twice a hundred miles he traveled, through misty mountains and over dark rivers, until he came to a town in the midst of a forest.

That was a strange place, for the town lay upon the borders of Elfland, and heavy were the enchantments that held it there. No time passed in those shadowy marches between our world and the other, but each morning dawned upon the same day, so that the folk grew no older, and the land did not decay. The force of the spells about the town was such that it was often hidden from human sight; at such times, any who found it would find only empty buildings and whispering streets. Indeed, only a few days in the year could that town be found by mortals; but All Hallows' Eve Day is of all days the most potent.

In that town, under the veil of enchantments, the maiden was hidden. Resting as it did on the border, the town had become a meeting-place for the worlds, and men named it Fairhaven, for within its walls humans and elves alike found refuge. Through its streets passed lords, ladies, peasants, pickpockets, fairies, elves, merchants, craftsmen, swordsmen, scholars, knights-errant, stranded seafarers, traveling jugglers, wandering minstrels, and others so many that the tale of them would last seven days in the telling. Among these the maiden took her place, living by her music upon the streets, and waiting for her love.

The man stopped before the gates of Fairhaven. The guards that keep the gates looked him up and down and muttered amongst themselves, for they let none pass that have not the welcome of the town's governors; and the man was a stranger. So he stood without the gates, gazing with wonder into that elfish place. Hard it seemed to have come to the gates of Faerie and be denied entrance; and harder still, for the man knew that the maiden had passed through those gates; and now only a single wall lay betwixt them; yet it was an impassable wall. Still he was patient, and waited for something to happen; and, as usually happens, something did.

For, by some way of magic, the maiden had learned of his coming. When she knew that he was without the gates, she ran thither as swiftly as her legs would bear her. And there in the doorway of the elfin city those two long parted met again, and in the twilight between Earth and Faerie the man found the end of his journey, and the maiden the end of her waiting. After a time she led him through the gates, for she had a word of passage from the governors of the town, and once within she became his guide through all the wonders of that place. The sights that she showed him there, musicians and players, merchants and craftsmen, jousts and processions, and more beside, must be left for another writing, for there is not space nor skill here to describe them. Through all these things she led him; and all that day he did not leave her side.

Yet, when the day ended, and All Hallows' Eve had passed, the enchantments that had bound the man once more summoned him away. All Saints' Day was come; the day of wonder was gone, and the man returned whence he had come. Once more the man and the maiden were separated: she went again to the town of Fairhaven to await his return; and he was borne back to a far-off land of thick and dreary enchantments. Yet even there, at times, the memory of Faerie, and of her who waits, returns to him in waking dreams. And it may be that they shall not remain thus parted: for there be other days in the year with potency against dreary enchantments; and there be other powers in the world besides those that strive with Love.

(I, Owen Locksley, son of Sir Reginald Locksley, servant of the Crown, do attest to the truth of this tale. Yet it may be that some find the story dark, and think the right shape of things hidden by the telling, and the facts obscured in webs of words. For those that make such complaint I say merely that this account is true to the utmost, as far as it goes; and for a clearer telling of the facts, they must wait for some other day. For tales take long in the weaving, even such tales as be reworkings of things already past; and a knight's son has scant time for tale-weaving.)

New Book

I'm starting a new book. For the moment, I'm just going to paste a couple quotes from its Preface without even divulging the title of the book...

Having now had an opportunity to study schools as a headmaster as well as a teacher, I would argue that the teacher, not the curriculum, needs to be the focus of reform. The greatest value of the curriculum proposed in this book, I now believe, is that it sustains and nurtures teachers as practioners of the art of learning while discouraging non-learners from entering the profession. (What non-inquisitive, discipline-bound person would want to teach in such a school as I have outlined in the second part of this book?) The classroom should be no place for teachers who are afraid of change, who are willing to talk about ideas ad nauseum but unwilling or unable to act on them, to experiment, to grow, to absorb new disciplines, to teach beyond themselves, their college lecture notes, their State-approved lesson plans, their textbooks.

[My book] presents a formidable challenge to schools controlled by administrators and teachers who simply want to be left alone and allowed to maintain old habits in the midst of a rapidly changing world. Some will defend their traditionalist stance as a means of protecting time-honored values or of avoiding educational fadism, but underneath, I suspect, indolence and insecurity have not a little to do with it At any rate, this type of conversation is contrary to the spirit of learning. Schools are places where students learn because they are places where teachers learn. Only a school (and by extension a curriculum) that encourages teachers to be always learning will keep its teachers fresh and fearless and its students happy and motivated in their studies, ready to test their lessons against life.

-----------------------

There is a disturbing trend these days, in this era of hyphenated Americans, to seek to motivate students and to build their self-esteem by devising ethnocentric studies tailored to their race or creed or to some high-sounding social agenda. Until now, the American school -- for all its shortcomings -- has embraced the idea of a common American culture and has acted as a powerful centripetal force in American society. The new craze for ethnocentric studies, however well intentioned, erodes the school's power to help our nation forge out of many, one.

American culture is, like all cultures, derivative. Its sources are sundry and varied, but they are not different for Latinos and Afro-Americans and Euro-Americans. It is one culture characterized by racial and ethnic diversity and, yes, by predominantly Western and European influences, but none of these sources or influences is as worthy of study as the common landscape and history, the shared political creed and social identity, the mutual aspirations and disappointments of the American people. Intellectuals, the media, and ethnic leaders tend to dwell upon our differences, which are often more interesting (for some reason) than our similarities. This makes it all the more important for schools to define in their curricula a common American culture and in this way to frame the debate that will naturally arise in a pluralistic society like our own.

One must ask, if our schools fail to believe in a common American culture and to teach it, what will become of us? This question would certainly perplex the ancient whose language, perhaps wisely, could not distinguish between education and culture. It is -- as this book attests -- the sacred duty of the school not only to believe in our common inheritance, but to teach the unfolding truth of that inheritance. Respect for truth -- not the self-esteem of our students or our regrets about the past or our hopes for the future -- must guide us in the quest for that common inheritance and in our definition of the curriculum.

Song of the Valley

To be sung in the manner of Chesterton

Splendid rides the sunset o'er the garden of the Lord
Where summer spreads its colors on the hills like emerald wine
And the mowers raise the incense of the grass and of the soil
And the ponds and trees and houses gleam like grapes upon the vine
In the sun that smites the valley with the brightness of a sword:
In this cool and quiet garden in the center of the world
Where the people's death and living makes a song of righteous toil
In this precious piece of nowhere in a corner of the world;
In this garden of the people which is sacred to the Lord.

Summer's End

I'm sitting on the lawn outside my dorm at school. That may sound lifelessly urban, and I suppose it would be in a lot of schools: but my school is settled right in the middle of a country Tennessee community, without a fence and sometimes without even a road separating them. There is beauty in this place and moment. The sun has set and the sky is glowing russet and pale blue. The woods are so close across the road that I can hear the cicadas humming. A flock of geese just flew overhead, calling the evening bugle of summer as they sped southward. I guess this is really my Beginning of Autumn post, which seems to have become something of an annual tradition. I didn't intend it that way; but for some reason there is a day or a set of days as summer ends that remind me of the season changing and make me want to write about it. Perhaps it is because, as Chesterton said, you realize how much you love something when you begin to lose it. I don't notice how much I enjoy summer until a cool evening or a red leaf on the ground reminds me that it is passing. Perhaps that is why I love autumn so much. After the peace of summer, it is a reminder that the seasons change; that the years turn; that time passes. And that reminder makes me enjoy the seasons, and the years, and time itself, all the more.

Mystery Eggs

Miss M and I were looking in the yard for caterpillars and instead we found a leaf with some black spots on it. I once found a leaf with red things on it - and after I looked it up, I determined that the red spots were a growth from a fungus or something. I thought this was the same thing - a fungus that makes tiny tumors on the leaf. But then I looked under my Radio Shack 30x lighted magnifier and they look like tiny raisins; some even have tiny hairs stuck to them. And each black raisin has its own smaller spot of what looks like mud next to it. So I think they're eggs, and the hairs are probably from some kind of caterpillar.

This is the leaf:

And this is a close-up of the black spots accompanied with a smaller brown dot:

Maybe if I keep them all winter, they'll hatch in the spring.

Ah, life.

Well, here I am back in my school dorm room again with the semester's first classes waiting for me in the morning. A great deal happened this summer, and I wanted to blog all about it all before the summer ended, but there you have it. Life waits for no man. And it's too big to fit into a few blog posts, no matter how thorough your writing is. Some things will always slip through the cracks. In my case the cracks just happen to be several months wide...

There was the Taming of the Shrew, for instance--rehearsals, and production week, and the performance in our backyard, and the reception and cleanup afterward--which all ended more than a fortnight ago. There was the ChildLight conference, of course, which happened months ago; I wanted to blog about it in more detail but I still haven't. There was my sudden sightseeing trip to Washington, D.C. last week, with visits to the National Gallery and the National Cathedral and the Shakespeare Library and more. And above all there's a story involving Regency dancing and midnight Poe readings and lots of prayer and a rainbow for good measure, which if told in full would be quite tolerable evidence that gentlemen and ladies still exist--and still end up together.

So, yes, that was my summer. The Unblogged Summer, one might call it, except I can think of so many better names for it.

School Schedules

It's that time of year again!

I've finished L's schedule for next year; he'll be doing AO Year 7. I broke his readings and things down into 180 daily increments and posted it here. J's is still to come.

Update: Here is J's schedule; he'll be doing Year 10. And here is Miss M's K schedule.

Maybe there are some good ideas buried in those textbooks, after all.

I was doing homework for my (summer school) speech class today, reading from a textbook about how to improve one's listening skills. The writing for the most part is efficient, scientific, and dry as dust. As I read, however, I realized that some of the ideas sounded familiar:

There are four major techniques [for remembering information]. The first is organization. Find a pattern, structure, order, plan, format, or framework.

Of course, I said to myself, because the mind feeds upon ideas. If you understand the overall structure of a thing, every detail of it will make more sense and you will be able to remember the whole more easily, because you will know how each piece fits within the whole. CM knew that: she didn't hold with the classical method, which taught facts first and ideas later; she started with ideas, and let the facts follow them. I thought to myself, "Ha! A CM reference!" and kept reading. The next sentence:

The second is association. Make the things you want to remember relate to each other or to categories you already understand. Group them, if possible.

Well, certainly, I said. Education is the science of relations, after all.

The third technique is vizualization. Picturing what you want to remember creates a strong, vivid memory of it.

This sounded quite prosaic and scientific until I got about halfway through and realized that all it means is use your imagination. I began to get curious. Were there any more good ideas beneath all that scientific language? I read on:

The fourth is repetition. When you repeat ideas, you burn them into your memory.

At this point I threw up my hands and laughed--or at least, I would have if I had been the sort of chap who does such things. An old truism, and one that sounds suspiciously like habit formation, to boot. I suppose I must reassess my position on textbooks a little. I still hold that they are mostly dead and require Miracle Max or a reader trained in CPR to breathe any life into them. After today, however, I must admit that they at least know where to go to find good ideas. Even if they do it unintentionally.

A proposal

My mother suggested it, and I really think it is an admirable scheme. One merely needs three hours of time to reflect for every fifteen minutes of life lived, and one would get along quite well. Why, say I, cannot so simple a proposal, whose benefits are so obvious, be adopted? Difficulties arising from hasty decisions and pressing deadlines would almost disappear. The increased volume of poetry alone that the scheme would occasion should be enough to recommend it to anyone. I think I shall contact the People In Charge and see if such a thing can be arranged...

Conference Notes on Narration

Friday of the conference offered a three-part series of workshops on narration - six full hours, and we still could have gone longer. Laurie Bestvater did the first couple of hours, Dr. Carroll Smith did two hours, and the laast session was looking at samples and narrating ourselves. These are the notes I took that day.

Narration is a subset of literacy. It seems too simple to work. But it does work. L.B.'s son used primarily narration throughout his school years and went to college on a scholarship. [My son used narration but with even less creative direction, and also went to college on a scholarship; it does work.]

Definition: Narration is a process of taking information. It's more than mere recall. It requires the internalization of ideas.

Why narrate? CM said, "in the act of narrating every power of his mind comes into play, that points and bearings which he had not observed are brought out; that the whole is visualized and brought into relief in an extraordinary way; in fact, that scene or argument has become a part of his personal experience; he knows, he has assimilated what he has read." (vol 6) Narration is not the same as memory work. When you narrate, you re-create and internalize in your own mind. It's a way of knowing, not of memorizing.

G.F. Husband wrote, "Properly dealt with, it produces a mental transfiguration." ("Some Notes on Narration," Parents' Review, 1924) It requires attention/engagement of the mind. Being able to answer a teacher's questions doesn't guarantee that the student really knows.

Narration is an all-purpose, extremely powerful activity. Transformation occurs that physically changes the brain. "The Power of Retelling: Developmental Steps for Building Comprehension," and "Read and Retell" by Hazel Brown and Brian Cambourne encapsulate all the principles of the wholistic/natural learning model.

Narration has linguistic spillovers: meaning, phraseology, vocabulary, punctuation, spelling. Children can retain phrases, styles, etc. that they pick up from narrating even after a year.

Narration enables learners to "own" their learning. "Learning that is not accompanied by transformation is shallow and transitory." (Cambourne) "Reader-Response" by Louise Rosenblatt. The learner "reproduces such Knowledge touched by his own personality; thus his reproduction becomes original." (CM vol 6)

Narration enables students to:
- write better sentences
- better solve math word problems
- increase vocabulary
- have a much higher level of comprehension

Narration improves concept of story, critical thinking, oral language development.

Critical thinking requires background knowledge and concepts to think critically about.

Narration reveals what a child remembers and what he thinks is important. It shows whether his organization matches the text - and more.

Narration in History: For generations and throughout centuries, history has been passed on through oral narration. People who are forced to increase their oral mind have better mental capacity than those who rely on printed text, note-taking, etc. Jewish Rabbis used oral tradition to relay God's truth to generations. See "The Singer of Tales" by Albert Lord for studies. Oral tradition is as literary as printed text. The art forms of literature/story-telling were already set and styled before any of the tales were ever written down. Songs, stories and poems can be kept in people's minds for centuries - intact - with no notes! The more you rely on notes, the less you use your mind.

Emotion drives learning because emotion is what transforms and engages. When the "amygdala" part of the brain is activated by fear or emotion, learning can enter long-term memory instead of short-term memory. Stories, not dry facts, engage our emotions.

Research on Narration

Olaffson and [Nietfeld?] (1999) said that a child's memory at age two predicts his later reading ability.

Zimmerman, Christakis, Metcalf (2007) found that television and DVD/video viewing in children younger than 2 years hinders later vocabulary.

Wise, Savelli ? -- found that oral language skills relate to later reading skills. Children only know vocabulary they have used - not what they have only heard.

Early listening/comprehension skills help with word recognition later.

When Adam named the animals, language was used as intellectual capacity to order his world; it wasn't just to communicate. "Giving a name is more than labeling. It is, as Gerhard von Rad puts it, "'an act of appropriate ordering, by which man intellectually objectifies the creatures for himself.'" Man conceives and orders his environment through words. He needs language in order for his mind to make things real. Internally, the mind forms the concept and imagines it after he has a word to frame it on.

What about a child who isn't used to narrating? There are ways to engage his active mind before reading:
- Build on prior knowledge by having the child look at the picture on the cover of the book, or maps inside, to et them interested. Go over two or three words they'll come across in the text that they might not know.
- Have the child mentally put himself somewhere in the setting, like in a corner of the room, and watch the story unfold in front of his eyes. Show the child how people in the story would have dressed so their mental image is accurate.
- Have the child describe in detail how he lines up at school to go to lunch. This forces him to sequence events and tell them.
- Read a paragraph at a time for narrating rather than a whole chapter.
- Ask the child to predict how the story will go.
- Before the next reading, ask the the child to re-create the scene read previously.

Oral language is contextual: we say what's going on. But written language is removed from our personal here-and-now reality.

Narration should be done immediately after the reading, before it dissipates. At the high school level, students might be able to narrate later than immediately after reading - perhaps during the next period, or the next day.

Narration is "the act of knowing." (CM vol 6, pg 99)

Information is not the same as knowledge.

"Because knowledge is power, the child who has got knowledge will certainly show power in dealing with it. He will recast, condense, illustrate, or narrate with vividness and with freedom the arrangement of his words. The child who has got only information will write and speak in the stereotyped phrases of his text-book, or will mangle in his notes the words of his teacher." (CM Vol 3 pg 225)

Ours is not to train. "ample ground for discussion not for lectures or for oral lessons, but for following for a few minutes any opening suggested by 'current events,' a feature in the children's programme of work. But they must follow arguments and detect fallacies for themselves. Reason like the other powers of the mind, requires material to work upon whether embalmed in history and literature, or afloat with the news of a strike or uprising. It is madness to let children face a debatable world with only, say, a mathematical preparation. If our business were to train their power of reasoning, such a training would no doubt be of service; but the power is there already, and only wants material to work upon." (CM Vol 6 pg 147)

Critical thinking matures from within. "Therefore children should be taught as they become mature enough to understand such teaching that the chief responsibility which rests upon then: as persons is the acceptance or rejection of ideas presented to them. To help them in this choice we should afford them principles of conduct and a wide range of fitting knowledge." (CM vol 6 pg 139)

Scaffolds vs Bridges: Many a teacher "believes that children cannot understand well-written books and that he must make of himself a bridge between the pupil and the real teacher, the man who has written the book." (CM vol 6, pg 260) But in a CM education, the teacher is not the bridge between the child and information. "Let the boy read and he knows, that is, if he must tell again what he has read. This, of telling again, sounds very simple but it is really a magical creative process by means of which the narrator sees what he has conceived, so definite and so impressive is the act of narrating that which has been read only once." (vol 6 pg 261)

It sounds simple. "All the acts of generalization, analysis, comparison, judgment, and so on, the mind performs for itself in the act of knowing. If we doubt this, we have only to try the effect of putting ourselves to sleep by relating silently and carefully, say, a chapter of Jane Austen or a chapter of the Bible, read once before going to bed. The degree of insight, the visualization, that comes with this sort of mental exercise is surprising." (CM vol 6 pg 304)

As students mature, their narrations become more abstract. "they will respond to such a question as,––"Write twelve lines (which must scan) on 'Sir Henry Lee,' or 'Cordelia,' or Pericles, or Livingstone," or, to take a question from the early days of the War, "Discuss Lord Derby's Scheme. How is it working?"; or, (IV) an essay on "The new army in the making, shewing what some of the difficulties have been and what has been achieved." (CM vol 6 pg 193)

A student's ability to narrate develops over time. And there are many ways to narrate: "But this is only one way to use books: others are to enumerate the statements in a given paragraph or chapter; to analyse a chapter, to divide it into paragraphs under proper headings, to tabulate and classify series; to trace cause to consequence and consequence to cause; to discern character and perceive how character and circumstance interact..." (CM vol 3 pg 180)

Narration is relational: "The teacher's part is, in the first place, to see what is to be done, to look over the of the day in advance and see what mental discipline, as well as what vital knowledge, this and that lesson afford; and then to set such questions and such tasks as shall give full scope to his pupils' mental activity." (CM vol 3 pg 180)

-------------------------------------------------------

Samples of one student's narrations over the course of twelve years were shared, and we were given the opportunity to narrate ourselves either by writing, telling or acting out a chapter we read in a book.

How Firm a Foundation: The Life and Works of CM

These are notes taken from a lecture given by Jennifer Spencer, titled How Firm a Foundation. The conference notebook describes this as "an introduction to the ideas behind Mason's methods. The main focus of the lecture is that techniques like narration and picture study are not the nucleus of the Mason model. The paradigm of education with which most of us grew up was rooted in classicism and industrialism, both of which are very humanistic and materialistic. If we simply add Mason's methods to those existing ideas, we fall way short of the mark..."

-----------------------------------------------

This was one of the highlights of the conference; there was a slide show presentation that went with it; these are just the notes I took. I think this lecture is a must for every teacher, especially a teacher in a CM school.

Educational problems are like a leaning tower - everyone has ideas about why it's leaning, but nobody knows how to fix it. If you don't address the problem at the foundation, you won't really fix it. In education, new books, computer programs, adding another new idea/tool without getting rid of bad ideas/tools don't address the foundational problem. Even in many "CM schools," CM's ideas are layered on top of traditional educational methods. This is how hybrids are born; by adding narration or picture study to a traditional program, the school identifies itself as a CM school, when it's really a hybrid.

Following a list of CM methods (narration, picture study, composer study, dictation, history as the hub, copywork, short lessons, hands-on math, classic literature, handicrafts, narrative books) can become like legalistic religion. Where's the relationship?? CM methods should be something that results from her foundational ideas, not something you apply to become a CM educator. It's like doing Christian works to become a Christian.

Here is a short history of education.

(Early?) classical education believed in the "tabula rasa" - the child's mind is a blank slate to be written on. Knowledge is the result of experience. There are three stages: grammar, dialectic, rhetoric. There is an emphasis onrote memorization of facts, and on a body of knowledge to be absorbed by the student. It's a bottom-up model (CM is a top-down model.) There is a dualism because the mind is seen as spiritual and the body is seen as secular matter, so mental pursuits are considered higher than physical pursuits. Pre-Indusrial Revolution, children learned from teachers and recitation. Churches often housed schools. Students often left school early to care for siblings or to go to work. Rich students went on to a university to learn how to use their leisure time responsibly. This kept class lines separated because only the rich had access to culture, while the poor were the workers. Hirsch's "What Your __ Grader Needs to Know" is based on classical ideals.

Then came the Industrial Revolution (1830-1900?). Entire families were often employed, which took children away from school. Books on management by authors like Frederick Taylor showed how to get more productivity from workers. Profit and efficiency were the buzzwords, and this attotude infiltrated even the schools. Dollar economy became the most important aspect of education. Could businesses train employees in schools with their own financing, instead of using school resources? To this day, businesses donate money to educational institutions to make students more useful to their businesses (CM said this was immoral!) The thought of the day was utilitarian: "Whatever helps industry helps the community." Even President Roosevelt supported vocational education/efficiency in foreign trade. People wanted to be productive like Germany and admired Germany's goal of loyalty to the company and to the state.

Charles W. Eliot and David Snedden led the way to American efficiency in the name of patriotism. Masses needed to learn to trust experts instead of themselves. Education needed to train students to respect authority and to be fit for their purpose (in the workplace). Teachers became public servants presenting the ideas of the controlling majority. Standardization was valued over individualization. Lessons were scheduled in rigid time-clock blocks of time. Children were sorted by IQ, social status and probable destiny. We still use many of these sorting techniques: SAT's, uniform textbooks, teacher certification, guidance counseling, mechanical discipline (behaviorism), strict schedules, isolated skills, qualifiable results and grades - all used to sort and diminish the individual personhood of each child.

Two groups opposed industrialization. Humanitarianism was against industrial slavery. They placed people above profit and felt that education should equalize opportunity. The NEA wanted to reform industry because they felt that "teaching is an art, not a science." But they were silenced when WWI demanded more goods and productivity. Then John Dewey took up their cause. He wanted a democratic ideal. Democracy should serve people. His ideas are based on relativism: man is the measure of importance, and a good life on earth is all we can hope for. Sensory experience builds knowledge. He didn't think of mind as spiritual and body as matter. To him, it was ALL matter. He felt that education should improve society, an idea which places society over the individual. Even religion, he felt, needed to evolve through slow social revolution, science and experimentation so that a new morality and new reality would become rooted. This resulted in child-centered teaching and "learning centers" based on inquiry/experience, "learning environments that foster learning," developmentally graded unit studies for thematic integration, democratic atmosphere in classrooms, co-operative learning, character-building lessons. Unfortunately, right/wrong isn't decided by majority vote. Character is internal and grows through ideas; it can't be applied from the outside. Dewey's style of education results in a foundation that shifts like sand. Morality under this atmosphere changes with the times.

CM is different. CM believed that children come to us as complete persons who have an innate desire for justice, and who were created for a special purpose. They already have a fully-developed soul and intellect. It's not our job to trim or prune them to make them conform to society's ideals. Skills are not equal to ideas. With CM, no information is presented without an informing idea. The teacher's job is to provide a rich feast of living ideas via books. The goal isn't cultural literacy, but critical literacy through reading, extracting ideas, weighing them with a constant measure or standard (the Bible), and forming their own judgment. CM is rooted in constructivism. Attentiveness revolves around making connections and expressing the child's own ideas, and partaking in the "grand conversation."

CM is built on --
- The child as a person
- The nature of knowledge as relational
- Ideas as the food for the mind.

CM does not need the bricks of trivium, grades, behaviorism, isolated skills,. But it's not enough to add the good aspects of CM over everything else. You have to also remove the bad in the same way that a gardener removes weeds before letting good plants take root.

The final question is -- should education be based on the changing demands of society/industry, or on the needs of the child?