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.