Book discussion: Vittorino da Feltre and Other Humanist Educators

[ElizaG]

A thread for all who are interested in discussing this book:

 

Vittorino da Feltre and Other Humanist Educators:  Essays and Versions; An Introduction to the History of Classical Education by William H. Woodward (Cambridge, 1897)

 

If you'd prefer something less detailed and more biographical, we could also discuss this one:  

 

Vittorino da Feltre:  A Prince of Teachers

 

:001_smile:

 

 

 

 

[LostintheCosmos]

I'm game, but also about to leave on vacation.  :party:

[ElizaG]

I hope you enjoy your well-deserved vacation, LostCove.   It's a 600 year old topic... I'm sure it'll still be here when you get back!  :laugh:

[Momto4inSoCal]

This book, for me, cleared up a lot of my questions on Classical Education. I think the revival of tradition needed the pathway that Christianity gave it. Vittorino's faith and the way he was able to make the goal of creating a three fold complete man (moral, physical and intellectual) complete by guiding the pupils faith and using some of the Ancient stories to connect to Christian morals. He understood that to fully comprehend a culture the best way to read the books would be to learn the language. That helped bring back the culture and appreciation for things that had been forgotten. I really loved how he would adapt his methods to each student and said that each student had a gift and as a teacher our job is to find and cultivate that gift. I found it interesting that it mentioned Guirino could turn out boys after 12 months that could translate Greek. I wish I knew his methods. I think what I'm finally realizing is that this is/was a way of life. I think it's really hard as a person brought up in the progressive era to change the way you think. I also have realized that in questioning Classical Education often we want a simple checklist of curriculum or an exact lesson plan of things that need to be done and somehow we miss that this is not training a child for a future job but instead molding a human being to be the best that they can be. If you miss the moral aspect of it, if you turn this on from 8-3 and then go back to life then you are missing the point. Also in reading this I think I need to get my kids outside more. It never occurred to me to consider the physical aspect of a child. I try and get my kids outside to burn off energy but I have never connected the physical health with our schooling.   

Edited June 25, 2016 by Momto4inSoCal

[ElizaG]

I find it interesting that the famous Renaissance Humanist teachers had a variety of opinions about discipline, inductive vs. deductive grammar, and other questions we're often uncertain about today.   Each of them had a system, but they were all somewhat different.

 

When we think about traditional classical education today, it's usually in the setting of the institutional schools and colleges for older boys and young men.   This is understandable, since they left the biggest paper trail, and many of them still exist (even if they've dropped most of the classics).   But Vittorino taught boys and girls from early childhood, and his school was said to have a family atmosphere.  

 

I'm still interested in the Jesuit model, but "family-style" education seems to have much more practical relevance for homeschoolers. 

 

Maybe we can pull out some details?

[Momto4inSoCal]

In the book it mentions an ancient spartan teacher who used to teach music. He is said to have charged double for children who had received lessons previously because he said he had to spend part of the time having them unlearn all they had already learned. I was thinking about that and how sometimes I keep trying to find an easy way to implement the classical principles in my schooling and I find it really hard to undo all that I've been raised to think about education. I have a hard time breaking away subjects and letting go of this core knowledge idea or just to think of school as life training and not a teaching of subjects. I have a couple of friends with children in classical schools and even those schools seem to be heavily influenced by the current pedagogies. I think the difference of styles with the teachers was due to different circumstances, settings and children.  We tend to look at education as building this model and then fitting the children into that model. It seems as if many of the classical educators were fitting the model to the children. With all of the ancient teaching I've read so far they all seem to use great writers as models from the beginning. They seem to focus on one book for a long time allowing students to memorize large portions of it. I've considered using some of the ancient books as models but if we read translations I wonder how much is lost when poetry is translated. 

[Momto4inSoCal]

  I was looking through my notes and it seems like he utilized games a lot with learning. It mentions letter games for the littles and math games to assist in arithmetic. Also that he alternated games and exercises to provide variation. Having children who dislike sitting still for long periods of time I can definitely appreciate methods that employ movement of any kinds. 

 The book mentions recitations and the littles being taught to enunciate, not speaking too loud and have grace while speaking. It mentions reading aloud was done in his presence and that it was an aid and test of understanding. This could easily be adapted to a homeschool setting and everyone in the family could be a part of it. The older children could read to the younger children while practicing eloquence and proper enunciation. I'm thinking the way it was a test of understanding was the way the child read. If they truly understand the text they will change their voice to match the tone of the text. I know I've noticed reading aloud often helps my children understand the text much better and listening to each other read aloud could help them critique what qualifies as a graceful and eloquent reading. 

  I've also noticed current methods of schooling are somewhat redundant whereas classical methods tend to reduce that redundancy. You can teach Latin by translating Cisero which teaches some of the history and proper oration while at the same time practicing grammar. 

 

 

[ElizaG]

I was just reading something written in the 1880s about the decline of reading aloud within the family.  The author said that it had decreased greatly in the past generation.  Family members would now sit down with their own book or newspaper in the evening.  They would even get impatient at having something read to them, because they could read it more quickly on their own.  

 

Oral reading stayed at the core of the US public school curriculum until the 1920s, even though the above author said that it couldn't really be taught to a whole class -- it required the older method of individual lessons.  He didn't think much of the elocution textbooks, full of rules and exercises, that had become popular in his day.  Practice, with personal guidance from the teacher, was the key to progress. 

 

Here's a link to the book, Every-day English by Richard Grant White.

 

So I agree that we have to make this a substantial part of our homeschooling and family lives, even if it takes some rearranging.  

 

It's very common for homeschoolers to give up on asking their children to read aloud, because the children don't enjoy it and complain a lot.  But most mothers accept that they themselves have to read aloud on a fairly regular basis, even if they don't enjoy it.   Is it okay to give our children the sense that they can just be passive consumers of literature, while the adults magically do all the work?   Not if we're aiming for a culture that's healthy and sustainable, it seems to me.  

 

Reading a story aloud -- like re-telling, or translating, or illustrating -- is a way of creating a new piece of art that's derived from the original, even if it only exists for an instant.   In French, they say that a singer who performs well-known songs is "interpreting" them.   They're not just copying; they're bringing some insight of their own.  I like that.  :001_smile:

[Momto4inSoCal]

I was just reading something written in the 1880s about the decline of reading aloud within the family.  The author said that it had decreased greatly in the past generation.  Family members would now sit down with their own book or newspaper in the evening.  They would even get impatient at having something read to them, because they could read it more quickly on their own.  

 

Oral reading stayed at the core of the US public school curriculum until the 1920s, even though the above author said that it couldn't really be taught to a whole class -- it required the older method of individual lessons.  He didn't think much of the elocution textbooks, full of rules and exercises, that had become popular in his day.  Practice, with personal guidance from the teacher, was the key to progress. 

 

Here's a link to the book, Every-day English by Richard Grant White.

 

So I agree that we have to make this a substantial part of our homeschooling and family lives, even if it takes some rearranging.  

 

It's very common for homeschoolers to give up on asking their children to read aloud, because the children don't enjoy it and complain a lot.  But most mothers accept that they themselves have to read aloud on a fairly regular basis, even if they don't enjoy it.   Is it okay to give our children the sense that they can just be passive consumers of literature, while the adults magically do all the work?   Not if we're aiming for a culture that's healthy and sustainable, it seems to me.  

 

Reading a story aloud -- like re-telling, or translating, or illustrating -- is a way of creating a new piece of art that's derived from the original, even if it only exists for an instant.   In French, they say that a singer who performs well-known songs is "interpreting" them.   They're not just copying; they're bringing some insight of their own.  I like that.  :001_smile:

 

 

I was thinking about how much I try and put emphasis into my reading and I've tried to listen to other readers (Jim Weiss for example) to try and imitate some of their techniques but I have never tried to improve my children's reading. It really is a process. I remember listening to my daughter who was 6 at the time read and my 5 yo asked if I could just read the book because it was taking to long  :laugh:. It takes a lot of patience and at the age of my children now (10 and 11) I'm often quick to just hand them something and tell them to read it on their own. Part of my problem is tending to my younger children but having them read the passages aloud could be done with all of us together. It also would be a good step towards more formal orations.

  I notice Vittorino did not really teach much logic. What is your feeling about that? I haven't done any logic at all and I feel like we have our hands full with Latin (and I haven't even thought about Greek!). I had always thought logic was a major part of classical education but here is a person who was considered a big part of the revival of classical education and he didn't think it was a necessity. He mentions it being of use to the schoolmaster though.