Homeschooling in Singapore

I have always understood the Classical Method to be a rigorously academic approach to education which stresses rationality and logical argument. The approach emphasises developing a high level of linguistic skill in Latin and ancient Greek as a precursor to studying Philosophy, especially Socratic dialogue, and ancient myths. The epitome of the Classical Method is John Stuart Mill. Do read his autobiography for an example of rigorous homeschooling! Could this be replicated in Singapore?

However, the term 'Classical Method' has been used in recent years by evangelical christians in America to mean 'Classical Christian Method'. See for example Dorothy Sayers's well-known essay 'The Lost Tools of Learning' as the basis of the new classical Christian education movement.

If you are christian, you might like to consider the 'Classical Christian Method'. It seems a good attempt at imposing some rigour into a christian curriculum.

For non-christians, it feels inappropriate juxtaposing 'Classical Method' and 'christian'. Aren't they oxymoronic as religious belief stresses the suspension of rationality in favour of faith?

Cheers
Martin
'Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?'

Here is a article that I found helpful in trying to understand what Classical Education is about.

I would like to take the point on language-based learing vs image-based learing for further discussion if possible but am not sure if this goes under curriculum? Perhaps you can help me out here Martin. Seems like you've become the unofficial guru here, heh.

Iris

What is a Classical Education?
by Susan Wise Bauer (January 29, 2001)

Classical education depends on a three-part process of training the mind. The early years of school are spent in absorbing facts, systematically laying the foundations for advanced study. In the middle grades, students learn to think through arguments. In the high school years, they learn to express themselves. This classical pattern is called the trivium.

The first years of schooling are called the "grammar stage" -- not because you spend four years doing English, but because these are the years in which the building blocks for all other learning are laid, just as grammar is the foundation for language. In the elementary school years -- what we commonly think of as grades one through four -- the mind is ready to absorb information. Children at this age actually find memorization fun. So during this period, education involves not self-expression and self-discovery, but rather the learning of facts. Rules of phonics and spelling, rules of grammar, poems, the vocabulary of foreign languages, the stories of history and literature, descriptions of plants and animals and the human body, the facts of mathematics -- the list goes on. This information makes up the "grammar," or the basic building blocks, for the second stage of education.

By fifth grade, a child's mind begins to think more analytically. Middle-school students are less interested in finding out facts than in asking "Why?" The second phase of the classical education, the "Logic Stage," is a time when the child begins to pay attention to cause and effect, to the relationships between different fields of knowledge relate, to the way facts fit together into a logical framework.

A student is ready for the Logic Stage when the capacity for abstract thought begins to mature. During these years, the student begins algebra and the study of logic, and begins to apply logic to all academic subjects. The logic of writing, for example, includes paragraph construction and learning to support a thesis; the logic of reading involves the criticism and analysis of texts, not simple absorption of information; the logic of history demands that the student find out why the War of 1812 was fought, rather than simply reading its story; the logic of science requires that the child learn the scientific method.

The final phase of a classical education, the "Rhetoric Stage," builds on the first two. At this point, the high school student learns to write and speak with force and originality. The student of rhetoric applies the rules of logic learned in middle school to the foundational information learned in the early grades and expresses his conclusions in clear, forceful, elegant language. Students also begin to specialize in whatever branch of knowledge attracts them; these are the years for art camps, college courses, foreign travel, apprenticeships, and other forms of specialized training.

A classical education is more than simply a pattern of learning, though. Classical education is language-focused; learning is accomplished through words, written and spoken, rather than through images (pictures, videos, and television). Why is this important? Language-learning and image-learning require very different habits of thought. Language requires the mind to work harder; in reading, the brain is forced to translate a symbol (words on the page) into a concept. Images, such as those on videos and television, allow the mind to be passive. In front of a video screen, the brain can "sit back" and relax; faced with the written page, the mind is required to roll its sleeves up and get back to work.

A classical education, then, has two important aspects. It is language-focused. And it follows a specific three-part pattern: the mind must be first supplied with facts and images, then given the logical tools for organization of facts, and finally equipped to express conclusions.

But that isn't all. To the classical mind, all knowledge is interrelated. Astronomy (for example) isn't studied in isolation; it's learned along with the history of scientific discovery, which leads into the church's relationship to science and from there to the intricacies of medieval church history. The reading of the Odyssey leads the student into the consideration of Greek history, the nature of heroism, the development of the epic, and man's understanding of the divine.

This is easier said than done. The world is full of knowledge, and finding the links between fields of study can be a mind-twisting task. A classical education meets this challenge by taking history as its organizing outline -- beginning with the ancients and progressing forward to the moderns in history, science, literature, art and music.

We suggest that the twelve years of education consist of three repetitions of the same four-year pattern: Ancients, Middle Ages, Renaissance and Reformation, and Modern Times. The child studies these four time periods at varying levels -- simple for grades 1-4, more difficult in grades 5-8 (when the student begins to read original sources), and taking an even more complex approach in grades 9-12, when the student works through these time periods using original sources (from Homer to Hitler) and also has the opportunity to pursue a particular interest (music, dance, technology, medicine, biology, creative writing) in depth.

The other subject areas of the curriculum are linked to history studies. The student who is working on ancient history will read Greek and Roman mythology, the tales of the Iliad and Odyssey, early medievial writings, Chinese and Japanese fairy tales, and (for the older student) the classical texts of Plato, Herodutus, Virgil, Aristotle. She'll read Beowulf, Dante, Chaucer, Shakespeare the following year, when she's studying medieval and early Renaissance history. When the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries are studied, she starts with Swift (Gulliver's Travels) and ends with Dickens; finally, she reads modern literature as she is studying modern history.

The sciences are studied in a four-year pattern that roughly corresponds to the periods of scientific discovery: biology, classification and the human body (subjects known to the ancients); earth science and basic astronomy (which flowered during the early Renaissance); chemistry (which came into its own during the early modern period); and then basic physics and computer science (very modern subjects).

This pattern lends coherence to the study of history, science, and literature -- subjects that are too often fragmented and confusing. The pattern widens and deepens as the student progresses in maturity and learning. For example, a first grader listens to you read the story of the Iliad from one of the picture book versions available at any public library. Four years later, the fifth grader reads one of the popular middle-grade adaptations -- Olivia Coolidge's The Trojan War, or Roger Lancelyn Greene's Tales of Troy. Four more years go by, and the ninth grader -- faced with the Iliad itself -- plunges right in, undaunted.

The classical education is, above all, systematic -- in direct contrast to the scattered, unorganized nature of so much secondary education. This systematic, rigorous study has two purposes.

Rigorous study develops virtue in the student. Aristotle defined virtue as the ability to act in accordance to what one knows to be right. The virtuous man (or woman) can force himself to do what he knows to be right, even when it runs against his inclinations. The classical education continually asks a student to work against his baser inclinations (laziness, or the desire to watch another half hour of TV) in order to reach a goal -- mastery of a subject.

Systematic study also allows the student to join what Mortimer Adler calls the "Great Conversation" -- the ongoing conversation of great minds down through the ages. Much modern education is so eclectic that the student has little opportunity to make connections between past events and the flood of current information. "The beauty of the classical curriculum," writes classical schoolmaster David Hicks, "is that it dwells on one problem, one author, or one epoch long enough to allow even the youngest student a chance to exercise his mind in a scholarly way: to make connections and to trace developments, lines of reasoning, patterns of action, recurring symbolisms, plots, and motifs."

Hi Iris

I'm only the unofficial guru here in the absence of others contributing! I want to learn from others so as more come on board with intelligent questions, answers and discussion, then I will gradually fade into the background and let others take centrestage...

Susan Wise Bauer often presupposes a christian world view in her writings and is a regular contributor to christian publications. Whilst there is nothing necessarily wrong with that, I do feel that faith-based perspectives conflict with rationality. In my earlier posting, I distinguished between Classical Education and Classical Christian Education.

Moving on to your substantive point, yes the distinction between language-based and visual-based learning is an important one. I feel it is partly a matter of history. Classical education is, well, classical and originated in an era where literacy and oracy were paramount. Nowadays, children are more visually oriented due to television, Gameboy, computer etc.

Some people go further and argue that some children are born right-brained and learn best using visual methods. This is highly contestable and is an area in which I can talk at length! (hmmm ... guru status). I would certainly argue that higher thinking skills are heavily dependent on linguistic ability.

What exactly would you like to know?

Are other people interested in learning styles too? It certainly seems that a whole industry has built up in Singapore based on catering to allegedly differing learning styles.

Martin

susan wise bauer - i wasn't aware of her orientation, thanks for informing me. I was trying to find a piece of writing on Classical Education sans religion. It was very much easier to find information on the latter, so if you have a good link, I will be grateful if you can post it for reading interest .

I would imagine there are lots of (invested) interest in learing styles.

"Some people go further and argue that some children are born right-brained and learn best using visual methods. This is highly contestable and is an area in which I can talk at length! (hmmm ... guru status). I would certainly argue that higher thinking skills are heavily dependent on linguistic ability. "

Can you elaborate on this? (guru status!!)

I understand that my posting in early February in answer to Iris has mysteriously disappeared from this forum. I presume the host or the administrators keep backups? In any case, I do. Here is a copy of my reply regarding classical education:

Reposting:
Hi Iris

The foundation of a Classical Education is to develop strong linguistic skills through the study of Latin and Greek. I would recommend Latin for the majority of Singaporean homeschoolers, as it is much more accessible than Greek. In particular, a grounding in Latin helps to teach the mind to think via rules (for instance, grammar). It also underpins English and many of the European languages.

Three books recommended are ‘The Latin-Centered Curriculum’ by Andrew Campbell, ‘Climbing Parnassus: A New Apologia for Greek and Latin’ by Tracy Lee Simmons and ‘Minimus Pupil's Book: Starting out in Latin’ by Barbara Bell. The approach of these books is that Latin (and Greek) is worth studying for its own sake, namely that it trains the mind to be logical and linguistically adept.

With regard to content of the curriculum, many Classical Educators take a Great Books approach. By accessing great literature, students are encouraged to be active participants in an historical conversation. The devil, of course, is in choosing what are great books. Classical Christian Educators frequently demonstrate bias in their choices, although to be fair this is fairly minimal in Bauer’s choices. The important thing is that reading material is selected not according to how well it concurs with what we already believe to be true, but according to how influential it was in its own time and afterwards. On this basis, it is quite appropriate to include christian texts, including Milton and the bible, as literary texts. The important issue is whether the author is inclusive. Campbell (see above) for instance is a christian but writes to a broad audience

Personally, I feel you cannot beat the Roman and Greek myths! From the middle ages I would go for Shakespeare. In the modern era, I am a fan of Charles Dickens and Mark Twain. In my opinion, reading these will help a child develop ethical and social conscience perspectives. In terms of developing logic and philosophical thinking, I like Stephen Law (for instance, ‘The Philosophy Files’).

With regard to left-brain/right-brain/visual based-learning etc, I should like to quote from my own book Success in English: The Primary Years:

There are primary schools in Britain that have children walking around with a badge stating ‘I’m a visual learner’, ‘I’m a kinaesthetic learner’ etc. This also ties in with those proponents of right-brain learning. It is not clear how teachers come to such determinations, nor how it affects their method of teaching.

Many advertisements and books by ‘educators’ like to promote the idea of multiple intelligences and how their system uses your child’s particular learning style. They often quote Howard Gardner. In reality, the Harvard professor never intended his book on multiple intelligences to be a blueprint for learning and has stated that he is ‘uneasy’ about the way his theories are used in schools.

In fact, the notion of differing learning styles is not well supported by research. The term ‘different learning styles’ is simply fashionable. More generally, labelling children is usually a bad idea. Whilst it is true that some children at some point might have a particular strength or wish to learn in a certain way, these phases are often temporary and can be built upon and changed. It is incumbent upon teachers to promote flexibility in their pupils rather than restrict their educational exposure and /or cause them to have a limited view of themselves. A child who is a ‘visual learner’ may be a visual learner because he or she is so weak in other approaches; these other approaches need to be addressed and strengthened: perhaps children need to be taught in the diametrically opposite style, whatever that is, to counter a supposed weakness? There is also a danger in a child simply being mislabelled. Labels, if used, need to be revisited.

[Ref: ‘Do Howard Gardner's Multiple Intelligences Add Up?’, John White, 1998, ISBN: 0-85473-552-6 and ‘Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning’ by Frank Coffield et al (Learning and Skills Research Centre, 2004) and ‘Should we be using learning styles? : What research has to say to practice’ by Frank Coffield et al (LSRC, 2004)]

End reposting

Hope that helps.
Martin

Hi Martin,

May I know where I can find your book "Success in English"? It sounds interesting.

cheers
Vivian

Hi Vivian

I have emailed you privately. Please check your message box.

For anyone else interested in my book: I cover the ages of 0 to 12 and show how to teach reading, spelling, creative writing and a myriad of other things. I have written it for the general parent, but with an emphasis on the homeschooler.

Regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me privately at mrushton@singnet.com.sg.

More generally, some people have contacted me privately concerning homeschooling matters. Unless the information is of a personal and confidential matter, I would much prefer people to write to the forum so that a wider audience may appreciate and learn; it is also stops me repeating myself!

Best wishes to all prospective and actual homeschoolers!

Martin

Is anyone using the Classical approach in homeschooling here?


Regards,
Priscilla

I use elements of the Classical approach.

Animis opibusque parati.

Martin

Sorry, I don't quite understand. You have a link to that? Tks

Priscilla

'Animis opibusque parati' is Latin for 'Prepared in mind and resources'. It was my attempt to suggest that I am a classicist, that is having a knowledge of Latin, Logic and Great Books, which are the hallmarks of a classical approach. I have a background in Philosophy, among other subjects.

My homeschooling approach, rather eclectically perhaps, incorporates all these elements.

With regard to curricula, I actually am a curricular writer myself (for example, I write books and I write lessons for the enrichment centre I teach at). Therefore, I do not bother with off-the-shelf packages and am reluctant to recommend given curricula.

As I have said elsewhere, I feel the essence of homeschooling is not which curriculum is better than another, but rather what effort the parent is prepared to make to individualise the teaching and learning for the needs of the respective child. It is this personalised and highly involved approach which counts, and which clearly distinguishes homeschooling from the mass-produced situation of the formal school classroom.

Martin