Eh, What's Classical Education, Doc?

 

If you hang around more than one classical Christian school for any length of time, it can quickly become apparent that no one knows exactly what they’re doing. I don’t mean that the teachers don’t know their subjects well, or that the administrators can’t fill out a spreadsheet, or that the students can’t add up a grocery bill—those skills are usually better than the average. But if you ask twenty people in those schools what on earth classical education is, exactly, you will probably get twenty-two different answers.

Some people say a classical education is about the great conversation around big ideas (unlike all those other ways of learning out there). Some say it’s about instilling virtue and despising vice (a definition that could apply equally well to life generally). Is it an educational method involving the Trivium-as-learning-stages—a formulation so “classical” that no one used it until 1981? Or is it a course in Western Civilization, warts and all? (Good luck explaining to your Chinese neighbor how math is peculiarly “Western”!) Perhaps it’s about “Great Books”…but which books are great, who says, and how many of them can you cram down a ninth-grader’s throat before he chokes? Is it about training a kid in “how to think, not what to think”? Or do the particular subjects matter? And then there are the non-academic concerns. Will a student ever be able to get a job with this sort of training? And how does the “Christian” part fit in, anyway? Broad tent? Narrow denominational focus? Do the Romans Catholics count? What about the Mormons? Both of them can claim a fair amount of influence in Western American culture, after all…

You begin to see why, if a certain carrot-crunching, wiseacre cartoon rabbit popped up next to you and wondered, “Eh, what’s classical education, Doc?” you’d be in so much trouble! Yet if you’re reading this blog, you are at least considering this education, if not immersed in it. So what is going on?

Commonplaces: August 2024

 

“The man who does not rein in his will to power and is at the same time very active according to the natural law is in a fair way to become an efficient megalomaniac.”—Irving Babbitt, Rousseau and Romanticism, in Antigone Journal “Humanities Without Humanism”

“The sentimentalist, who would subject man to the rule of impulse and passion; the pragmatic naturalist, who would treat man as a mere edified ape; the leveling enthusiast, who would reduce human differences to a collective mediocrity—these are the enemies of true human nature.”—Russel Kirk, Introduction, Literature and the American College

“Colleges had been founded for the study of abstractions, not as schools to supply entertainment and job-certification for boys and girls.”

“It is not always easy, of course, in the ebullitions of a new movement, to distinguish the man who has received the living word from the man whose access of energy is the result of being relieved of the necessity of thinking for himself. Men who have stopped thinking make a powerful force.”

“At best, what the typical college has offered its undergraduates, in recent decades, has been defecated rationality: that is, a narrow rationalism or Benthamite logical ism, purged of theology, moral philosophy, and the wisdom of our ancestors. This defecated rationality exalts private judgment and gratification of the senses at the expense of the inner order of the soul and the outer order of the republic. On many a campus, this defecated and desiccated logicalism is the best that is offered to the more intelligent students; as alternatives, they could pursue a program of fun and games, or else a program of social commitment of a baneful or silly character, wondrously unintellectual."

Favorite Student Blunders and Bloopers of 2022-23

 It's that time of year again--classes are over, the pressure is off, and we can all laugh at the small stuff. Here is a collection of some of my favorite mistakes, blunders, malapropisms, or slips of the 22-23 school year. If any of my students read this, don't be embarrassed--such errors simply make me laugh and love you more. Enjoy!

In the place of honor, my absolute favorite of the year: “Martin Luther wrote the 95 Theses against the Catholic practice of selling pennants.”  😆🚩🚩🚩

"To explain my upbringing of this statement, I observed an assertion that Socrates had placed forth to Adeimantus about gods, specifically, God.”

“From these questions and comments, Socrates deducted these facts into a paragraph which I will announce as follows”

“Louisa wrote many works but had limited acknowledgment until her autobiographical Little Women was released, from which, she contracted fame.”

What Do I Think of Harry Potter?

 This was composed as an in-class essay for my 8th-grade Humanities students of 21-22. They were allowed to collectively come up with any four questions they wanted me to answer, from which I would select my favorite and write a one-hour reply. The question selected was "What do you think of the Harry Potter books?"

Most people have heard of the “elephant in the room.” That is, something that is well-known to everyone involved, but too embarrassing or prohibited from talking about. Some elephants, however, are too big to ignore. One of these elephants is the publishing phenomenon of J.K. Rowling—the Harry Potter series. Since 1998, Harry Potter has sold over 500 million copies (that’s one book for about every thirteen people on the planet, by the way). It’s been made into a play, eleven blockbuster movies, and enough themed parks, stores, and tourist attractions to fund a small country. No matter what you think of Harry Potter, it’s too big to ignore now.

Love is Blind: A Review of Veritas Press' A Rhetoric of Love

Introduction 

Rhetoric is an ancient art, with a long and impressive history. Some of the most brilliant minds of any age—Aristotle, Cicero, Augustine—have practiced it and taught it. As classical schools have recovered the lost tools of learning, one of the rustiest has been rhetoric. Various approaches have been proposed to clean off that rust and return it to trusty service. These range from simply shoving the Ad Herrenium under a student’s nose to that put forward by authors Douglas Jones and Michael Collender, in Veritas Press’s A Rhetoric of Love, published in two volumes as the mainstay of a two-year high school course.

Rather than follow the traditional method of using the Greek and Roman pagans, A Rhetoric of Love (hereafter ROL) claims that it follows a distinctively Christian approach to rhetoric: one based on the Bible (and specifically Jesus as presented in the gospels). This allows them to move beyond the taint of power or manipulation, and instead focus on bringing the foundation of all believing activity—love—to bear on communication. It is an intriguing idea, reminiscent of Augustine’s claim that one could learn eloquence by merely studying the Scriptures. A thoroughly effective Christian reworking of classical rhetoric would be something to applaud. But I believe this ROL project, by poorly defining its terms, means, and genre, winds up with several significant issues that quickly bog it down. These issues group nicely under three major headings: first, definitional troubles and an unworkable antithesis between love and power—what we might call paradigm problems—mar the project’s scope and purpose. Second, practical issues would render the text difficult to use in actual high school classrooms. Third, ROL is not a “classical” textbook in most senses of the word, making it a poor choice for the intended audience: classical Christian schools. Though the text is graciously reasoned and wittily written, and has many praiseworthy points, I would not recommend it to any classical school trying to craft a high schooler into a rhetor; its flaws outweigh its foundations.

A Commonplace Against Those Who Take the Lord's Name in Vain

 [Composed as an example of the exercise for my writing students. The "commonplace" gave a student the skills to manipulate an audience's pathos, or emotions, and provided training for conclusions of full speeches]

[Prooemion] Christians are called to use our words with care, honor, and respect. This applies clearly to the name of God, our Maker and Creator.

[Contrast with the opposite]

We serve a God who does not merely use words, but is the Word Himself, whose name is the foundation of all existence. He has given that name to his greatest creation, mankind, and he has told us to carry it with honor in the third of the Ten Commandments. Those who follow Him in this will be blessed in both word and deed. Their words will be precious pearls, found in the least likely places.

[Expansion]

Who, then, are those who break this commandment? They are men, women, boys and girls, who take the most sacred word known to humanity—the one God gave us to represent himself—and trample it in the dirt. Taking the Lord’s name in vain is not only the frivolous use of cursing, bringing the name of God out to cover a stubbed toe or a hammered thumb. This is evil, but it is not the highest evil under this commandment. No, it may be seen in anyone who claims to bear the name of the Son of God, a Christ-ian (or we may say a “little Christ”) who does not live every moment as though this was true. This is hypocrisy, high-handed lying about God; the kind of lying that men do even while claiming to be one His people. Any man who does not tell the whole truth about who God is (and who he is) every second, of every day, is a breaker of this commandment: a blasphemer! They are sinners, and not small sinners, but sinners flirting with hell-fire itself.

[Comparison with something less bad]

A thief is a terrible thing. He uproots prosperity and strikes at the very pillar of civilization. But one who takes God’s name in vain is often far more guilty than any thief ever could be. A thief steals from men; a blasphemer steals from God. A thief may commit his crime at most a few times in a day; a blasphemer’s every word may betray him. A thief’s crime is easily measured, but who can quantify a personal slight against the infinite Ruler of Heaven and Earth and all within them?

[Maxim]

Few men will dare to insult a great man in his presence. But thousands easily scoff at the vast majesty and glory of God; they speak words with no thought of their meaning or outcome. What else can this be but true madness? As Cicero said, “What so effectually proclaims the madman as the hollow thundering of words—be they never so choice or resplendent—which have no thought or knowledge behind them?” And what else can be uttered in frustration and anger, empty of meaning? This is truly the path of the insane, chasing death and destruction not just with their feet but with their tongues.

[Wicked Intent/Origin]

Of course, their wicked path may have started long before this moment. A high-handed blasphemer does not wake up one day and decide to curse God to His face. They sin gradually, first becoming content with not telling the whole truth, but only part of it. They tell themselves they are doing it to help others, to spare them pain, to shield them from “the real truth.” Then they move on to deliberately obscuring their words and actions. They grow in deception and darkness with every lie about God they utter. Finally, they become true hypocrites, vipers with poison under their tongues, the sort all Christians should fear becoming!

[Rejection of Pity]

So often we hear that this is “just a little sin.” Using the Lord’s name in vain is “just an accident” or “a tiny habit” or “an unfortunate slip-up.” These people ask us to excuse them because their sin is so small. But is this what God thinks? Hear what he says: “You shall not take the Name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses His Name.” If God will not absolve them, if He considers it important enough to list before murder and adultery, than who are we to pity and ignore this fault? We must stand against these blasphemers with all the strength we can muster!

[Final Appeal]

We condemn those who take the Lord’s name in vain because it is just; the Lord Himself wrote it into his law. He does not change, and so why should we by ignoring this fault? Further, it is most beneficial to the health of the Body, for squashing this sin early will prevent many others from fouling our churches, the beautiful Bride of Christ. If we do not wish for murder or covetousness to be our topics of conversation, then we must begin with our smaller words and actions; we must live as those marked with the insignia of Jesus: bread and wine and water. It is appropriate for us to do this—for we follow Christ, who condemned in the strongest terms those who blasphemed the Holy Spirit. Though it may be difficult to convince others in our corrupt and lewd culture to be careful with their mouths and deeds, yet we know it is possible, for “with God, all things are possible.” So let us put these men and their filthy mouths in the dust bin of history—where they belong.

On Distracted Students

Note: While the personages mentioned in this are fictional composites, the situation is, sadly, one I face often in online schooling.

Dear Mr. S—,

Thanks for reaching out. Far too many parents never even notice that their child is having trouble in my class until it is far too late to do something—I’m delighted to find that you are staying so involved.

You said in your email that John is having trouble staying focused, you’re not quite sure how to help with that, and you’d like any advice I can give. You’ve caught him multiple times during class with several windows open on the computer, chatting with friends, listening to music, or doing anything besides solely paying attention to me and his other teachers. You know this is occurring on a regular basis, but don’t want him to always do school directly under his parents’ eye, since “that would defeat the reason we put him in an online class in the first place.” You're considering switching to a more traditional schooling format to solve the problem. Does that seem an accurate summary?

I have noticed two major categories of student who struggle with staying focused in online classrooms; each tending to arise from opposite ends of the aptitude spectrum. The first is the student who is bored stiff—he thinks he knows everything (or at least quite enough to pass the quiz) and quite often he does. The slow plodding required for the slower students in the class causes him to disengage and seek more diverting material. If asked a direct question, it only takes a few seconds’ work to figure out the context and come up with a reasonably correct answer—easily covered by the excuse of “tech trouble.” He’s not being challenged, and no amount of lecturing from Mom and Dad will change that. After all, he will think, he’s making good grades—isn’t that the point of school?

The second student, instead of being bored, is overwhelmed--no matter what he does, he can't understand ninety percent of what the teacher is saying. He’s reading massive textbooks that don’t seem to make sense either, but all the other kids in class appear to somehow be getting this, particularly the four or five who always come up with those questions the teacher likes so much. Since no one likes to appear dumb (particularly in front of a bunch of cute girls) admitting he’s lost and asking for help is out of the question. So, he might as well do something fun—and comprehensible— instead of sit there and feel stupid. If the teacher asks him a point-blank question, he also can easily pretend tech trouble, and quickly slip back to his game. If lectured, he can semi-honestly assert he’s doing the best he can, but school’s “not really his thing.”

As a quasi-third option, there is also the student who has simply developed a systemic lack of discipline (which shows up most pointedly when surrounded by bright, shiny objects like screens). He wants to pay attention, and sometimes can when the topic is interesting enough, but his default state is to chase the latest impulse. With so many pleasurable options a click away, that impulse is easy to gratify. This type feeds into our first two options quite regularly: the brilliant student can indulge his curiosity, the slow one his apathy.

You will be better able than I to judge where John falls. A few questions for a week straight at the dinner table about “what he learned that day” should provide a pretty easy diagnostic tool. As far as solutions go, I haven't been a parent myself yet, but here are a few educated guesses:

If you think John’s the smart-and-bored type, then I suggest you tie something he actually does value—time with friends, reading, sports, whatever—back to his grades. If he doesn't meet a certain grade in the class at any given time, he doesn't get that privilege that week and must spend it on school instead. Don't be afraid to set the bar high! Since this type of student is motivated more by laziness, if you can make him sufficiently uncomfortable, he will move. And if he's making straight A's and still goofing off half of class, then he just needs more responsibilities (because he can obviously still handle it). Make him go get a job, join a club, start learning a trade, play a sport. When the grades finally start to drop, ease off about an hour’s worth of tasks a a week, and watch him go.

If you think John’s the overwhelmed type, you might require him to attempt asking or answering at least one question in class every day—and then check up on him. If he does that I will hear from him often, and he will usually be wrong, since he doesn’t know what is going on anyway. That will be both humbling and discouraging at first, but it will have the long-term affect of both forcing him to pay strict attention and to recognize exactly what he doesn't know. Since he’ll be getting daily personal explanations of his mistakes from me, it should also boost his understanding. Eventually, that should build into a fair amount of confidence--thus solving the problem. It's also helpful if you can ask this sort of student to synopsize what he learned that day at the dinner table. Roll out a whiteboard or something and ask for a 5-minute demonstration and summary. If he can't do it, then you know some extra study time is in order and he should, too. (Actually, this exercise is one of the most valuable things a parent can do for any type of student, period.)

If you suspect it is merely lack of discipline, the counterintuitive solution here is to pursue that discipline outside of class time rather than inside it. Does your son always make his bed? Write legibly even on homework no one will ever see? Complete chores on time and well? A kid who regularly does all that and more probably won't give you much trouble in class itself. This is arguably the hardest problem of the three to fix, because it requires both a lot of attention and a whole new set of habits, but it has the biggest payoff, as well. Your son is always going to be living in a digital world, and the sooner he masters it, the less it will rule over him. One of the drawbacks of online schooling compared to traditional homeschooling is that kids often spend a significant portion of the day away from their parent’s direct oversight. As you note, that’s a feature, but often it becomes a bug: the student develops some bad habits before parents can even notice. If that's where John is, then all you can do is thank God you noticed now, do some heavy-duty praying, and try to do some retraining. It will be unpleasant for both of you, but the harvest will be joyful.

If you truly think the only way to solve this is pulling him from school, I understand. Some kids just can't handle the manifold temptations and distractions that come with distance learning. I would far rather John learn self-discipline in another school than merely stick with me. But since you’re here now, I hope the above advice is useful.

May God grant you wisdom.