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.