Classical Schools vs. Other Types

[ReadingMama1214]

DD is 4 and will attend a Classical Charter for K-12 as long as she gets in. My husband and I both had classical educations and love the model and philosophy. We are fortunate to have a few classical schools around us that we can check out and apply to. However, we've had a lot of people ask us why we are pursuing classical vs a more student led model. Expeditionary, project based, and Montessori are somewhat big where I live. A lot of people seem to think that classical means a rigid setting that hinders individuality. We have a bright, imaginative, and creative/artistic child and her pre-k teacher seems to think that classical will hinder this. We disagree greatly. I agree that there is too much pressure on young kids academically and that play is essential, but that does not seem incompatible with classical education. So what would you say to someone who seemed to think that the classical model hinders the individual development of a child?

[Farrar]

I definitely don't think the model does... I mean, one of the beauties of classical education, at least to me, is that it fills a child up with content knowledge and doesn't really talk down to them - it pushes all this history, all these great stories, all this rich vocabulary and content on kids. Most of the kids I know who were brought up doing Story of the World are so imaginative and I think that's part of what fuels them. A lot of other methods for the early years wait for children to be ready for content or emphasize skills or put the kids in charge, except, how can they know what's out there when they're so young? Classical education assumes the child is ready to learn all those stories.

 

That said, I think it depends on the way it's done and the school. I've heard of some schools that are classical where it does seem like an imagination and individuality killer. But I've heard of others that sound lovely. We weren't rigidly classical in the grammar stage (and now in the logic stage we really aren't at all, though it's my hope to return to more classical influence later on). I attended much more liberal, child-led type schools as a kid and I thrived that way and then the humanities program of my high school was very classically influenced and I thrived with that, which leads me to feel like the classical "stuff" is most important for older kids. But that's just my personal take.

Edited January 10, 2016 by Farrar

[ReadingMama1214]

Thanks for the response. I agree. I feel like the classical mode fed my creativity with an appreciation for fine art and great books. Our DD is a pretty typical learner and I think would fit the classical model excellently. If it doesn't address her interest in art, we will do something at home for that.

 

2/3 schools I am looking at only offer half day K so it seems pretty relaxed at least for that age. My DD will also be an older K student since she turns 6 shortly after starting. We love the classics philosophy and approach.

[ktgrok]

Listen to the Joy of Classical Homeschooling, one of Susan Wise Bauer's audio lectures :)

[Tanaqui]

So what would you say to someone who seemed to think that the classical model hinders the individual development of a child?

 

"Mind your own business."

 

I mean, I wouldn't phrase it exactly that way, but that'd be the gist. "We're happy with our choice" followed by a subject change is the somewhat more mannerly way to phrase that. For variety, you can say "You've given us a lot to think about".

 

The most important thing is to end these discussions quickly. I'm assuming you didn't ask these people to share their opinions on your educational choices, probably because you don't want their opinions. So don't engage with them on the subject any longer than strictly necessary. Remember: When you allow people to discuss this subject with you, you're sending the message that the matter is up for discussion. And if it's not, it's not. So don't let it even get started.

[G5052]

I was classically educated too. Even before children, I knew that I wanted that for them.

 

And I've had the naysayers hit us all along (last one in 11th grade now). I've had people tell me that I would "ruin" my children's character and make them into arrogant snobs. 

 

Funny because people who have no idea how they've been educated say that they're some of the nicest teens they've ever met. My son's professors rave about how solid he is academically and how polite he is in class. He's a favorite both at the gym where he works out and at the dojo where he teaches.

 

Listen, but move the topic on. 

[kiwik]

We loved our education and want the same for our kids.  Wasn't it lovely weather over the weekend.

[Reefgazer]

I wouldn't say anything; I'd tune them out.  They are products of the teacher educational system in this country, which doesn't see the value in classical ed (generally speaking).  Smile and say you'll take it under consideration, and then do exactly as you please without comment.

[Bluegoat]

I think I agree with Farrar - there are classical educators who seem to really see it as a "fill up the empty jug" kind of thing, and I can see why people might wonder about that.  So I guess I'd want to know what they think classical education means?  I might go so far as to say that one of the errors a classical education could most lukey fall into is being a lot of rote learning and memorization.

 

I think what I would say is that one of the gifts that a good classical education gives is that there is plenty of content for the creative or intellectual child to chew on.  THat's not just literature, and the arts but in things like the sciences. 

 

I remember when I was trying to decide what to do for post-secondary education - I seriously considered the art school.  I'm a fairly creative person. I spent many years taking art lessons in and out of school, and I loved the art school in town where I'd spent a lot of time at lessons and camps - it was a neat old warren of buildings in the old part of the city.  I liked the idea of learning more about art history (though, notably, they didn't have a separate program for that.)

 

In the end, there were two related things that stopped me, in part about the philosophy of the school but also because of my own education.  One was that they tended to emphasize originality and creativity over  skill, and I really wanted to be able to be more than only technically competent.  I wanted to be able to really realize my ideas, and I wasn't sure if the school would do that for me. 

 

But the more important thing was a felt, in terms of my creativity, that I was missing content.  What did I have to say aside from the usual predictable things about the environment or whatever - I needed to know things, though I didn't really know what (and not knowing what I needed to know was part of the problem.)  I wouldn't get that easily at the art school.

 

Anyway - I ended up choosing a Great Books program and a classics degree because I thought that would give me some content.

 

I think that if we look at classical education, it is offering, at its best, both of the things I mentioned.  It tries to give students skills that are robust enough that they can use them to accomplish their goals.  And it tries to introduce them to enough content that their creativity has facts and ideas to mull on and work with, and they have an idea where to go to carry on with that learning.