| Author | |
JennGM
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17702
|
| Posted: Sept 15 2005 at 6:20pm | IP Logged
|
 |
|
Forgive me if this has been treated before. I have a few questions. These are very fundamental questions, so bear with me....I'm trying to understand the different approaches to hsing.
First of all, what's the best definition of "Classical Education"? Dorothy Sayers treatment? Laura Berquist? Well-Trained Mind? Are all the interpretations the same? Is this a philosophy? A method?
And when we talk about Classical Education is it BOTH a certain method/way of learning and teaching AND the use of classical works of literature, etc.?
Then, thirdly, does the approach of a classical education agree with Charlotte Mason philosophy? Where does it become purely CM and not classical, or can they really go hand-in-hand?
Seeing how unschooling doesn't always blend nicely with Classical Education in your discussions, I just wanted to clarify this point in my mind.
__________________
Jennifer G. Miller
Wife to  & ds1  '03 & ds2  '07
Family in Feast and Feria
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JennGM
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17702
|
| Posted: Sept 15 2005 at 8:31pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I haven't read much on classical education...here and there bits and pieces and a bit of Berquist and Sayers essay. I've got this pile of books I'm slowly digesting on home education. I want to be able to understand a little of where one is coming from in the forum so I can follow a bit before the books are read!
__________________
Jennifer G. Miller
Wife to & ds1 '03 & ds2 '07
Family in Feast and Feria
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Willa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3881
|
| Posted: Sept 16 2005 at 9:17am | IP Logged
|
|
|
jenngm67 wrote:
First of all, what's the best definition of "Classical Education"? Dorothy Sayers treatment? Laura Berquist? Well-Trained Mind? Are all the interpretations the same? Is this a philosophy? A method?
And when we talk about Classical Education is it BOTH a certain method/way of learning and teaching AND the use of classical works of literature, etc.?
Then, thirdly, does the approach of a classical education agree with Charlotte Mason philosophy? Where does it become purely CM and not classical, or can they really go hand-in-hand? |
|
|
Dear Jenn,
I'll give this a try -- on the classical education lists I've been on, a recurring thread is always "What IS classical education?"
So, I hardly know how to begin.... I personally, started off homeschooling from reading unschooling and "better late than early" books, then found Susan Macaulay's For the Children's Sake, which introduced me to Charlotte Mason. Then my DH bought me Laura Berquist's book Designing your Own Classical Curriculum, which I liked and have referred to often.
Oh, I forgot -- in there somewhere I read Doug Wilson's book, Recovering the Lost Tools of Learning The book didn't appeal to me much -- for one thing, he wasn't that thrilled with homeschooling at the time. But he did include the whole Lost Tools of Learning essay by Dorothy Sayers, and THAT was worth the cost of the book at the time, for me.
I think Doug Wilson's very Reformed Protestant outlook has heavily influenced the revival of "Christian" classical education in homeschools nowadays, and not always for good in my opinion. "Reformed" or Calvinist Protestantism, for one thing, holds that man is born "totally depraved" and that baptism is not a sacrament but a sign -- therefore, children are not seen as weakened by original sin but sanctified by grace; rather, they are seen as basically corrupt. So education becomes more of a corrective and has more of a punitive, chastising aspect. Over-simplifying here -- but if you read Charlotte Mason, she was speaking against this idea to some extent, and reclaiming the idea that a child is not "born evil" but rather, more like the Catechism would have it: where original sin is "a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". " The way the Catholic Church understands it, what is thought of human nature has immense implications for what education is about.
DH also used to donate money to Kolbe back when it was a tiny day school. So when I was getting burned out on Seton, we looked into both Kolbe and MODG -- MODG was too expensive plus much less organized at that time, and we loved Kolbe's booklist in the high school years, so we went with Kolbe. STAA didn't exist back then, at least as far as I know. But anyway, Kolbe provides the LEAST amount of hand-holding and for us, that was a plus. I wanted to do it my way but still be part of a community and Kolbe makes such a point of parents being the expert.
I'm sorry this is SO longwinded. Basically, I wanted to explain my context. DH and I both approached classical education a bit subversively, so to speak. We were both kids who felt that school was sort of a waste of time, that we learned more out of school than within it. Plus, DH has a big interest in liberty/freedom issues in the USA. Classical education appealed to us because it talked about "tools" of learning, because it was an education for the "free man", not just telling you how to think but giving you the tools to think for yourself.
Now, HOW to teach kids to think for themselves and live as free citizens and children of God -- well, Charlotte Mason helps me fill in the gaps there, with the emphasis on forming the will and heart and imagination as well as the mind. To me, Charlotte Mason and classical education theories are on the same page as far as basic principles, but sometimes the specific methods differ, and in that case, one can pick and choose what works for one's kids and oneself.
I am not sure if this is all making sense.
A couple of years ago I did a LOT of reading on classical education. Partly it was because my oldest kids were going through Kolbe's high school ancient history reading list, so I was reading up on how the Greeks and Romans thought of education.
The Greeks had a word "Paideia" which is a key one to me. Our word "pedagogue" comes from it. I believe the word means something like "the rearing of children" and basically it was to the Greeks a very broad term -- the connotation was helping a man (ie human being) to reach his true self. Sort of like the Pope's "families, be who you are" applied to the individual. The idea is that a child is born a person but needs guidance and mentoring to help him reach his potential.
There's more to it than that -- but basically, "paideia" describes what the Greeks did to help each other, particularly their children, reach their full human capacity. It encompasses more than just academics -- also citizenship (in a broader, more personalistic way than we see civics or politics nowadays); also physical development, the influence of environment, art, music, and overarching it all is a philosophical view of life. a kind of continual reflection and examination and exploration, not taking things for granted. Obviously, this kind of education cannot be done purely by rote, though probably some rote learning is indicated.
This is a very Catholic idea too. You can see it traced from Plato et al, all the way through history to both Charlotte Mason and Dorothy Sayers, and even to John Holt (the last three being non-Catholics, obviously, who I believe stand on the shoulders of Catholic philosophy in several ways).
This tradition is firmly OPPOSED to a tradition that education is really just behavioralistic training of some kind -- training people to be good workers or in some way educating them for a secondary, "servile" purpose. If you read John Taylor Gatto, for example, you will see his rage at a school system that teaches kids to move from one lesson to another at the ring of a bell, and so on
The Seven Lesson Schoolteacher. John Holt often writes about the same issues, eg in How Children Fail
To me, classical education is an unbroken line from the ancients through the Catholic thinkers like Aquinas, Ignatius, etc. Catholic thinking developed the thinking of the ancients, and "conversed" or dialogued with it. So to me there isn't ONE classical education guru -- they can all be cross-checked against the philosophical thinking of the Church.
That's important to me -- that truths about how humans think and learn weren't just invented or discovered yesterday, that they can be traced back in some form and tied in with Catholic thinking through the ages.
I feel I didn't answer your questions very well, but now that I've gotten all that out of the way, I or someone else can get into the nitty-=gritty part ... 
__________________
AMDG
Willa
hsing boys ages 11, 14, almost 18 (+ 4 homeschool grads ages 20 to 27)
Take Up and Read
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Willa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3881
|
| Posted: Sept 16 2005 at 9:55am | IP Logged
|
|
|
jenngm67 wrote:
First of all, what's the best definition of "Classical Education"? Dorothy Sayers treatment? Laura Berquist? Well-Trained Mind? Are all the interpretations the same? Is this a philosophy? A method?
|
|
|
So for the nitty-gritty, since the kids still aren't awake  This is just my take.
Of those three, Dorothy Sayers influenced Laura Berquist, as she writes in her book, and gave her a way to understand what she had already observed in her children -- that the early years are a time for absorbing and soaking in -- lots of input and learning from one's environment and routine -- that the intermediate "dialectic" years are a time when kids question, analyze, cross-compare, and sometimes (gasp) argue!, and that the later, high school years are a time when kids are often developing a focus, a persona, an approach to life which is a clue and seed to their future vocation.
Laura Berquist's book is firmly in the Catholic philosophical tradition, but it's not a philosophical book; it's mostly practical "how to implement these ideas" and resource lists to help the homeschool mom do this.
The Well Trained Mind also follows the "Trivium" model but to me, the main strength of the book is its organizational ideas and possibly its resource lists, and its pleasant, conversational tone. It is not really very philosophical and in fact is secularly oriented -- religion, for example, is confined to 15 minutes a day in a proposed 6-hour day for grade schoolers.
Dorothy Sayers' essay was basically meant to be a discussion-starter for a revival of "real" education -- at least the way I read it. It wasn't meant to be the final word, but rather, to help people of her time think through some of the educational "psychological" premises which they were in danger of taking too much for granted because they were modern and "scientific". So she proposed an alternative "psychology" based on the medieval Trivium of grammar, logic, and rhetoric.
I tried to explain in my other post that classical education to me is a philosophy and the methods are to be geared to the philosophy. "Perfect schools are the result not so much of good methods as of good teachers, teachers who are thoroughly prepared and well-grounded in the matter they have to teach; who possess the intellectual and moral qualifications required by their important office; who cherish a pure and holy love for the youths confided to them, because they love Jesus Christ and His Church, of which these are the children of predilection; and who have therefore sincerely at heart the true good of family and country." Divini Illius Magistri
In other words, to me, methods are subordinate to relationship and general religious integrity. The Church gives us a lot of latitude as to methods "the rights of the family and of the State, even the rights of individuals regarding a just liberty in the pursuit of science, of methods of science and all sorts of profane culture, not only are not opposed to this pre-eminence of the Church, but are in complete harmony with it." within general guidelines, but it also advises us
"the Christian teacher will imitate the bee, which takes the choicest part of the flower and leaves the rest, as St. Basil teaches in his discourse to youths on the study of the classics.[51] Nor will this necessary caution, suggested also by the pagan Quintilian,[52] in any way hinder the Christian teacher from gathering and turning to profit, whatever there is of real worth in the systems and methods of our modern times, mindful of the Apostle's advice: "Prove all things: hold fast that which is good."[53] Hence in accepting the new, he will not hastily abandon the old, which the experience of centuries has found expedient and profitable."
That last part, to me, is a summary of the "basics" of classical education.....
__________________
AMDG
Willa
hsing boys ages 11, 14, almost 18 (+ 4 homeschool grads ages 20 to 27)
Take Up and Read
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Willa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3881
|
| Posted: Sept 16 2005 at 10:33am | IP Logged
|
|
|
jenngm67 wrote:
Then, thirdly, does the approach of a classical education agree with Charlotte Mason philosophy? Where does it become purely CM and not classical, or can they really go hand-in-hand?
|
|
|
I think that narration, copywork/dictation, and nature study are some of the things that are or can be common to both approaches. Also, both have an emphasis on second languages, though class ed emphasizes the ancient languages -- Latin and Greek -- while CM emphasizes the modern "useful" languages of her time -- French, German, because educated people of her time would need to read and converse in those languages.
Both emphasize Great Books and living literature but CM focused more on "modern" literature (modern in her time, so if you use the books she used, you will have a 19th century focused education, whereas if you applied her principles of choosing the best, most up to date books on every subject, you might have something similar to Sonlight's curriculum)
Classical education as it is thought of today places more emphasis on memorizing than CM does-- partly, as Richelle pointed out, because of Dorothy Sayers' contention that children LIKE to memorize. As Richelle also mentioned, not all kids seem to bear out the theory, though some do.
Charlotte Mason emphasizes that kids like narrating and in my experience this is not always true of all kids. Mine never willingly did formal narrations, and the formal narrations they did were never very meaningful in terms of assimilating or retaining the reading they had done. So maybe memorizing and narrating are better thought of in broad terms -- not just techniques, but principles?
For example, all humans probably do like to recount stories and anecdotes. Even my quietest kids will come up and tell me about what they saw outside or what they read or something they did or learned. That's the bottom line "principle" that man is a "narrating" animal.
Similarly, all kids and all people spend a lot of their time acquiring information of some kind or other. For example, they say that people have acquired something like 70% of their total adult vocabulary by the time they are five years old. So there's that principle that man is a "memorizing" animal but not all kids will enjoy reciting catechism or drilling Latin paradigms.
If you look at specific details, all educational "styles" look very different. But if you look at general principles, they move a lot closer to each other. I like to look at the general principles than unite the methods rather than the details that divide them, but of course, the details are what we have to actually DO in day to day life.
I think both classical AND CM have a focus on good, "whole" types of education that include the whole environment one lives in, not just academics. The object of both methods is not just an intellectual, but a virtuous person who freely chooses the good. So I find them very compatible in that respect.
__________________
AMDG
Willa
hsing boys ages 11, 14, almost 18 (+ 4 homeschool grads ages 20 to 27)
Take Up and Read
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JennGM
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17702
|
| Posted: Sept 16 2005 at 3:31pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Willa,
Thanks for taking so much time to answer my questions. It really makes sense....I've got to read them carefully later...right now I'm a little fuzzy brained from some pain medication, so I want to come back to them when I'm feeling a bit more peppy. But I just wanted you to know that I really appreciate it! 
__________________
Jennifer G. Miller
Wife to & ds1 '03 & ds2 '07
Family in Feast and Feria
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Willa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3881
|
| Posted: Sept 17 2005 at 9:44am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Dear Jenn,
I think I went on a bit too long yesterday in my posts. I have trouble with that!  Sorry if it was overwhelming.
Christine Miller's Classical Homeschooling site is a good one to talk about the basics of class ed, and you'll recognize some CM ideas like narration and copywork there...
Beth Parker's website is another fun and extensive site to explore if you are interested in how classical and CM fit together in one person's homeschool.
But basically, I imagine that some of your questions are ones we'd be often discussing on a "4real" classical education forum like this one.... how classical education can fit with CM and even unschooling, what are the differences, are there any basic incompatibilities.... so I suppose there's not a real final answer -- how we do it would vary for each individual....
We had a similar discussion on the CathCM loop a long time ago, and MacBeth and Jane in the UK both pointed out that they received a classical education that was basically focused on learning the ancient languages and reading the ancient literature. Sort of like a "classics" degree in college. But to most homeschoolers that call themselves "classical", the definition is probably somewhat broader.
__________________
AMDG
Willa
hsing boys ages 11, 14, almost 18 (+ 4 homeschool grads ages 20 to 27)
Take Up and Read
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
tovlo4801
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 28 2005
Location: Minnesota
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 386
|
| Posted: Sept 17 2005 at 9:53am | IP Logged
|
|
|
WJFR wrote:
Dear Jenn,
I think I went on a bit too long yesterday in my posts. I have trouble with that! |
|
|
Willa,
I don't know what Jenn thought, but I thought your posts were fabulous! I've been checking in, but haven't had much time to post. I wanted to quote several things you said because they struck me so strongly. Thank you for posting!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
tovlo4801
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 28 2005
Location: Minnesota
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 386
|
| Posted: Sept 17 2005 at 9:57am | IP Logged
|
|
|
WJFR wrote:
The Greeks had a word "Paideia" which is a key one to me. Our word "pedagogue" comes from it. I believe the word means something like "the rearing of children" and basically it was to the Greeks a very broad term -- the connotation was helping a man (ie human being) to reach his true self. Sort of like the Pope's "families, be who you are" applied to the individual. The idea is that a child is born a person but needs guidance and mentoring to help him reach his potential.
There's more to it than that -- but basically, "paideia" describes what the Greeks did to help each other, particularly their children, reach their full human capacity. |
|
|
First part I loved.  Moving on to your second post.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
tovlo4801
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 28 2005
Location: Minnesota
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 386
|
| Posted: Sept 17 2005 at 10:00am | IP Logged
|
|
|
WJFR wrote:
I tried to explain in my other post that classical education to me is a philosophy and the methods are to be geared to the philosophy.
--------------------------------
In other words, to me, methods are subordinate to relationship and general religious integrity. |
|
|
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
tovlo4801
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 28 2005
Location: Minnesota
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 386
|
| Posted: Sept 17 2005 at 10:06am | IP Logged
|
|
|
WJFR wrote:
So maybe memorizing and narrating are better thought of in broad terms -- not just techniques, but principles?
For example, all humans probably do like to recount stories and anecdotes.
Similarly, all kids and all people spend a lot of their time acquiring information of some kind or other. For example, they say that people have acquired something like 70% of their total adult vocabulary by the time they are five years old. So there's that principle that man is a "memorizing" animal...
If you look at specific details, all educational "styles" look very different. But if you look at general principles, they move a lot closer to each other. I like to look at the general principles than unite the methods rather than the details that divide them...
The object of both methods is not just an intellectual, but a virtuous person who freely chooses the good. |
|
|
I know I probably just wasted a lot of space , but I don't have time to comment on these things. I just wanted to comment by highlighting how important these thoughts were to my thinking. Thanks again, Willa.
God Bless,
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
~Rachel~
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 29 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 677
|
| Posted: Sept 20 2005 at 3:12pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I wanted to add something here... firstly THANKS for setting this up, and secondly:
I have spent my years as the mother of preschoolers reading about classical education and its variety of methods. So when DS finally turned old enough for school this year, I was excited to be able to put my thoughts into action.
I was very much a follower of TWTM, even though I did not agree with everything they said.
Then, on TWTM forum one day someone mentioned a different classical group. This was called Latin centered Classical.
It was really misnamed, for the truth is it is more of a 'latin based' education, based on the philosophies of Cheryl Lowe at Memoria Press.
This group Latin Classical Ed, describes two versions of 'Classical Education': neo-classical and traditional classical. Neo classical is the Dorothy Sayers group, following the three fold model of grammar, logic and rhetoric stages. Traditional Classical ignores this grouping, feeling that it artificially divides the groups into segments that inreality occur at different times for different children. They like to use the model of the past, to use Latin as the teaching of language and grammar.
It gets a lot more complex than that, but is outline both on the yahoo group, on the Memoria Press site and in the book Climbing Parnassus by Tracy Lee Simmons.
__________________
~Rachel~
Wife to William
Mum to James 13, Lenore 8
Lighting a Fire
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Willa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3881
|
| Posted: Sept 25 2005 at 3:20am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Dear Rachel,
Thanks for bringing up the Latin-based classical education model. I've moved quite a bit in that direction in the past couple of years.... the ideas made a lot of sense to me. For one thing, it's a lot easier to focus on analytical English grammar by comparison and contrast with another language, particularly an inflected one like Latin. Analytical English grammar seems rather strained and artificial to a child/person with a good natural grasp of functional grammar acquired by reading lots of good books. Latin or really, to some extent ANY foreign language, lets you see how grammar works outside your own language, and thus gives you a "meta"-view of language structure.
About the Trivium "stages" written about by Dorothy Sayers -- she writes that she intends it to be an amateur foray into child psychology and educational philosophy.
She writes:
"That I, whose experience of teaching is extremely limited, should presume to discuss education is a matter, surely, that calls for no apology. It is a kind of behavior to which the present climate of opinion is wholly favorable. Bishops air their opinions about economics; biologists, about metaphysics; inorganic chemists, about theology; the most irrelevant people are appointed to highly technical ministries; and plain, blunt men write to the papers to say that Epstein and Picasso do not know how to draw. ..."
"My views about child psychology are, I admit, neither orthodox nor enlightened. Looking back upon myself (since I am the child I know best and the only child I can pretend to know from inside) I recognize three states of development. These, in a rough-and- ready fashion, I will call the Poll-Parrot, the Pert, and the Poetic--the latter coinciding, approximately, with the onset of puberty."
Her tone is sort of ironic and I'm sometimes surprised by how seriously and literally her words are taken both by classical education types and classical education critics. I think she would have been surprised, too.
I happen to see "stages" similar to the ones she describes, in my own memories of myself and in my kids; they are not unlike Piaget's constructivist theories of child development and to some extent, I see them implicitly in Charlotte Mason's curriculum ideas as well;
but I think the whole "Trivium stage" idea boils down to what Sayers says in her conclusion, that we lost something when we tossed out our cultural heritage:
"What use is it to pile task on task and prolong the days of labor, if at the close the chief object is left unattained? It is not the fault of the teachers--they work only too hard already. The combined folly of a civilization that has forgotten its own roots is forcing them to shore up the tottering weight of an educational structure that is built upon sand. They are doing for their pupils the work which the pupils themselves ought to do. For the sole true end of education is simply this: to teach men how to learn for themselves; and whatever instruction fails to do this is effort spent in vain. "
__________________
AMDG
Willa
hsing boys ages 11, 14, almost 18 (+ 4 homeschool grads ages 20 to 27)
Take Up and Read
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
tovlo4801
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 28 2005
Location: Minnesota
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 386
|
| Posted: Sept 25 2005 at 9:45am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Just a comment about those natural stages of learning. I'm pursuing a math tutor for my oldest who is quite behind in math. I was describing my assessment of what's going on with him to her, when she suggested something that had never occured to me. Because of the particular struggles we have in math, she offered that my son might have trouble with long-term memory.
So...my frustration with classical education has in many ways revolved around the difficulties we've had with retention and the pain it's involved trying to get things into his head.
I'm wondering now if my assessment of the inaccuracy of the natural learning stages is skewed because my son might have some sort of disability that knocked him out of those natural stages. My youngest is still awful young to really make any sort judgement about, but I've been watching him closely and thinking that he fits much more closely those natural stages. Right now he's in a period of learning math all by himself. He is fascinated with counting and adding and multiplication and even powers. He'll sit quietly for a period and then just state a problem and the answer. He absorbs either the confirmation or the correction and keeps parroting it back as if he's trying to make it stick in his head. It's occured to me that this seems to be that natural tendency toward memorizing.
Anyway, I just thought I'd share that those stages might be more normal in my family than I'd thought and it might just be some learning difficulty that has bumped my oldest out of that natural rhythm.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Erin
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5814
|
| Posted: Sept 28 2005 at 8:26am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Willa,
Just wanting to say I have been studying this thread with interest. In fact it has finally prompted me to read Sayers" Lost tools of Learning" which has been sitting on my shelf for years. I really found it interesting. Lots of food for thought.
Like yourself my homeschool reading started off with Holt, travelled to Moore and eventually to Charlotte Mason. I have always been interested in a classical education, the goals are what appeal to me. Now that my oldest is approaching 7th grade, I wonder anew if it is an appropiate way to go for her.
WJFR wrote:
we looked into both Kolbe and MODG -- MODG was too expensive plus much less organized at that time, and we loved Kolbe's booklist in the high school years, so we went with Kolbe. STAA didn't exist back then, at least as far as I know. But anyway, Kolbe provides the LEAST amount of hand-holding and for us, that was a plus. I wanted to do it my way but still be part of a community and Kolbe makes such a point of parents being the expert. |
|
|
I've been having a look at Kolbe over the last few months. Although I'm having trouble finding there recommended booklist on site I'm trying to picture if there is a way of combining some of CHC with KOlbe. Different approaches I know.
WJFR wrote:
| Classical education appealed to us because it talked about "tools" of learning, because it was an education for the "free man", not just telling you how to think but giving you the tools to think for yourself. |
|
|
Now I just love this comment. I think it says it all.
WJFR wrote:
| Now, HOW to teach kids to think for themselves and live as free citizens and children of God -- well, Charlotte Mason helps me fill in the gaps there, with the emphasis on forming the will and heart and imagination as well as the mind. To me, Charlotte Mason and classical education theories are on the same page as far as basic principles, but sometimes the specific methods differ, and in that case, one can pick and choose what works for one's kids and oneself. |
|
|
Willa,
I would love to hear more about how you do just this.
You have a wealth of knowledge. I have so much to learn.
__________________
Erin
Faith Filled Days
Seven Little Australians
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Willa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3881
|
| Posted: Oct 21 2005 at 8:24pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Erin wrote:
WJFR wrote:
| To me, Charlotte Mason and classical education theories are on the same page as far as basic principles, but sometimes the specific methods differ, and in that case, one can pick and choose what works for one's kids and oneself. |
|
|
Willa,
I would love to hear more about how you do just this. |
|
|
Erin,
There was a thread on Classical Education and CM earlier this year and also, Richelle started this one on Excellence in Education.
I couldn't find where I wrote it, but basically I try to have some "discipline" type subjects and some "discovery" or exploratory type subjects. Usually math and languages and catechism fit in the first area and I put history, science, literature and religion in the second. Discipline subjects are the ones you do just like your morning Flylady routine, because it's a good habit and helps build skills in small increments.
Discovery subjects are the ones that are more "idea"-driven -- mostly based on reading and talking about good books. Though any kind of "affinities", to use a term Julie used, are great starters for discovery learning. My daughter is big into musicals and sewing right now, for example.
We do the "discipline" subjects in CM style "short lessons" so the kids know they can get through quickly if they stay focused. And "staying focused" is itself a big part of the agenda. Then we have more leisure to do the read alouds, discussions, silent reading and writing projects, plus crafts and that kind of thing -- and I don't have to watch the clock for those, because they're more internally motivating for the kids.
We vary year by year and also vary somewhat by child. This year has been looser than the past couple of years because last year I felt that we got a bit burned out and over-structured (for us). I was feeling that I didn't have any space or margin to pursue anything just for delight in it, or encouraging that in my kids, and a "love for learning" is a key goal in my homeschool, worth dropping back on the Discipline subjects for a while in order to encourage.
What we're doing this year is more like a Robinson Curriculum or the kind of unschooling in Homeschooling with Gentleness -- ie math, writing, catechism and then lots of reading, some assigned and some not. Then lots of other things like music, crafts and athletics, but not much that's on a checklist.
I hope this makes sense. At other periods in my homeschooling the details would be somewhat different. This year I felt we needed a little more time and space.
A review and how-one-family-uses-it article on the Robinson Curriculum that Leonie once sent me.
Hope this helps a bit.
__________________
AMDG
Willa
hsing boys ages 11, 14, almost 18 (+ 4 homeschool grads ages 20 to 27)
Take Up and Read
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Willa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3881
|
| Posted: Oct 21 2005 at 8:37pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
In the CE and CM thread I linked to above, Natalia asked me how I did CE/CM with my 7th grader. My answer was connected to what he did last year in 6th grade; this year is a bit looser as I explained, but I'll paste the post just so you can see it:
About the 7th grade curriculum, I agree with Julie's point about flexibility being important. Not just the child's needs, but what is going on with the mom and the family. My oldest did a more classical curriculum in 7th, my next two were much less CE and more CM-- my second son responded SO well to theme-type studies based on Elizabeth's booklist-- and my fourth son is in 6th and is doing more classical. But all of them were a mixture, plus that "real life, real learning" theme which to me overrides all the methods -- that Catholic homeschooling should be Sacramental, and family-oriented, a matter of relationships and environment as well as conscious teaching and training. My present sixth grader is studying Latin and Christian Greek, but using short lessons. He's also doing Logic -- part way through Introductory Logic and just starting Traditional Logic. He is doing diagramming for English grammar. I think of those as the "discipline" or teaching subjects. Math also fits in there, and working on the catechism. His reading and writing is mostly CM "living books". I try to mix the more difficult classics with some easier reads. He narrates, mostly orally, sometimes in writing, and does copywork. Religion, history, literature, geography and science are covered this way and they overlap a lot of course. We use something like the Ambleside schedule for these subjects. Then the next category is the "study" category. Picture study, composer study, nature study, handicrafts, drawing etc. Century book too fits in this category. I try to do these once a week, rotating through. I'd like to have some studies of the liturgical year in here. Once in a while we put all this aside and do something else, whatever. Variety is refreshing. We usually try to keep going with the Math, Latin, and religion though. I guess that for me the "languages" -- math, logic, Latin, Greek, English grammar -- are more classically oriented and the other ones are more done in the CM way. It seems to work for me. I like the balance between the different categories. Well, to be honest the "study" category is difficult for me. I think it is valuable, but too often push it aside. I plan to continue this next year, using the Ambleside booklist, and continuing Latin, Greek and Logic.
__________________
AMDG
Willa
hsing boys ages 11, 14, almost 18 (+ 4 homeschool grads ages 20 to 27)
Take Up and Read
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Philosophy of Education
Topic: Classical Education and Charlotte Mason
