| Author | |
Mackfam
Board Moderator
Non Nobis
Joined: April 24 2006
Location: Alabama
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 14656
|
| Posted: June 07 2012 at 12:06pm | IP Logged
|
 |
|
JennGM wrote:
Loving this discussion. Pardon me if this has been answered, but I'm trying to understand the Catholic influence on classical education.
Is going back to the original ideas straight from the Greeks, or somewhere it was Christianized/baptized a bit? |
|
|
The Greeks originated the structure and form, and much of the content. Many scholars believe that St. Paul, a masterful rhetorician, was classically educated. And yes, Classical education was fully immersed in the fullness and beauty of Catholic understanding by around the 5th century. Throughout the Middle Ages, Classical Education was quietly tended and nurtured within the Church, in monasteries. And by the time Emperor Charlemagne became Holy Roman Emperor, one of his goals and focuses was to ensure that a Classic Christian Education was offered to all. I would say that this was probably the high point of Classical Christian education. At this point (although certainly before), it was most certainly enjoying the fullness of the faith, both in the content and the focus on supernatural virtues.
JennGM wrote:
| When exactly is this neoclassical on a timeline? |
|
|
I couldn't pinpoint an exact date for you, but I'd guess somewhere in the 80's. It comes as a result of some home educators reading Sayers' article, The Lost Tools of Learning, and their great desire to recover the lost tools. They took Sayers' proposal of the Trivium following developmental stages, and built entire curriculums around that idea.
JennGM wrote:
| While the Classical was appealing to me, especially thinking I'm following St. Thomas Aquinas...I was completely overwhelmed. And I couldn't get over the "filling the bucket" idea at the younger ages. Perhaps it's been done for ages, but it seemed to forced and unnatural to way a child learns. I wanted my child to be well-rounded, a "Renaissance Man" so to say, but it seemed overwhelming. |
|
|
This "filling the bucket" is really a new thing, and I think it's largely a result of frantically trying to accomplish all the work of one of the skills of the Trivium at a young age, and within a finite period of time. Certainly, I think we've all seen that young children have a great capacity for memory work, but to do so without having first given the living idea reduces memory work, which is a good thing and quite commonly used in CM's Programmes, to filling a bucket. And, just to be clear, I don't think all neo-Classical forms function on this idea of memorize-memorize-memorize..without first presenting the idea. I think that this memory work which is devoid of idea is almost a spin-off of trying to make neo-Classical education fit into finite periods of development so that there may be an unusual impetus to hurry, hurry, hurry so you can get to the ideas when they're older.
In looking at older Classical forms of education, they certainly do a great deal of memory work, but it is always within context. The living idea is there first. They were great supporters of wonder and nurturing wonder and believed that all true education began in wonder. Aristotle said, "Wisdom begins in wonder."
I think as CM educators, we would do well to understand what older Classical education truly looked like, and understanding that this older form would have been all that CM would have been familiar with. Doing so opens up possibilities and things begin to make much more sense.
__________________
Jen Mackintosh
Wife to Rob, mom to dd 19 , ds 16, ds 11, dd 8, and dd 3
Wildflowers and Marbles
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Mackfam
Board Moderator
Non Nobis
Joined: April 24 2006
Location: Alabama
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 14656
|
| Posted: June 07 2012 at 12:14pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
CrunchyMom wrote:
What an interesting article.
It brings to mind for me Charlotte Mason's Formidable List of Attainments for a Child of Six.
There IS a good bit of memory work emphasized here, but it is a LIVING memory work, not some parroting of vocabulary, declensions, math facts, or other tedious items out of context.
She does take advantage of the "parrot stage", but the advantage comes from laying a foundation of worthy and beautiful ideas that will likely stay with the child forever instead of verb conjugations or historical dates that may or may not be useful. This, again, is born from respecting the child as a person and not simply a parrot. |
|
|
EXACTLY!!
__________________
Jen Mackintosh
Wife to Rob, mom to dd 19, ds 16, ds 11, dd 8, and dd 3
Wildflowers and Marbles
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Tina P.
Forum All-Star
Joined: June 28 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1638
|
| Posted: June 07 2012 at 1:51pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
This is just what I needed today! I sailed through early grade school (read: pre-6th) with my first three using Charlotte Mason's methods to the best of my abilities.
At high school level, however, I blanched. I thought that CM wasn't rigorous enough (read that above somewhere) and therefore, set my sights on a more MODG-style approach. It is just not working. I really needed some articles to sink my teeth into this year to gird myself up for planning and executing next year.
Thank you ladies! You rescued me again! 
__________________
Tina, wife to one and mom to 9 + 3 in heaven
Mary's Muse
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JuliaT
Forum All-Star
Joined: June 25 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 563
|
| Posted: June 09 2012 at 10:39am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I just want to say that it is so refreshing to see a whole thread on the premise that CM is Classical. I am so tired of politely arguing with people who do not see the similarities between these two philosophies.
I came to Classical at the beginning of our homeschool journey through the WTM door. That introduction messed up my whole understanding of CE. It has taken me 7 years to pull myself away from some of their 'rules.' I felt in bondage to many of the things they said I should do with my children. It was not an education for the free.
I have tried to use CM only but have since discovered that things move more smoothly when I meld the two philosophies together. I am feeling much more freedom from educating this way.
The Circe Institute has been such a support to me as I have been trying out my CE/CM wings. I have been purchasing their Conference CDs for the last few years now and, oh! what a drink of cool water for a parched and thirsty soul. I am so grateful to Andrew Kern for all that he has done in helping me come to a better udnerstanding of CE and how it is okay to combine CM with that as well.
The thing that has helped me so much in my journey is to take into consideration the nature of each of my children and the duties that they have and will have as they get older. Planning our years have become so much easier with those thoughts in mind.
I would like to add to the CE booklist if I may. These are the books that have inspired me over the years.
Poetic Knowledge by James Taylor
Beauty for Truth's Sake by Stratford Caldecott
Wisdom and Eloquence by Robert Littleford and Charles Evans (this book is more a primer for those that are trying to get away from the WTM mindset.)
The Circe website also has free podcasts that would be a great starting point. Society for Classical Learning also has podcasts but they are not free. They also have PDFs for their newsletters that I have found helpful. Keep in mind, though, that this group is for teachers of classical schools so some of the content is not applicable to homeschooling.
__________________
Blessings,
Julia
mom of 3(14,13 & 11 yrs.old)
MusingsofaPrairieGirl
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Angel
Forum All-Star
Joined: April 22 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2293
|
| Posted: June 11 2012 at 10:00am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I put this reply together over the space of a couple of days, after coming back from a busy vacation, so I hope it is somewhat coherent!
This is an interesting thread to me, especially since I was just telling my husband that I was going to start telling people that we are “classical unschoolers”. My daughter told me that didn’t make any sense, but it made perfect sense to me, considering the mix of influences from which we draw and our basic “freedom within limits” mentality. Plus, “Montessori-Classical-Charlotte Mason homeschoolers” is quite a mouthful!
We began homeschooling with a sort of unschooling/neoclassical mix (mainly from Laura Berquist’s Designing Your Own Classical Curriculum, but also a bit from the Well-Trained Mind... although I had some disagreements with WTM from the very beginning.) Over the years I discovered Montessori, which gave us the flexibility of a great deal of choice within flexible limits, and Charlotte Mason, which sort of confirmed all the living books we liked to use and the nature study we enjoyed. Over the years, I have drawn a bit more from Charlotte Mason (largely thanks to this forum) and use my Neoclassical reference books mostly for their lists of resources, as I much prefer Andrew Campbell and Andrew Kern’s vision of classical education. In fact, I own both the first and second edition of The Latin-Centered Curriculum! (In my defense, the editions are different enough that I think owning both of them is warranted.)
I just wanted to mention that as I understand it, the theorized three stages of growth for Neoclassicists -- Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric -- are less about the skills involved and more about the kind of learning that is supposed to take place in each stage. (If you read The Well-Trained Mind, you’ll see that Susan Wise Bauer recommends English grammar for almost all 12 years, which would, frankly, drive my children insane.) The Grammar stage, then, is about information gathering and learning the basic structure of things. So, for instance, it would apply to any division of knowledge. The “grammar” of biology is the Linnean classification system, for example. The “grammar” of an insect is that it has 6 legs and 3 body sections. The grammar of a language is its structure. In order to read, one has to (somehow) be able to put the sounds that the letters represent together to form words. The “grammar” of a word is the phonograms that make it up. So Dorothy Sayers (who was decrying the demise of the more classical model of education in which she, CS Lewis, and JRR Tolkien had all been trained and in which the study of Latin played a central role) was trying to put together what she considered a child’s natural propensity for memorization in the younger ages with the first stage of learning anything: that is, in order to learn to a subject, you can’t start by analyzing it, you have to learn something *about* it first. This emphasis on learning “about”, learning “facts”, is what (to the neoclassicists, as I understand it) forms the basis of the Poll-Parrot stage, and why they emphasize so much memorization. The child at that age is supposed to be like a parrot, and it all comes back to the idea that in order to perform higher order intellectual operations you must first have a body of knowledge to operate upon.
The Logic stage is then supposed to go along with the (supposed) natural propensity of children in the middle school years to argue. Because they like to argue, you would then teach them *how* to argue; what makes a good argument and what makes a bad argument. You would focus more on the why’s of things than on the what of things. The Rhetoric Stage would accordingly follow on the heels of this stage by teaching children to express their own arguments eloquently. Now that the child knows a lot of facts and how to structure an argument logically, he or she can marshall those facts into an argument of his or own making.
That’s the way I understand it, anyway. I have to admit it does sound somewhat logical on paper, but I think it gets messy when applied to real children. For instance, many children don’t want to wait until they’re 10 years old to ask “why” something is the way it is, and many 6 year olds detest memorization. Also, it’s easy to get hung up on the memorization thing. I have a few kids, for instance, who find it almost impossible to memorize their math facts. If we didn’t move on until they had their math facts memorized, they would never get to do anything more interesting with math and would actively hate it (rather than the dislike expressed by one or two of them.) I think the Neoclassical stages actually apply more accurately to the stages anyone goes through when learning something at any age. Say I wanted to learn about... stained glass windows. First I would read about stained glass windows. I would start with something general to find out the basic facts. After I had learned enough of the basic facts, I would delve a little deeper into more specialized areas, depending on whether I was interested in the history of stained glass windows or in making my own. If I was interested in making my own, I might try following someone’s directions to see if I could replicate their project in order to learn *why* I would do certain things. After I was satisfied I knew the why’s, I might then try to branch out and make a glass of my own creation.
Anyway, I think that’s where the sense of education as “filling the bucket” comes from. As Jen said, though, it isn’t, as far as I know, really “classical” at all. I pulled out The Latin-Centered Curriculum last night and Andrew Campbell’s definition of “classical education” (from the first edition, and taken from Climbing Parnassus) reads thusly:
“[Classical education is] a curriculum grounded upon -- if not strictly limited to -- Greek, Latin, and the study of the civilization from which they arose.”
I think if you draw a Venn diagram you will get lots of overlap between CM and classical education of any stripe. I do think there are still some differences, but I don’t think they are material objections to combining the two styles of education. For instance, while CM included Latin in her curriculum, I don’t believe you can say that it formed a *major* portion of it... and I doubt seriously that anyone would say she *based* an education upon the study of Latin or Greek. In fact -- and I can’t remember which volume this was, so don’t quote me -- she criticizes the elite schools of the time which operated by having their pupils memorize vast swathes of Latin grammar. So, if you were quibbling about semantics, I guess you could say that CM was not an educator in that classical tradition, and that she has much more in common with the Neoclassicists, for whom “classical” means something more like “whatever is good, beautiful, and true”. My response to this objection would be, “Who cares??” I don’t think any modern classical educator does, because they all borrow liberally from her work, whether they are “neoclassical” or whatever. We could all do so much worse than to follow St. Paul’s dictum!
And on the other hand, we have reaped benefits from following the old classical model, in which Latin and Greek form a large portion of our work. My older kids (ages 13 and 15) have both told me that grammar is so much easier to understand when you learn Latin grammar. Both of them struggled with English diagramming and English grammar, but they can diagram in Latin with much more ease and skill. My oldest has just spent a year studying ancient Greek (Attic), and his command of vocabulary has expanded to the point that he can dissect almost any word he encounters, now that he has a background in both ancient languages.
I think, in the case of education, it is more a process of finding “unity in truth”. We have Maria Montessori to remind us that learning requires at least some measure of freedom. We have Charlotte Mason who reminds us that children are persons, and we should treat them accordingly, by giving them living books and ideas and only requiring short lessons, so that they can feast on all the beauty and truth of the world. And we have the classical tradition, which helps us define truth and beauty, and helps us dig into the forms that underlie our knowledge.
I guess it’s more complicated than that, but those three strands are really what twine together to form the idea of education that my husband and I have gradually built over the years.
__________________
Angela
Mom to 9, 7 boys and 2 girls
Three Plus Two
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Betsy
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 02 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1962
|
| Posted: June 11 2012 at 10:36am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I am late to this conversation because I was attending the Childlight USA Conference. 
The conference speakers are truly some of the worlds most studied persons of CM Methods and Philosophy! From what I gleamed from the speakers last year, when this topic was directly addressed, and this year with an informal dinner with Karen Glass a founding member of AmbleSide Online, I beleive that what Jen wrote would be very much agreed upon.
As has been mentioned, it boils down to: CM is Classical but not Neo-Classical.
Thanks Jen for writing such a beautiful and truthful reply to a somewhat complicated question. 
__________________
ImmaculataDesigns.com
When handcrafting my work, I always pray that it will raise your heart to all that is true, modest, just, holy, lovely and good fame!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Neptune
Forum Newbie
Joined: April 01 2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: June 11 2012 at 11:54am | IP Logged
|
|
|
JuliaT wrote:
I came to Classical at the beginning of our homeschool journey through the WTM door. That introduction messed up my whole understanding of CE. It has taken me 7 years to pull myself away from some of their 'rules.' I felt in bondage to many of the things they said I should do with my children. It was not an education for the free.
I have tried to use CM only but have since discovered that things move more smoothly when I meld the two philosophies together. I am feeling much more freedom from educating this way.
|
|
|
Thank you for your story. Having been introduced to Classical ed by the same resource, I totally feel what you mean. When I started to try and plan something using their "rules" as you said, I felt so trapped, and did not enjoy that feeling.
I was just wondering how you feel that melting both philosophies together makes you feel more freedom in your education? How do you merge those 2 together, what is your approach?
Thank you for this discussion, it has been very helpful and insightful. I feel that I understand better where CM is from, and the differences between CM and CE.
That being said, some expressed a concern about CM not being rigorous when in the high school level, and for most, I felt like you had changed your mind at some point. What made you change you mind?
And for those of you having older children that have been taught using the Charlotte Mason methods and philosophy, what do you think it has brought to your children? What kind of trait has it developed in them?
thank you so much again
[/QUOTE]
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
CrunchyMom
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 03 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6385
|
| Posted: June 11 2012 at 12:17pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I think you raise a good point, Angela. If an education does not involve an emphasis in Greek and Latin, it is not "classical." Good, true, and beautiful things can make a most worthwhile education, but cannot always be defined as classical.
I think this is a major point in Simmons's work (though, as I said, I have not read the whole thing).
That said, I do think you *could* have a classical education that relies chiefly on Charlotte Mason's methods.
You could also have a very worthwhile education that was rooted in Charlotte Mason's theories and methods yet not actually studying Latin or Greek in depth. It would not be classical by this strict definition, but it could be wholly good.
I think that the emphasis on the person, and thus the SOUL, is where CM and classical are clearly alike. One reason there is emphasis on the study of ancient languages is because they exercise the mind (much like the study of higher maths) AND feed the soul since some of the most worthwhile thoughts written in the most beautiful language in human history were originally in Latin or Greek.
But, there are other worthy ways to feed the soul.
I think that there is some truth to the opinion that a *classical* education, this highest form of education rooted in the ancient languages, is not for everyone. This is not elitist, imo.
BUT, Charlotte Mason recognized that EVERY person deserves and is capable of an education where they learn to rigorously apply themselves and are given worthy thoughts and ideas to ponder.
Anyway, I fear I'm close to rambling.
One aspect of classical education is that the mind is exercised through the mastery of Latin and Greek.
Another is that the whole point of an education is to become a better person, one who is moral, thus the emphasis on the good, true, and beautiful.
A Charlotte Mason education CAN address the former and ALWAYS addresses the latter.
__________________
Lindsay
Five Boys(6/04) (6/06) (9/08)(3/11),(7/13), and 1 girl (5/16)
My Symphony
[URL=http://mysymphonygarden.blogspot.com/]Lost in the Cosmos[/UR
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
CrunchyMom
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 03 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6385
|
| Posted: June 18 2012 at 6:57am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I just ordered Stratford Caldecott's newest book, Beauty in the Word, but I probably won't have a chance to pick it up until our company comes and goes the first week of July. However, this article of his, The Search for Wisdom in Education, is very pertinent to this discussion.
He also has a blog Beauty in Education
__________________
Lindsay
Five Boys(6/04) (6/06) (9/08)(3/11),(7/13), and 1 girl (5/16)
My Symphony
[URL=http://mysymphonygarden.blogspot.com/]Lost in the Cosmos[/UR
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
kristinannie
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 27 2011
Location: West Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1363
|
| Posted: June 19 2012 at 11:43am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Amber-v wrote:
The subject of CM vs. Classical vs. Neo-Classical is one I am very interested in as well. I read The Well Trained Mind way back before I even had any school age children and was quite taken with it. However as I began to implement many of the suggestions, I started to question all the work that was being required, as well as the kind of work required. I particularly remember being frustrated at the poor quality of the notebook entries and such I was receiving from my daughter when we were working with the recommended materials like the Usborne history encyclopedias. I started to learn more about Charlotte Mason, and all of a sudden I understood why this was happening - how can you have a child narrate from something that isn't living? No wonder it was so frustrating for us both!
I began to wonder about the whole classical world, and in talking to some women in my (then) local homeschooling group, I found that what the Well Trained Mind and other modern classical educators was putting forth wasn't something that bears much resemblence to classical education of old. One book was particularly useful in learning more about the historical classical education - Climbing Parnassus by Tracy Lee Simmons. If you want a book that will make you swoon over the beauty of a truly classical education, this is it. But what Simmons describes is very different from the WTM or Designing Your Own Classical Curriculum.
One issue that becomes clear in Simmons book is the exclusivity of the ancient classical educational model. It wasn't for everyone, and I think it was proud of this fact. Something I find so beautiful about Charlotte Mason's writings is her emphasis that her philosophy of education is for *everyone* - every child is born a person, and every child deserves a chance to have their mind awakened to these living ideas. Not that she thought that every child was equally brilliant, but every child had the potential to come in contact with living ideas, form connections with them, and grow and learn.
Another book I'd recommend regarding the neo-classical vs. classical distinction is The Latin Centered Curriculum. Andrew Campbell spends the first part of the book defining and describing a classical education (and differentiating it from the neo-classical) then he spends the latter part of the book laying out his own plan for a classical education. Campbell, by the way, downplays the exclusivity of a classical education. Much of his recommendations are in line with Charlotte Mason's methods - the three main departure points (in my opinion!) are CM would have the students encounter a wider variety of books, Campbell has a much greater emphasis on ancient languages than Mason, and Campbell breaks away from the CM style language arts very early to have children start the Progymnasmata around 3rd grade. I have seen a number of people online who use CM for the methods, and Campbell's recommendations for the materials and they have found this to work extremely well.
For my family, moving to the progymnasmata that early was a mistake. I, personally, don't think it is a school of writing that should be started with children that young. But when classical education was at the forefront, children didn't start it that young! I am still keeping it in the back of my mind for later, because I could see it becoming an excellent writing education for a high school age student. But earlier? Well... in our family, it took a child who delighted in writing and who had a charming "voice" and completely squelched all her desire to write and almost killed that writing voice.
This ended up being our breaking point from classical education. Mason's methods had always seemed not quite rigorous enough, not quite thorough. In the almost year and a half that I have been a CM purist (to the best of my ability!!) I have seen this amply proved wrong, and I have been delighted by what I have seen in my children. Their interest in their work, their comprehension of the material, their delight in learning and their overall sense of wonder is truly beautiful. Frankly, deciding to go all out for Charlotte Mason's methods has been the best decision I've made for our children's schooling. (besides deciding to homeschool, that is!!)
I hope this is useful - if you are interested in learning more about classical education, I definitely recommend those two books - I was able to get them from my library, perhaps you might be fortunate enough to find them there as well!
Amber |
|
|
I just want to thank you for this post. It was really helpful to me!
__________________
John Paul 8.5
Meredith Rose 7
Dominic Michael 4.5
Katherine Elizabeth 8 months
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Amber-v
Forum Rookie
Joined: Jan 29 2012
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 83
|
| Posted: June 19 2012 at 4:10pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
You are welcome, I am so glad it was helpful!
Amber
__________________
Amber
Mom to dd (born 2002), ds (2005), ds (2008), ds (2011), dd (11/2013)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
margot helene
Forum Pro
Joined: Feb 26 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 350
|
| Posted: June 20 2012 at 7:51am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Wow - Jen, your responses are amazing.
JennGM wrote:
Loving this discussion. Pardon me if this has been answered, but I'm trying to understand the Catholic influence on classical education.
|
|
|
For anyone who interested in thinking further about this topic I highly recommend Stratford Caldecott's two books; Beauty for Truth's Sake and Beauty in the Word. In them he is seeking to define and explain true Catholic liberal education. He defines it as classical and in the first he talks about the quadrivium and in the second, the trivium. It is beautifully written. But all the way through I kept putting notes in the margins "CM," "CM," "CM" (Everything from attention to relationships). He talks about the development of the idea of what we mean today by classical education and also talks about modern influences on education,including Charlotte Mason and John Holt.
I'm reviewing them for the next mater et magistra issue on beauty, but in the meantime, I highly recommend them for an uplifting, philosophical read on truth and beauty and Catholic education.
I will have copies of Beauty in the Word at the IHM in VA this weekend if anyone wants to take a look at it.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
SuzanneG
Forum Moderator
Joined: June 17 2006
Location: Idaho
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5465
|
| Posted: June 20 2012 at 4:41pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
lindafay at Higher Up and Further In had a couple good articles linked.
__________________
Suzanne in ID
Wife to Pete
Mom of 7 (Girls - 14, 12, 11, 9, 7 and Boys - 4, 1)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Mackfam
Board Moderator
Non Nobis
Joined: April 24 2006
Location: Alabama
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 14656
|
| Posted: June 22 2012 at 6:40am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Mackfam wrote:
9th century - 13th century
Classical education experienced a renewal and resurgence with the crowning of Charlemagne as the first Holy Roman Emperor. Christian classics were now studied: the Old and New Testaments, the Church Fathers, liturgical books, lives of the Saints, canon law...and...Greek and Roman texts. |
|
|
I found a lovely article which paints a fuller picture of Charlemagne and his friend, the monk (some say priest) Alcuin, who led the revival of a Catholic Classical Education in Europe at the time (around the end of the 8th century). The article also gives a fuller understanding of classical education of this period. Enjoy.
Charlemagne and Alcuin
__________________
Jen Mackintosh
Wife to Rob, mom to dd 19, ds 16, ds 11, dd 8, and dd 3
Wildflowers and Marbles
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
AmandaV
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 27 2009
Location: Texas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 707
|
| Posted: July 10 2012 at 10:15am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I thought this talk (free online right now, for how long I don't know?) by Andrew Kern of Circe Institute sort of fits in with this discussion. To me, the talk totally fits in with a CM education. You Become what you behold
For those unfamiliar, Circe Institute promotes Classical Education. This talk discusses, in part, how education should teach the child to behold the good, true and beautiful, including Christ but also all of creation. The child should learn to be attentive (very CM!) and also very importantly needs to be able to recall what they have learned (narration :) )and then they can sort it out. (also narration)
I need to listen a few more times to get it all, as I was sorting toys and other wise decluttering while listening!
__________________
Amanda
wife since 6/03, Mom to son 7/04, daughter 2/06, twin sons 6/08 and son 7/11, son 1/2014
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
AmandaV
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 27 2009
Location: Texas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 707
|
| Posted: July 10 2012 at 10:21am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I edited/updated my post to specify why I think it is related :)
__________________
Amanda
wife since 6/03, Mom to son 7/04, daughter 2/06, twin sons 6/08 and son 7/11, son 1/2014
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
sunshinyliving
Forum Newbie
Joined: Dec 14 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 48
|
| Posted: July 11 2012 at 6:28pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Thanks for sharing the Andrew Kern talk. It was excellent!
__________________
Diana, wife to Brad, Mom to dd18, dd16, dd13, ds10, dd7, ds5
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
SallyT
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 08 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2489
|
| Posted: June 12 2015 at 10:48am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Bump. I just linked to this discussion, which is one of my favorites of all time here, and thought it would be nice to bring it to the top again.
Sally
__________________
Castle in the Sea
Abandon Hopefully
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Philosophy of Education
Topic: Charlotte Mason vs classical?
