| Author | |
CKwasniewski
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 31 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 601
|
| Posted: May 05 2007 at 6:09pm | IP Logged
|
 |
|
Ladies--
I'd like to get some ideas on how these two principles are in conflict or compatible?
I've read LCC and had very mixed feelings about it. While I think he's right about a lot of things, I wonder what C Mason would say. She wanted "a wide and generous curriculum" with relationships being formed with lots of things.
Any thoughts?
CK
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Willa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3881
|
| Posted: May 06 2007 at 10:59am | IP Logged
|
|
|
To me they seem compatible -- perhaps because I like them both and don't want to drop either of them.
I tried to write a post on liberal arts education and how both LCC and CM fit into that category, but I can't seem to pull that off on Sunday morning pre-coffee.
I will just say that I find it helpful to address BOTH in my homeschool. First -- I haven't read LCC in published form. I first heard about "multum non multa" many years before LCC through Kolbe Academy's Ignatian education manuals, and in that context, it was a reminder to prioritize when it comes to education. Some subjects are "tools" or what the philosophers call "Arts" -- using them leads to further knowledge. When you can read or do math, new doors to knowledge open. And so it makes sense to focus on these Arts because they put learning in the hands of the child.
However, CM's "broad and generous curriculum" reminds me what these basic tools are FOR. What good would it be to read and write if there were no books or pens or paper? She emphasized that the reading and writing skills had an objective -- a purpose -- they were to open up a world, set the child's feet "in a spacious place". , give him a key to unlock his cultural heritage and a way to continue the dialogue that has taken place throughout history.
This is what the ancient liberal arts education essentially aimed to do, as well.
I think Charlotte Mason's particular insight was that the way children learn, they can start exploring the spacious place even before they are actually reading and writing.
You can read to children; you can guide them a bit as they explore Creation; this gives them a reason to learn the skills they need to continue the explorations themselves.
__________________
AMDG
Willa
hsing boys ages 11, 14, almost 18 (+ 4 homeschool grads ages 20 to 27)
Take Up and Read
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
CKwasniewski
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 31 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 601
|
| Posted: May 07 2007 at 1:44pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Willa,
I think this is a helpful distinction.
Perhaps Mr. Campbell would also add that its a question of focusing your energies--all the rest can and should be included, but not as "the work" of the school day, which he defines and gives a very narrow scope to. Then its also a practical distinction about what is considered "school" and what is not.
Thanks for helping me think through this.
CK
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Willa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3881
|
| Posted: May 07 2007 at 3:12pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
CKwasniewski wrote:
Perhaps Mr. Campbell would also add that its a question of focusing your energies--all the rest can and should be included, but not as "the work" of the school day, which he defines and gives a very narrow scope to. Then its also a practical distinction about what is considered "school" and what is not. |
|
|
That makes a lot of sense. I know that our homeschool seems to work best when I choose a very limited number of "tool" subjects and focus on those using fairly short, condensed lessons. This past year or so it has been math and Latin and catechism.
The kids don't exactly jump to do these, but the lessons are tolerable and they see themselves making progress.
Charlotte Mason, interestingly, kept math and Latin and grammar fairly similar to traditional methods in her schools. She did not see much reason to change the methods significantly.
Then the other "subjects" are more open-ended and seasonal. I think in terms of opening the world up for the kids, as Charlotte Mason said. CM wanted the children to be able to assimilate for themselves, each in their own way.
It looks like LCC has a place for these subjects, too. Mr Campbell would perhaps suggest treating them less formally than the basic subjects. ... more like aspects of regular family life. What CM called "an atmosphere, a discipline, and a life".
Again, I find it very compatible with my homeschooling style to explore these kinds of subjects in an open-ended, more informal way.
__________________
AMDG
Willa
hsing boys ages 11, 14, almost 18 (+ 4 homeschool grads ages 20 to 27)
Take Up and Read
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
~Rachel~
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 29 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 677
|
| Posted: June 04 2007 at 9:27am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I have always understood the LCC stance to be that of priorities. Schoolwork is kep to a simple minimum... the books studied are studied in depth, so their numbers are not large.
This does not limit the books for you... your kids can read as many books as they like in 'family time' and 'free time', but the schoolwork is all about depth.
I like to think that you can do LCC, and then use the Ambleside or Mater Amabilis book lists for family/free reading (or in the case of nature study, for the science aspect of school!).
I don't believe CM and LCC to be mutually exclusive, but rather complimentary to each other 
__________________
~Rachel~
Wife to William
Mum to James 13, Lenore 8
Lighting a Fire
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: June 04 2007 at 5:06pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
CK,
Drew Campbell joined us briefly to discuss his book. You might want to look at this thread. I think we can offer generously and help a child to discern what is best for him to study deeply.
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Leonie
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2831
|
| Posted: June 04 2007 at 5:52pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
And interesting to note that I just posted on this idea, and on the Latin Centred curriculum, in the unschooling thread.
Perhaps the ideas are not mutually exclusive but can be taken as ideas to adapt to our children and our family - a few tool subjects ( Latin centred), some living books and nature and ideas ( CM) and time to explore interests and passions in a non schooly fashion ( unschooling).
__________________
Leonie in Sydney
Living Without School
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
CKwasniewski
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 31 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 601
|
| Posted: June 06 2007 at 5:29pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Ladies,
Thanks for your input on this. I have looked at the thread in which he posted....
I'll look at your thread Leonie.
Honestly, after thinking about it over the course of several months, I found Campbell's book so problematic as to be unacceptable. Not the multum not multa principle, which I do agree with, but other principles, assumptions, arguments, and his practical suggestions as well.
CK
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: June 06 2007 at 5:52pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
CKwasniewski wrote:
I found Campbell's book so problematic as to be unacceptable. Not the multum not multa principle, which I do agree with, but other principles, assumptions, arguments, and his practical suggestions as well.
CK |
|
|
I'm curious to hear what you're thinking. It sounds like you've given a good deal of thought. It's that time of year when one is so tempted to sign up for the next "best thing." LCC sounds so simple that it's enticing.
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Leonie
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2831
|
| Posted: June 06 2007 at 6:01pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
CKwasniewski wrote:
Honestly, after thinking about it over the course of several months, I found Campbell's book so problematic as to be unacceptable. Not the multum not multa principle, which I do agree with, but other principles, assumptions, arguments, and his practical suggestions as well.
CK |
|
|
I, too, would be interested in your thoughts ....so far, I am mentally arguing with Campbell as I read his book ( two chapters only so far!  ) - and this is good for me. Keeps me on my toes, means that I don't fall into educational complacency in our homeschool/unschool.
__________________
Leonie in Sydney
Living Without School
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
CKwasniewski
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 31 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 601
|
| Posted: June 06 2007 at 6:51pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Well, I am going to try to summarize my concerns briefly, in no particular order. I just want to start off saying that I am in favor of greek and latin, classical history, but there is a question of emphasis.
1. What LCC proposes is school at home, not homeschool. Its not 4real. It seemed to me in reading the older threads this came out too.
2. It is not developmentally appropriate to put this kind of academics on kids. Henle in 4th grade!
3. It seems to me that the highest aim of our education, our work, should not be reading pagan authors like Cicero and Homer, Virgil. To be fair he does propose Greek for NT too.
4. In a similar vein, it seems to me that the adulation (implied or explicit) of Greeks and Romans is totally inappropriate for Christians and Catholics especially. The high point of civilization is the Christian middle ages. As far as I can see, that is given pretty short shrift in the proposed program.
Our heroes and models should the be the saints. St. Paul says pursue what is good, true and lovely. That is NOT famous men of Rome, for example! Ditto for greek mythology to the extent proposed. What are we forming our kids with!!!?????
4. St. Augustine and the Church fathers say that the greek and roman authors should be studied TO THE EXTENT that they help in understanding the Bible and Christian doctrine. This was the medieval understanding which formed the greatest saints (and brains) of the Church, like St. Thomas, St. Bonaventure and St. Dominic.
The Renaissance overturned this principle, and turned to and unbalanced interest in paganism. It seems to me that this new wave of classicism in homeschool has to be careful not to fall into those same errors.
5. Making math one of the "core" subjects (for the early grades esp.) is totally neo-classical. (The Bluedorns talk about this in their book, for example.)
6. An argument being made seems to be this:
CS Lewis, TS Eliot, Dorothy Sayers, etc. studied greek and latin.
TS Eliot, Lewis, etc. were ultra smart
Therefore your kid will be ultra smart if they study greek and latin too.
This argument does not follow. And we have to realize that genius is genius, perhaps regardless or in spite of education.
Maybe your kid will be smarter for spending hours a day on latin, or maybe he'll be miserable and his other talents will go undeveloped.
7. The author has not tried this and has only 1 child!! 
Finally, I wd just say that this curriculum seems to have no soul, it is all brain. The Holy Spirit, who is the source of all joy, life and truth, does not seem to me to breathe in this. "Christian studies" is just one among many subjects....
INCARNATE WISDOM, OUR LORD Jesus Christ, SHOULD BE THE CENTER OF THE CURRICULUM!!!
We are Catholics and Christians first--not classicists or Romans and Greeks-- and the emphasis we put on subjects should match that.
hope this is clear
don't want to pick fights...
God bless you all,
CK
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Anne Marie M
Forum Pro
Joined: Feb 27 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 171
|
| Posted: June 06 2007 at 10:42pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
CK,
Just to throw a few things into the mix -
Drew addressed your problem with reading Greek and Roman authors. A quick search of his website turned up Classical education is not. . . and this post about humanism. (I'm pretty sure there's more, just don't have time to look now.)
For a thoroughly Catholic view of why to read the Greek and Roman authors, see University of Dallas valedictory address. It's one of the best apologies (in the best sense of the word) for a classic liberal arts education.
I'd love to say more, but I have a pile of geometry final exams to grade!
Anne Marie in NM
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
CKwasniewski
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 31 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 601
|
| Posted: June 07 2007 at 8:06am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Thanks for the links. I have looked at Campbell's website before....
As I said at the top of my message, I do think there is a place for greek and roman authors and history. It is a question of EMPHASIS and SLANT (and developmental awareness of what is appropriate to what age).
CK
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
BrendaPeter
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 28 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 981
|
| Posted: June 07 2007 at 10:54am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Hi CK,
Just wanted to throw in that I have found the articles at Memoria Press to be very helpful. Also the latest issue of their catalog, "The Classical Teacher", contains some fantastic articles, particularly the one entitled "The Conservative Purpose of a Liberal Education" by Russell Kirk, liberally sprinkled with quotes from John Henry Newman.
Drew is very active and available on the LCC Yahoo Group. He's very open to suggestions and recommendations. He based much of his book on the book Climbing Parnassas which might also be helpful.
If you're interested, I can invite Drew back to join us again so that he can address your concerns.
__________________
Blessings,
Brenda (mom to 6)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
CKwasniewski
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 31 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 601
|
| Posted: June 07 2007 at 11:38am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I have read Climbing Parnassus and I have many of the same objections to Tracy Lee Simmons arguments (which are the theoretical side of LCC) and MORE besides!
Memoria Press's approach has many of the same bugs, since much of LCC is based on their day school.
I think LCC has some good things, and some fundamental flaws, especially from a Catholic point of view.
CKmk
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Philosophy of Education
Topic: multum non multa vs." wide and generous"
