Just a bitty bit of background.
I have been thinking about education for a long time. For about a century, actually. I think about it far more than I do anything about it, and I read about it even more than any of that.
I'm very extremely good at reading about stuff rather than doing it.
So it is with a truly refined humility that I humbly submit and have been submitting and will continue to submit my distillations — my moonshine, if you will — on the topic of education.
I have figured out, in fact, how to turn my corn of laziness into the white lightening, however raw, of interwebial conversation, so here you go.
{And you do realize that everything I have to say applies to any child, no matter where his education takes place, right?
It's about how a child learns; and everyone has an approach, and your approach, or the approach of the school, will determine the success of the endeavor. And how we define success is part of what the approach is, ha!}
My thinking has evolved, thank goodness, from when, as a fifteen-year-old, I read A. S. Neill's Summerhill, a book I would not really recommend. (Except as an artifact of a certain kind of weirdly optimistic fruitiness that obtained in the cultural wasteland or black hole we call the 70s — and that there is a grain of truth — as in everything, no matter how fruity! — in there about a child's passion to discover what is truly meaningful to him, uniquely. And I have lots more to say about this.)
Remember when I was telling you about Dorothy Sayers' The Lost Tools of Learning? Back before I got distracted by a sudden need to traffic in fabric?
Well, I'll tell you more about it. One long-ago day, when I was about 16 or 17 and just getting to know the man who was to become my husband, I espied National Review's reprint of that essay on his coffee table. (I plunked myself down and read it right then and there. I don't remember if I even said hello. So you can see why he's so attracted to me 🙂
It hit me in the gut with its casual, almost nonchalant familiarity — and fellowship! — with the very distant past.
I had been studying medieval poetry and the medieval point of view in general. My fascination was with the thought that everything is connected in an ordered way — from the pulsing of the blood in our veins to the movement of the stars.
All my (short, at that point) life I had thought in analogies, and here, in the Middle Ages, I found a whole time period that made interrelatedness its emblem, sword, and passion. Everything is an image of something else: mind encounters object (both real and imaginary) with delight and hopefulness.
Sayers seemed to be talking to me — not only about something from the Middle Ages, but also about my frustration with my own schooling, which seemed so slow, so plodding, so lacking in imagination.
She takes a seemingly modern discovery– the inner life of the child — and with finesse and wit, illuminates it with what the medieval thinkers had already understood, stripping away all the false ideas that have accrued with the sheer abundance of information that in our age seems to beat down on our poor ignorant heads.
Her thesis is “back to basics” — where the basics are not simply facts but universal ideas — our patrimony, in essence. She doesn't argue just for great books, but for an approach to learning that uses the child's own development to equip him with ability to learn for himself.
I went on to read (besides the books I mentioned in this post), over the years, these books {I've linked to them so you can have the information. I don't necessarily recommend buying them — some are worth owning, some are worth getting out of the library.} :
John Holt, How Children Learn
John Henry Newman, Idea Of A University
John Senior, The Restoration of Christian Culture
James Schall, Another Sort of Learning
Charlotte Mason, The Original Home Schooling Series
William Kilpatrick, Why Johnny Can't Tell Right from Wrong: And What We Can Do About It
David Hicks, Norms and Nobility: A Treatise on Education
And more, including the stories of those who educated themselves, like Ben Franklin and Booker T. Washington.
Sometimes people can't get through even some of this reading before they have to make decisions on their children's education.
And sometimes it all seems a little abstract when brought to bear on the issue of how to get this particular batch of children educated. Believe me, I know the difference between, say, Mason's ideal of sweet walks in the English countryside conversing about the Battle of Hastings, and the reality of … of…well, you know. All these people.
So let's read Against School by John Taylor Gatto — it's not a long article – for next time. We'll have a good talk over that. (It's worth reading even if you — as I have done myself — send your child to school, and it might be helpful to keep in mind that he, a longtime public school teacher, is talking about secondary school education in this article.)
Tracy @Magnolia Cul- says
Just read Gatto's article…wow! Thanks for the link and your thoughtsps.you are my hero!
Sarah says
Ah, timely post. Over on my blog, I've been pondering the wisdom that experienced homeschoolers offer to those of us at the beginning of the journey. There is nothing I like reading about or thinking about more education. 🙂 John Taylor Gatto is a hero of mine- I'll go read the article right now.
Camille says
Thank you! My children are not school aged yet (3 and 10 mos) but I am trying to be as prepared as possible when we start homeschooling soon.
Sarah says
I just finished reading "Dumbing us Down" by Gatto and I look forward to reading this article!Very timely post/series, just last night I re-picked up my book on Charlotte Mason . . . I'm looking forward to hearing more!Best,Sarah
Lawler Family Stalke says
FOR SCHOOLI read the Gatto article. It's interesting. However, it all sounds a bit far-fetched compared to my life experience. I live in a very well-off area, so maybe it isn't a fair comparison, but I don't think that the public schools in my area were boring due to a secret agenda to brainwash the students into mindless working-class robots, but because of ineptitude in the system and occasionally in the faculty. While it may have been true that schools started as a way to control the proletariat, etc, I think that the majority of educators today sincerely care about their students. At least, they start with high ideals. A lack of training or support might compromise their effectiveness, but I don't think it's a political agenda.As to school size, in many rural areas it has simply been deemed better for the students to be in a huge student body with a greater diversity of opportunities (specialized teachers, activities, etc) than broken down into smaller schools with more generalized teachers (a math teacher also covering an english class, etc). It's true that smaller is better in the case of education, but I don't think that these school districts felt like they had much of a choice in the matter.Also, Mr. Gatto fails to acknowledge the phenomenon of the school board in many areas which has considerable say in the curriculum…?It's true that large schools often lack creativity and the ability to engage students, but in their defense what is a viable alternative? If there is no mother in the house (a reality for many people), then home schooling is not an option, and children must be educated, or schooled, or whatever. Traditional classrooms might be mundane, but they seem to be the most practical way to affect the greatest number of students. Mr. Gatto also doesn't talk about the effect of family life on the classroom- if most students haven't had a decent meal, or go home to violence and instability, or don't have homework help early on, what chance does any schooling system have?Finally, I'd like to petition that Mr. Gatto consider excluding Catholic and some secular private schools from his tirade. My family has attended 4 generations of Catholic schooling, and I personally LOVED my high school (all-girl) experience, so I don't think it's fair to bash Catholic schools and private schools along with the rest. More than any other, I think that these schools truly strive for the development of the student as a whole person, and to a great degree, achieve that goal.The end. If anyone read this far.
Tracy @Magnolia Cul- says
Hey stalker, sure, most of the public school teachers begin very idealistically (speaking from experience…) it's the SYSTEM that is flawed and sets up the teachers. At this point I doubt that most of the teachers and administration share the same stated goals of the founders and early proponents of the public school system that Gatto cited (at least consciously). However, the SYSTEM has prevailed and whether they know it or not, they are perpetuating those goals.To be sure the collapse of the family in our society has devastated the educational system, and it is hard to imagine a system that could work better to 'educate the masses'. But, greater teacher autonomy, performance incentives (not necessarily based on test scores) and less interference from the thought police sure would go a long way to improving the boredom factor. This essay is the only thing I have read of Gatto's but it seemed to me he was singling out public schools, not private ones and as far as rural areas needing giant schools…what about those old one room classrooms? I don't buy the need for specialised teachers, especially in the age of the internet, nor the need for more activities. Finally, it's true that the school districts don't feel as if they have a choice, but, isn't that just one more BIG part of the problem with the system?
LawlerFamilyStalker says
Tracey,Well put. I'll concede that anyone can bash public schools all they like as long as the Catholics and privates (in general) aren't included! Alma mater pride, you know.-LFSPs. I read "lost tools of learning" last night, and that article was SO GOOD it just makes even commenting on Gatto's seem like a waste of time! Read it!!!! 🙂
Natasha says
Hi, LawlerFamilyStalker! I’m so glad you’re private school experience was wonderful! I only attended kindergarten at the local Catholic parochial school (My parents pulled my siblings and I from the school because of a situation that would have backfired and caused us to be blackballed. We lived in the country so the only other options were to attend public school or homeschool. My parents choose to homeschool, which was a great experience for us. My sister, brother, and I all want to homeschool our own children because of that.) Anyway, after that long aside to give you some initial background, I eventually ended up teaching in two different private Catholic schools and a Hillsdale charter school prior to marriage and children. The first was a private Catholic school that was opened too quickly–before sufficient thought could be put into the curriculum and overall plan, but it was still a great experience and a good school, in spite of the adaptations that needed to be made along the way due to insufficient preparation. The second school was a Catholic parochial school in the country. I was hired there at the last minute as a long term substitute and ended up teaching kindergarten for the first quarter of the school year. I received no curriculum help or advice during that time and was simply crippled in the discipline arena. (I had two students who were… challenging. One of them intentionally tried to hurt the girls in class on more than one occasion by chasing one with a Little Tikes saw once, and prying another girl’s fingers off of the monkey bars so she would fall on the pebbles below on a separate occasion.) I was told that I could not even put that student in the corner because that would be singling him out. That aside, only one of my students–in a country, Catholic, parochial school!–was innocent! In kindergarten. (And his family wasn’t Catholic.) I taught first and second grade religion there the following year and had a similar experience. The religion books were worse than useless. (I didn’t use them) And again, I was hog tied in the discipline arena. (When I figured out something that worked to get the students to stop distracting the class–having students kneel behind their desks for a few minutes before returning to their seat–diocese didn’t allow the use of “corporal punishment.” I only had those students for half an hour a day, so my options for discipline were already quite limited.) Due to poor discipline (why did 50% of the class have such an issue with out of control anger? I am not exaggerating), utterly content-less curriculum, lack of innocence along the students, and unbeneficial social interactions, I would never send my children to (what I consider) a “normal” Catholic parochial school nowadays. That said, I do know of one student who was benefited to some degree by switching to that same school. He was coming from a private SSPX school with no discipline (based on hearsay from multiple reliable sources as well as knowing the families and teachers involved) and did benefit because of being placed in the classroom of an experienced teacher who would have made an excellent principal. (She helped me with discipline ideas for both classes while I was teaching there.)
That’s just my experience in one Catholic parochial school, but I don’t believe that school was atypical of parochial grade schools. (I was honestly in a state of shell shock for the first month of teaching kindergarten there. Those children knew words and body language that I didn’t know as an adult.)
The Hillsdale Charter school had an excellent curriculum and so much thought had been put into everything through Hillsdale’s charter school initiative. I loved that they emphasized certain virtues (you can look up their 8 pillars of virtue) and supported discipline in the classroom. Overall that initiative is excellent, though I have no idea why they didn’t want us to read the Chronicles of Narnia to the students. Perhaps it was considered too Christian and therefore potentially contentious? I don’t know. That said, there will still always be some issues due to so many people/children being together so much: drama, bullying, lying (this honestly wasn’t a problem at the two Catholic schools I taught at), etc. Even with teachers in the classroom and adults monitoring lunch and recess, (and then the addition of cameras on the playground), drama and bullying were still issues. (The education there was great, though they didn’t teach religion or allow praying in the classroom since it’s technically a public school, but overall, I still wouldn’t send my children there if I had the ability to homeschool, which of course, not everyone has. If I couldn’t homeschool, a Hillsdale charter school with real religion at home, not typical PSR, would probably be about the best option.)
If that comes off sounding judgmental and opinionated, I apologize. That wasn’t my intention. Just trying to give a bit of an inside view to what I believe is fairly typical for parochial schools–this is not a commentary on non-parochial Catholic schools. Those have greater variance and I do not have the knowledge or experience to comment on them by and large.
Pam says
I would love to partake of some of your "moomshine"!! My oldest is now 12 (followed by 10 and 6). I find myself fretting more this year, worried about what we have and haven't done. I'm also reading lots more about education and assorted home schooling books. I guess I'm trying to distill a little moonshine of my own. I always find so much warmth and encouragement flowing out of your blog. Thank you for blessing us like you do.Pam
Mrs. B. says
Dear Mrs. Lawler, I look forward to the discussion! I am the mother of two, aged 4 and 3, and our family is very seriously considering homeschooling, with a (Catholic) classical approach. There is so much to read and learn out there, before I can even think of teaching my children! I am positively frightened at times… HEre's the point of view of an "outsider": I am not American, and I came over here only five years ago, so all I know about the American school system comes from my husband’s experience and the reading I’ve been doing (especially Thomas Sowell, Diana West, Diane Ravitch, Roger Kimball, and Charles Murray.) From books and the news I have learned one thing: I do not want our children to be immersed in the moral relativism so aggressively espoused by our public school system: we first need to equip them with what, later, will make them capable of challenging it. I can’t say whether Mr. Gatto is right in saying that our school system has a direct goal of producing a specific set of behaviors for “the great unwashed”, but from what everyone can read in the news it’s very clear that public schools do pursue the goal of what some call a “naked public square”, where moral equivalence and non-judgmental multiculturalism rule, and religious belief is suffocated in every possible way (think of the homeschooled little girl in NH recently in the news because a judge is forcing her to be in public school, with the explicit purpose of challenging her Christian upbringing – thus admitting that public schools are naturally an anti-Christian environment. Think of the CA judge who recently said parents cannot pull their children out of sex-ed classes, because these are designed to “protect” their children…) From my husband’s retelling of his experience (he says his parents always looked for the very best public schools, but now he’s reading The Well-Trained Mind, and he’s not so sure anymore he got even close to getting a “good education”) I have concluded this: I do not want my children to waste so much time away from home doing things that do not belong to school (We don’t really need to make schooldays even longer to teach woodwork and how to cook, right? These were things my husband did in high school!), and especially learning things haphazardly, without a logical plan (other real-life examples: whole language approach to reading; "creative" spelling; history studied without following a clear path, one year studying the Romans and the next, suddenly, the American Revolution. Are these things specifically designed to keep children from learning how to think for themselves, as Mr. Gatto would suggest? I don't know – but they happen everywhere and do have consequences…)One thing I am forever grateful for: the American system allows you to homeschool when all the other options are not good for you – something that does not happen everywhere… (and Sweden just outlawed it!)Sorry, so sorry about being so long – it's a subject we all care about so much! Thank you again for tackling these issues with your readers!Mrs. B.
50s Housewife says
"my moonshine" Oh I do adore the way you turn a phrase! 🙂
Jane says
I can certainly attest to the fact that not everyone involved in the public school system is interested in perpetuating the goals of making bored, automaton-like children who never grow up. Both of my grandfathers were teachers at public high schools (one taught English, the other taught shop), and both of my parents worked for the public school system. I know they didn't want bored automatons because I know how they raised me. Interestingly, this family of public-school educators did not send me to public school. I always went to Catholic schools, and even then, my parents knew they had to be active in my education. Was the school-sponsored field trip stupid? Let Jane go to the office with Mom instead. Was Jane not doing well in math? Let her do math at home. Was P.E. a waste of time? Jane's dance classes provide enough exercise and her dance teacher can submit grade sheets.My parents and grandfathers labored their whole working lives to make public schools better, especially for the parents and children who could afford nothing else, but sent me to private school because they knew the public schools weren't better yet.And yes, my school principals kind of hated my parents for being troublemakers, but also admired them for being persistent.
Heather says
Thanks for the link, Leila. Very thought provoking. I needed that. My child is 4 and my step-son is 10. I'm not sure about home schooling and I'm not sure about public education either. Sigh. I just don't know if I have the guts to home school. I admire you.
Mrs. B. says
See what I mean? California is considering introducing “Harvey Milk Gay Day” in K-12 public schools: http://savecalifornia.com/in-the-media-8-28-09-9-23-09-exposing-the-harm-of-harvey-milk-gay-day.htmlThis is what passes for education these days in the schools funded with our money: Children as young as 5 or 6 "performing mock gay marriages". I'm afraid Gatto is right: public schools these days are more about producing a certain behavior than about teaching good academics…
Alex says
My friend just posted this blog post on her Facebook profile and I decided I needed to respond. One of my frustrations with Gatto and similar writers is that they have little if anything to say to those of us who found our public high school experiences to be both intellectually stimulating and thoroughly enjoyable. Many of us wonder, "Why do we need to blow up the entire public school system? Why can't we try to just figure out a way to give everyone what we had, or at least use that as a starting point, then make it even better?" Gatto and his ilk usually seem to take it for granted that anyone who has any recent knowledge of the public school system (except for maybe tenured teachers and administrators) thinks it is a terrible system. This is simply not true. Can I think of some flaws in my public school education? Absolutely! But in all but one case, I can also point to public schools within 10 miles of mine that were doing a better job in those areas. In any case, I simply am not convinced that private and/or home schooling would necessarily have done a better job. It certainly could have done a better job. It also could have been much, much worse than my public school experience. Gatto and his ilk never explain how they can be so sure that their "solutions" won't be worse than the current problem. They just want us to trust them. Sorry, but I'm not going to trust them until they can do a better job of convincing people who don't already agree with them. I'll continue to be an enthusiastic and unapologetic advocate for public schools and for making them better, not blowing up the whole system.
Leila says
Dear Alex,Gatto was a teacher in the NY city public schools for 30 years. His analysis is trenchant and rises above individual experience, which can only take us so far. The cost of producing one contented consumer is so high that it's hardly worth it. Anyone who gets a good education in the public schools today will certainly get it anywhere.If ever there was a system ready to be blown up, it's public schools in America.