Holy Family Curriculum Prototype (Work in Progress)
A ground-based version of the online curriculum.
Catholic Alternative School:
A Curriculum Rationale
The problem of restoring to the world original and eternal beauty, is solved by the redemption of the soul. The ruin or the blank, that we see when we look at nature, is in our own eye. The axis of vision is not coincident with the axis of things, and so they appear not transparent but opaque. The reason why the world lacks unity, and lies broken and in heaps, is, because man is disunited with himself. He cannot be a naturalist, until he satisfies all the demands of the spirit. Love is as much its demand, as perception. Indeed, neither can be perfect without the other. In the uttermost meaning of the words, thought is devout, and devotion is thought. Deep calls unto deep [cf. Psalm 42:7]. But in actual life, the marriage is not celebrated. There are innocent men who worship God after the tradition of their fathers, but their sense of duty has not yet extended to the use of all their faculties. And there are patient naturalists [empiricists], but they freeze their subject under the wintry light of the understanding. Is not prayer also a study of truth,—a sally of the soul into the unfound infinite? No man ever prayed heartily, without learning something. But when a faithful thinker, resolute to detach every object from personal relations, and see it in the light of thought, shall, at the same time, kindle science with the fire of the holiest affections, then will God go forth anew into the creation. – Ralph Waldo Emerson[1]
When we think about the remarkably early age at which the young men went up to university in, let us say, Tudor times, and thereafter were held fit to assume responsibility for the conduct of their own affairs, are we altogether comfortable about that artificial prolongation of intellectual childhood and adolescence into the years of physical maturity which is so marked in our own day? – Dorothy L. Sayers[2]
A Curriculum Rationale
The problem of restoring to the world original and eternal beauty, is solved by the redemption of the soul. The ruin or the blank, that we see when we look at nature, is in our own eye. The axis of vision is not coincident with the axis of things, and so they appear not transparent but opaque. The reason why the world lacks unity, and lies broken and in heaps, is, because man is disunited with himself. He cannot be a naturalist, until he satisfies all the demands of the spirit. Love is as much its demand, as perception. Indeed, neither can be perfect without the other. In the uttermost meaning of the words, thought is devout, and devotion is thought. Deep calls unto deep [cf. Psalm 42:7]. But in actual life, the marriage is not celebrated. There are innocent men who worship God after the tradition of their fathers, but their sense of duty has not yet extended to the use of all their faculties. And there are patient naturalists [empiricists], but they freeze their subject under the wintry light of the understanding. Is not prayer also a study of truth,—a sally of the soul into the unfound infinite? No man ever prayed heartily, without learning something. But when a faithful thinker, resolute to detach every object from personal relations, and see it in the light of thought, shall, at the same time, kindle science with the fire of the holiest affections, then will God go forth anew into the creation. – Ralph Waldo Emerson[1]
When we think about the remarkably early age at which the young men went up to university in, let us say, Tudor times, and thereafter were held fit to assume responsibility for the conduct of their own affairs, are we altogether comfortable about that artificial prolongation of intellectual childhood and adolescence into the years of physical maturity which is so marked in our own day? – Dorothy L. Sayers[2]
|
|
The Ideal Curriculum
What is the ideal curriculum? Asking this question should arouse other essential enigmas: What is reality? What is the human soul? What is happiness or fulfillment? Who can say how a person should be formed, how a person should live, how a person should work? I dare not dishonor those mystical vagabonds and prodigal entrepreneurs whose ministries circumnavigate outside my orbit. While I do believe in the common nature of humanity and in the overlapping radii of human experience, I must readily admit the limitations of my own vision and the vast spectrums of charisma beyond any individual perception. One God does not fit all, unless He’s a Trinitarian God. If the latter is true, than one can be utterly unique without trespassing on the common good; one can love in one’s own way without needing to be a solution for every person. What is missing in interaction is immanent in prayer. This is what I see: I see young people who believe their authentic selves can only be expressed through psychotropic inspirations, sexual conquest, musical ejaculations, body art, or deviant behavior. Their personalities are so chaffed by economic masochism and corporate bondage (which begins with education rituals) that participating in political society seems a worse fate than poverty, imprisonment, or even death. Those who do participate often do so hypocritically, just to survive, and thus develop alter-egos that creep out at night. The human spirit and material existence are so at odds that work and play have become enemies. These are the children and adults whose educational niche I am longing to fill. This is my market, but it is not mine alone.
With all due respect to my anarchist peers, I am convinced that the schizophrenia of transcendentalist-capitalism is unhealthy. It seems foolish and childish (not childlike) to pretend that every social convention is arbitrary, as if there were not thousands of years of trial and error behind (some or part of) most of them. Creative expression naturally institutionalizes, it is, in fact, intrinsically self-organizing. The war for originality and innovation is really a war against injustice, not against tradition. Reform is necessary but rebellion is damaging. Sin does not incorporate on its own; it is only viral to associations already established on some common good. The clearest example is the Christian Church and the Christian saint. These are the most authentic and eccentric people of history, the hardest and most fearless rebels who are simultaneously the most universal and communal. The Catholic Church is the one club that does not require their self-abolition. Yet, the great difficulty of the orthodox Christian Church has been that its exclusivity is founded on doctrine and not on shifting needs. The saint himself or herself responds to the cries of their times but the Church is as unmoving as Mother Earth herself. The Church is the source and destination of redemption. It is more American than America, because it is more constitutional than America and more individualistic than America. Some say Christian indoctrination is ideological cloning, but if we could place even a couple canonized saints in the same room, the folly of that statement would be plain. Still, human genius is not measured by difference alone, or the asylum would be the new academy. One must also give one’s creative labors to a worthy cause. Relativism is the tyrant’s spell. Christian dogma is the defender of Truth. I strongly contend that the doctrines of Catholicism are both the most rationally defendable and the most historically consistent of all human institutional experiments. If we would educate our children well, we will hope that they be given tools to uncover objective information as well as ambition enough to ‘become the change they wish to see in the world.’[3] To be enterprising in play and playful while in labor, these are the crossbeams of Christian lifestyle and education.
Institutionalized-“De-schooling” and Online Curriculum Theory
The advantages of community-centered education are many. One of those benefits is that such a system relies on initiative rather than compulsion. Early monastic schools exemplify the difference; the only true motivation is a religious motivation. Monasticism preserved literacy in the West during the barbarian invasions of Rome because the diplomats had more pressing concerns, like staying alive in a new world and pandering to illiterate kings. But for the monks there was little distinction between self-preservation and self-education. Learning was integral to the monastic regiment and it continued like clockwork. When social, political, and economic motivations for learning were sacked and buried, religious communities faithfully protected the seeds of future civilization. Now, as the American empire looms toward a Romanesque fate, one might ask, who will keep society from disappearing into ruins? When the time for philosophical conviction arrives, those countless millions who approached education as a ticket to security will likely be immobilized by uncertainty and unpreparedness. Instead, it will be those who sought knowledge for the sake of service, out of love for others, who will be ready and waiting when the opportunity arises to meet felt needs.
Unfortunately, the majority of institutions that exist today have barred opportunities for spontaneous service because they have monopolized control of markets wherever possible. But who can act with more precision: one giant hand or a million tiny hands? Who can meet the needs of individual citizens better than the persons geographically closest to them? Most likely the million local hands will always perform more comprehensively, if not with more sophistication as well. Such is the reasoning behind the doctrine of subsidiary. From its conception the Church has been the primary care-taker of the lowest members of society. “The family should live in such a way that its members learn to care and take responsibility for the young, the old, the sick, the handicapped, and the poor. There are many families who are at times incapable of providing this help. It devolves then on other persons, other families, and, in a subsidiary way, society to provide for their needs: ‘Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to care for orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world’” (CCC 2208; Jas 1:27).
The culture of education must be a culture of service; the classroom and streets should be in conversation. Screenwriter philanthropist, M. Night Shyamalan, uncovered the weightiness of school culture in the balance of factors contributing to the most effective educational practices, particularly those that have succeeded in closing the achievement gap in America. Data shows that the five tenets, which must be fostered together in order to close the achievement gap are: eliminating bad teachers, school leadership and culture, observation and feedback, smaller school sizes, and more hours of education (Shymalan, 2013). With the exception, perhaps, of organized methods of feedback, the great schools of Europe and early America easily possessed these tenets - without relying on excessive data to know these elements were needed. What many do not acknowledge is the similarity between school leadership/culture and traditional Christian systems of hierarchy/ritual.
INSERT John Dewey
In an interview with Arnold Dodge about school choice, Diane Ravitch said: “What is so wrong about this is that public education is vital to our democracy. It would be a tragedy if children had no more neighborhood public school. The public school is a building block of democracy. It's where neighbors meet and where families get involved in community action. Have every child on a bus heading to school outside the neighborhood, and you lose one of the elements that make a democratic society” (Dodge, 2011). Does school choice necessarily lead to the diaspora of neighbors? Perhaps not, if choice is not extended to schools all over the county, state, or nation, but required within every smaller township. In this way, the private sector would have no economic incentive to monopolize the wealthiest districts. If competition is limited, or regulated, to local economies (ideally a township rather than a county) than profits cannot be siphoned off to corporate fat-cats. In poorer areas school-funding could still draw on government tax assistance, at least initially to avert the dangers of free-market exploitation and educational anarchy.
It is conceivable to have a “public” system that does not rely on mass federal intervention (such as accountability testing) beyond monetary assistance to communities below an established poverty level. Why does “public” mean “standardized” anyway? Is America a country of freedoms-to or freedoms-from? Are people free to speak and worship as they believe is best, or is speech and religion supposed to be relegated to the private sphere only? Politician Ron Paul suggests that the Department of Education is unconstitutional for this reason: Education, like religion, has no objective definition; these are both matters of freedom-to. The narrative of a non-indoctrinating democratic education is a fairy-tale. All that can truly be done is to allow doctrines to compete for consensus. Yet, the centralization of education is diametrically opposed to the competition of philosophies in education. However, this does not require one to assume that government has absolutely no role in providing universal access to education. The third possibility is that government supports equality in competition. Equity can only be achieved through diversity. One huge mob-majority is just another form of dictatorship, but many small minorities form a sustainable democracy. This is exactly the reason for the doctrine of subsidiary: since injustice comes from the individual human heart, its waves are most effectively quelled by the distribution of authority to as many heads as possible.
“For the philosopher Slavoj Zizek we are living in the end times characterized, he says, by four antagonisms: the threat of ecological catastrophe; the inappropriate notion of private property when applied to “intellectual property”; the socio-ethical implications of new techno-scientific developments such as biogenetics: and, the creation of new forms of apartheid.” Although society is multi-cultural and multi-ethnic, it is still segregated economically, politically, and geographically, leading to a zeitgeist of hopelessness and anger toward the present power system. Reaching ecological and cultural sustainability becomes a more critical goal with each passing year. “The world of wiki economics, wiki design and Wikipedia is allied to the world of carbon accounting, biosynthesis and cloud computing (Blewitt 2010, 3467).” Flourishing community life requires a safe environment. John Blewitt argues that proponents of sustainable business are desperately in need of communicating with the vast range of creative ideas that lie dormant in neighborhood leaders (especially in urban areas), which is more than feasible through the networking capabilities of the World Wide Web. While this would result in the deinstitutionalizing of education, it would not necessitate total autonomy from the government as has been demonstrated in Aston University’s Lifelong Learning Centre, which still meets accreditation norms (Blewitt 2010, 3475-76).
DISCUSS Deschooling Society
Peter Peretti and Emma Jones, 1982, presented some of the limitations of “deschooling society.” In terms of effects on the community, institutionalized schooling helps relieve the burden of home life, decrease juvenile delinquency, and prevent children from competing for jobs (Peretti & Jones, 1982). Also most States budget about 40% towards education, and it seems hard to imagine specialized schools not being even more expensive. Thirdly, schools are the primary standardizers of social organization and behavior. Finally, it is argued that government schools provide compulsory peer interactions, and therefore are important trainers in meaningful relationships. Yet, all these arguments are rather weak in the same way, that is, there is no reason to think that these positive aspects of institutionalized education will be lost in a spontaneous learning environment. The fact that children would be at home more often in a deschooled community is not necessarily a bad thing. Delinquency has more to do with a vacuous cultural than with forced “education.” It could be beneficial to increase parent-child interaction in a society that is increasingly aware of risk-factors correlated to absentee parents. It is not institutional schools that civilize children but religion, human interaction, and constructive activities, all of which could likely be improved in a deschooled society.
The economic criticisms of free-market schooling are probably the most difficult to answer, but as others have pointed out, institutional schools waste a great deal of money in conforming to the one size fits all structure. Ron Paul promotes online or digital resources precisely for this reason: in a miniscule fraction of the space and cost one can hold an entire library (or two or three) in the palm of his or her hands (Paul & Coulter, 2013). Why have most schools avoided this ridiculously efficient possibility? Because much public education funding still comes from businesses that monopolize school resources. Other corporate conflicts of interest are just as apparent in any education system that allows federal or even state-wide standardization. The standard creators cannot help but give in to the temptation to implement or advertise for the handful of multi-billionaires who own most of world’s resources. But low capital economies cannot be exploited as easily because the monetary incentive is simply not very strong, and local authorities would be close enough and numerous enough to stamp out abuses almost immediately. Centralization and monopolization might as well be synonyms.
Sugata Mitra’s research reveals that education can be self-motivated and self-generating. When poor children in India were given access to a computer and the internet, without help or previous experience, they taught themselves and their peers how to use them. In nine months any child with access to a computer, in any language, can become as proficient as an American secretary (Mitra, 2010). When prompted, children were even able to learn specialized information all by themselves with a street-side computer. One of the key factors in these experiments was the assistance of “teachers” who simply encouraged the learners and cultivated their sense of wonder. Mitra has developed several “S.O.L.E.s,” self-organized learning environments, which are simply small rooms with a computer, projection screen, and access to the internet and video-conferencing. Kahn Academy, Academic Earth, and Coursera are just three examples of very successful free online educational programs with college level, peer-reviewed, content. The unspoken danger of the online democratic utopia is that it partially disconnects one from the physical environment in which he or she lives. One potential remedy to this situation would be to get online students to video/audio/journal record interactive moments within their immediate community, as part of an online curriculum that values non-digital social interaction.
The longer a child is involved in institutional schooling, the more likely he or she is to dislike the educational process (Varbelow & Griffith, 2012). Priest philosopher Ivan Illich (1970s) credited this fact to the way schools treat children as “scientifically produced commodities,” stifling their ability to become self-actualized. Illich envisioned a world where students could choose what they want to learn when they find it interesting, thereby preserving the connection between knowledge and love. The market of education resources would be open to everyone and contributed to by everyone, since almost all people have a skill that they could educate someone else in. This system of “learning-webs” is clearly a prophetic version of what is happening today with the World Wide Web. Griffith & Varbelow’s criticism of Illich is in his economic solution of “peer-matching” which restricts learning to those who have earned “vouchers” awarded according to hours of teaching others (Varbelow & Griffith, 2012). A more viable option would be a flat-tax that went towards paying professional teachers in proportion to their open-market demand.
INSERT Maritain’s Education at the Crossroads
INSERT Newman’s Idea of the University
DISCUSS How could one create an online (partially of course) monastic school?
In conclusion, the arguments for decentralizing education have made vital points, including the unavoidable relationship between centralization and monopolization, the disenfranchisement of local authorities, and the false view of education as a means to economic production. The truest form of learning is self-actualization, but it is possible to allow for this kind of education in a semi-organized, and even partially institutionalized, fashion. The priority of local authority does not have to mean the elimination of state and federal authority, nor does the distribution of resources have to mean the destruction of the teaching profession. The author’s position is against corporate standardization as the rule and towards a balance of power in favor of townships, thus allowing for much needed diversity in educational initiatives, yet still preserving educational communication networks state-wide, federally, and globally.
What is the ideal curriculum? Asking this question should arouse other essential enigmas: What is reality? What is the human soul? What is happiness or fulfillment? Who can say how a person should be formed, how a person should live, how a person should work? I dare not dishonor those mystical vagabonds and prodigal entrepreneurs whose ministries circumnavigate outside my orbit. While I do believe in the common nature of humanity and in the overlapping radii of human experience, I must readily admit the limitations of my own vision and the vast spectrums of charisma beyond any individual perception. One God does not fit all, unless He’s a Trinitarian God. If the latter is true, than one can be utterly unique without trespassing on the common good; one can love in one’s own way without needing to be a solution for every person. What is missing in interaction is immanent in prayer. This is what I see: I see young people who believe their authentic selves can only be expressed through psychotropic inspirations, sexual conquest, musical ejaculations, body art, or deviant behavior. Their personalities are so chaffed by economic masochism and corporate bondage (which begins with education rituals) that participating in political society seems a worse fate than poverty, imprisonment, or even death. Those who do participate often do so hypocritically, just to survive, and thus develop alter-egos that creep out at night. The human spirit and material existence are so at odds that work and play have become enemies. These are the children and adults whose educational niche I am longing to fill. This is my market, but it is not mine alone.
With all due respect to my anarchist peers, I am convinced that the schizophrenia of transcendentalist-capitalism is unhealthy. It seems foolish and childish (not childlike) to pretend that every social convention is arbitrary, as if there were not thousands of years of trial and error behind (some or part of) most of them. Creative expression naturally institutionalizes, it is, in fact, intrinsically self-organizing. The war for originality and innovation is really a war against injustice, not against tradition. Reform is necessary but rebellion is damaging. Sin does not incorporate on its own; it is only viral to associations already established on some common good. The clearest example is the Christian Church and the Christian saint. These are the most authentic and eccentric people of history, the hardest and most fearless rebels who are simultaneously the most universal and communal. The Catholic Church is the one club that does not require their self-abolition. Yet, the great difficulty of the orthodox Christian Church has been that its exclusivity is founded on doctrine and not on shifting needs. The saint himself or herself responds to the cries of their times but the Church is as unmoving as Mother Earth herself. The Church is the source and destination of redemption. It is more American than America, because it is more constitutional than America and more individualistic than America. Some say Christian indoctrination is ideological cloning, but if we could place even a couple canonized saints in the same room, the folly of that statement would be plain. Still, human genius is not measured by difference alone, or the asylum would be the new academy. One must also give one’s creative labors to a worthy cause. Relativism is the tyrant’s spell. Christian dogma is the defender of Truth. I strongly contend that the doctrines of Catholicism are both the most rationally defendable and the most historically consistent of all human institutional experiments. If we would educate our children well, we will hope that they be given tools to uncover objective information as well as ambition enough to ‘become the change they wish to see in the world.’[3] To be enterprising in play and playful while in labor, these are the crossbeams of Christian lifestyle and education.
Institutionalized-“De-schooling” and Online Curriculum Theory
The advantages of community-centered education are many. One of those benefits is that such a system relies on initiative rather than compulsion. Early monastic schools exemplify the difference; the only true motivation is a religious motivation. Monasticism preserved literacy in the West during the barbarian invasions of Rome because the diplomats had more pressing concerns, like staying alive in a new world and pandering to illiterate kings. But for the monks there was little distinction between self-preservation and self-education. Learning was integral to the monastic regiment and it continued like clockwork. When social, political, and economic motivations for learning were sacked and buried, religious communities faithfully protected the seeds of future civilization. Now, as the American empire looms toward a Romanesque fate, one might ask, who will keep society from disappearing into ruins? When the time for philosophical conviction arrives, those countless millions who approached education as a ticket to security will likely be immobilized by uncertainty and unpreparedness. Instead, it will be those who sought knowledge for the sake of service, out of love for others, who will be ready and waiting when the opportunity arises to meet felt needs.
Unfortunately, the majority of institutions that exist today have barred opportunities for spontaneous service because they have monopolized control of markets wherever possible. But who can act with more precision: one giant hand or a million tiny hands? Who can meet the needs of individual citizens better than the persons geographically closest to them? Most likely the million local hands will always perform more comprehensively, if not with more sophistication as well. Such is the reasoning behind the doctrine of subsidiary. From its conception the Church has been the primary care-taker of the lowest members of society. “The family should live in such a way that its members learn to care and take responsibility for the young, the old, the sick, the handicapped, and the poor. There are many families who are at times incapable of providing this help. It devolves then on other persons, other families, and, in a subsidiary way, society to provide for their needs: ‘Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to care for orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world’” (CCC 2208; Jas 1:27).
The culture of education must be a culture of service; the classroom and streets should be in conversation. Screenwriter philanthropist, M. Night Shyamalan, uncovered the weightiness of school culture in the balance of factors contributing to the most effective educational practices, particularly those that have succeeded in closing the achievement gap in America. Data shows that the five tenets, which must be fostered together in order to close the achievement gap are: eliminating bad teachers, school leadership and culture, observation and feedback, smaller school sizes, and more hours of education (Shymalan, 2013). With the exception, perhaps, of organized methods of feedback, the great schools of Europe and early America easily possessed these tenets - without relying on excessive data to know these elements were needed. What many do not acknowledge is the similarity between school leadership/culture and traditional Christian systems of hierarchy/ritual.
INSERT John Dewey
In an interview with Arnold Dodge about school choice, Diane Ravitch said: “What is so wrong about this is that public education is vital to our democracy. It would be a tragedy if children had no more neighborhood public school. The public school is a building block of democracy. It's where neighbors meet and where families get involved in community action. Have every child on a bus heading to school outside the neighborhood, and you lose one of the elements that make a democratic society” (Dodge, 2011). Does school choice necessarily lead to the diaspora of neighbors? Perhaps not, if choice is not extended to schools all over the county, state, or nation, but required within every smaller township. In this way, the private sector would have no economic incentive to monopolize the wealthiest districts. If competition is limited, or regulated, to local economies (ideally a township rather than a county) than profits cannot be siphoned off to corporate fat-cats. In poorer areas school-funding could still draw on government tax assistance, at least initially to avert the dangers of free-market exploitation and educational anarchy.
It is conceivable to have a “public” system that does not rely on mass federal intervention (such as accountability testing) beyond monetary assistance to communities below an established poverty level. Why does “public” mean “standardized” anyway? Is America a country of freedoms-to or freedoms-from? Are people free to speak and worship as they believe is best, or is speech and religion supposed to be relegated to the private sphere only? Politician Ron Paul suggests that the Department of Education is unconstitutional for this reason: Education, like religion, has no objective definition; these are both matters of freedom-to. The narrative of a non-indoctrinating democratic education is a fairy-tale. All that can truly be done is to allow doctrines to compete for consensus. Yet, the centralization of education is diametrically opposed to the competition of philosophies in education. However, this does not require one to assume that government has absolutely no role in providing universal access to education. The third possibility is that government supports equality in competition. Equity can only be achieved through diversity. One huge mob-majority is just another form of dictatorship, but many small minorities form a sustainable democracy. This is exactly the reason for the doctrine of subsidiary: since injustice comes from the individual human heart, its waves are most effectively quelled by the distribution of authority to as many heads as possible.
“For the philosopher Slavoj Zizek we are living in the end times characterized, he says, by four antagonisms: the threat of ecological catastrophe; the inappropriate notion of private property when applied to “intellectual property”; the socio-ethical implications of new techno-scientific developments such as biogenetics: and, the creation of new forms of apartheid.” Although society is multi-cultural and multi-ethnic, it is still segregated economically, politically, and geographically, leading to a zeitgeist of hopelessness and anger toward the present power system. Reaching ecological and cultural sustainability becomes a more critical goal with each passing year. “The world of wiki economics, wiki design and Wikipedia is allied to the world of carbon accounting, biosynthesis and cloud computing (Blewitt 2010, 3467).” Flourishing community life requires a safe environment. John Blewitt argues that proponents of sustainable business are desperately in need of communicating with the vast range of creative ideas that lie dormant in neighborhood leaders (especially in urban areas), which is more than feasible through the networking capabilities of the World Wide Web. While this would result in the deinstitutionalizing of education, it would not necessitate total autonomy from the government as has been demonstrated in Aston University’s Lifelong Learning Centre, which still meets accreditation norms (Blewitt 2010, 3475-76).
DISCUSS Deschooling Society
Peter Peretti and Emma Jones, 1982, presented some of the limitations of “deschooling society.” In terms of effects on the community, institutionalized schooling helps relieve the burden of home life, decrease juvenile delinquency, and prevent children from competing for jobs (Peretti & Jones, 1982). Also most States budget about 40% towards education, and it seems hard to imagine specialized schools not being even more expensive. Thirdly, schools are the primary standardizers of social organization and behavior. Finally, it is argued that government schools provide compulsory peer interactions, and therefore are important trainers in meaningful relationships. Yet, all these arguments are rather weak in the same way, that is, there is no reason to think that these positive aspects of institutionalized education will be lost in a spontaneous learning environment. The fact that children would be at home more often in a deschooled community is not necessarily a bad thing. Delinquency has more to do with a vacuous cultural than with forced “education.” It could be beneficial to increase parent-child interaction in a society that is increasingly aware of risk-factors correlated to absentee parents. It is not institutional schools that civilize children but religion, human interaction, and constructive activities, all of which could likely be improved in a deschooled society.
The economic criticisms of free-market schooling are probably the most difficult to answer, but as others have pointed out, institutional schools waste a great deal of money in conforming to the one size fits all structure. Ron Paul promotes online or digital resources precisely for this reason: in a miniscule fraction of the space and cost one can hold an entire library (or two or three) in the palm of his or her hands (Paul & Coulter, 2013). Why have most schools avoided this ridiculously efficient possibility? Because much public education funding still comes from businesses that monopolize school resources. Other corporate conflicts of interest are just as apparent in any education system that allows federal or even state-wide standardization. The standard creators cannot help but give in to the temptation to implement or advertise for the handful of multi-billionaires who own most of world’s resources. But low capital economies cannot be exploited as easily because the monetary incentive is simply not very strong, and local authorities would be close enough and numerous enough to stamp out abuses almost immediately. Centralization and monopolization might as well be synonyms.
Sugata Mitra’s research reveals that education can be self-motivated and self-generating. When poor children in India were given access to a computer and the internet, without help or previous experience, they taught themselves and their peers how to use them. In nine months any child with access to a computer, in any language, can become as proficient as an American secretary (Mitra, 2010). When prompted, children were even able to learn specialized information all by themselves with a street-side computer. One of the key factors in these experiments was the assistance of “teachers” who simply encouraged the learners and cultivated their sense of wonder. Mitra has developed several “S.O.L.E.s,” self-organized learning environments, which are simply small rooms with a computer, projection screen, and access to the internet and video-conferencing. Kahn Academy, Academic Earth, and Coursera are just three examples of very successful free online educational programs with college level, peer-reviewed, content. The unspoken danger of the online democratic utopia is that it partially disconnects one from the physical environment in which he or she lives. One potential remedy to this situation would be to get online students to video/audio/journal record interactive moments within their immediate community, as part of an online curriculum that values non-digital social interaction.
The longer a child is involved in institutional schooling, the more likely he or she is to dislike the educational process (Varbelow & Griffith, 2012). Priest philosopher Ivan Illich (1970s) credited this fact to the way schools treat children as “scientifically produced commodities,” stifling their ability to become self-actualized. Illich envisioned a world where students could choose what they want to learn when they find it interesting, thereby preserving the connection between knowledge and love. The market of education resources would be open to everyone and contributed to by everyone, since almost all people have a skill that they could educate someone else in. This system of “learning-webs” is clearly a prophetic version of what is happening today with the World Wide Web. Griffith & Varbelow’s criticism of Illich is in his economic solution of “peer-matching” which restricts learning to those who have earned “vouchers” awarded according to hours of teaching others (Varbelow & Griffith, 2012). A more viable option would be a flat-tax that went towards paying professional teachers in proportion to their open-market demand.
INSERT Maritain’s Education at the Crossroads
INSERT Newman’s Idea of the University
DISCUSS How could one create an online (partially of course) monastic school?
In conclusion, the arguments for decentralizing education have made vital points, including the unavoidable relationship between centralization and monopolization, the disenfranchisement of local authorities, and the false view of education as a means to economic production. The truest form of learning is self-actualization, but it is possible to allow for this kind of education in a semi-organized, and even partially institutionalized, fashion. The priority of local authority does not have to mean the elimination of state and federal authority, nor does the distribution of resources have to mean the destruction of the teaching profession. The author’s position is against corporate standardization as the rule and towards a balance of power in favor of townships, thus allowing for much needed diversity in educational initiatives, yet still preserving educational communication networks state-wide, federally, and globally.
|
|
Prototype Curriculum Scope & Design
The major theme of 21st century education has been the crusade for increased standardization, under the banner of global competition (Furda, 2014). The plain definition of “specific, measurable, concrete statements describing what all students must know and be able to do as a result of their schooling” is not an unreasonable request on the surface. The desire to see all children freely educated (and to have some guarantee that this is what occurs at school) is a good motivation. It helps teachers plan and implement instruction, to assess student development more accurately, and to measure the success of one school to another across communities or even across the globe (Furda, 2014). Nevertheless, standards should never exhaust the scope of an education.
The difficulty of standards is deciding what content is most essential and how specific the standards should be. It seems obvious enough that standards should be broader and broader as the district scale increases, because this allows the smaller communities to address and adapt to local needs without hindrance from bureaucrats who cannot possibly know what is better for small communities than the communities themselves (unless we are talking about basic human rights violations or some example of that nature). The danger of top-down micromanaging is that a panacea mentality will inevitably exclude more than it includes. Human beings are simply too unique to be ruled monarchically and that understanding used to be the genius of American democracy and free-market capitalism. Monopolization, whether of business, government, education, or all of thee above, is destructive to society. This understanding has to be an essential element of education itself if we are to avoid repeating history’s great mistakes.
Another important practice, related to standardization and educational scope is school-based accountability. While the value of data measurement is apparent because of its ability to increase efficiency and numerical accuracy, there remain elements of the human person that simply cannot be precisely measured (Furda, 2014). Oversight is an important part of life in society; it does not seem practical or healthy in this world to simply leave everyone to their own devices. That being said, true accountability has to flow in both directions. Such was the idea behind the “balance of powers” in the American constitution, and such is the rationale behind the “servants of the servants” hierarchal structure of the Christian Church. As history attests, it is all too easy for one party to assert its governing authority to the denigration of the other parties, and therefore, a certain distrust of centralized power is quite prudent. Following this train of thought, my school would balance achievement goals with growth measurements to allow an equal share of accountability between teachers and students.
I include standards and accountability in this discussion of my curriculum scope and design because so often in public education the two are interlaced. The scope is the standards and accountability is based upon teaching the full scope. To some degree accreditation will also parallel with standard and accountability measures. In my own curriculum I am limiting standardization to a very broad set of skills, not necessarily corresponding to modern subject area criterion. Science, mathematics, and literacy will be integrated into a holistic set of courses. Accountability and accreditation might have to rely solely on the Catholic system of oversight, which today is coming into conflict with the national system more and more, especially in higher education, but I am confident that I could at least engage the public system in a discussion about the value of my model and its practical effectiveness.
The breadth and depth of curriculum scope are usually divided into the domains of cognitive, affective, psychomotor, and moral (Ornstein & Hunkins 2014, 156). Although I am not opposed to these domains, I have divided my own curriculum based on the ancient model of the Trivium: Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric. Grammar is essentially the cognitive domain, the content of human knowledge, the symbols of our civilization. Logic combines the cognitive, affective, and moral/spiritual domains because it is the analysis and assimilation of information into one’s being and person. This stage is often bypassed or rushed in most curriculums, because students are taught to accept that the teacher is always right, to simply memorize information and move on. Taking the time to let truth be an emotional and spiritual encounter with reality is rarely considered, yet this is true learning that will be fun, memorable, and cherished, this is learning as an end in itself and not solely a means to a well-paying job. Rhetoric is also a combination of domains including the affective, moral, and psychomotor especially. Rhetoric is the ability to teach, persuade, and communicate the truths that one has appropriated. This involves training in all the active literacies of public writing, speaking, and performance. This element of the curriculum focuses on interpersonal relationships and social awareness.
The interesting thing for us is the composition of the Trivium, which preceded the Quadrivium and was the preliminary discipline for it. It consisted of three parts: Grammar, Dialectic, and Rhetoric, in that order. Now the first thing we notice is that two at any rate of these “subjects” are not what we should call “subjects” at all: they are only methods of dealing with subjects. Grammar, indeed, is a “subject” in the sense that it does mean definitely learning a language—at that period it meant learning Latin. But language itself is simply the medium in which thought is expressed. The whole of the Trivium was, in fact, intended to teach the pupil the proper use of the tools of learning, before he began to apply them to “subjects” at all. First, he learned a language; not just how to order a meal in a foreign language, but the structure of a language, and hence of language itself—what it was, how it was put together, and how it worked. Secondly, he learned how to use language; how to define his terms and make accurate statements; how to construct an argument and how to detect fallacies in argument.[4]
INSERT more from “The Lost Tools of Learning.”
In so far, as the scope of this curriculum has depth it is in these three areas of Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric; all courses are organized according to the development of the human person in these capacities. A rough comparison can be made between the Trivium and Kieran Egan’s three main ideas in curriculum design: Plato’s academic idea (Grammar), Rousseau’s development idea (Logic), and socialization (Rhetoric) (Ornstein & Hunkins 2014, 150-51). The breadth of study comes from an integrated approach to related disciplines. Almost every traditional subject is covered, but often not explored beyond a basic understanding. The impetus of the curriculum is knowledge as it relates directly to the human condition and the social milieu, and if a student seeks depth in a certain discipline beyond the fundamentals, it will likely have to involve a personal initiative. The curriculum is designed to accommodate such creative initiatives, which my curriculum will allot to their own space and time, and teachers will be available to support and guide student effort to this effect (there will be more discussion of this accommodation for student creativity later).
The first essential aspect of my curriculum design is the “horizontal organization” of curriculum components. The purpose of this method is to allow ideas to pass freely between classes so as to minimize the compartmentalization of subjects that are intermingled and interrelated in the real world. This is also meant to eliminate what John Taylor Gatto called teaching “confusion,” “the un-relating of everything,” so that students feel at liberty to engage their genuine enthusiasms regardless of what class they happen to be in (Gatto 1992, 2-4). Connected to horizontal organization is a whole-to-part sequence of learning (Ornstein & Hunkins 2014, 157). This arrangement also will help cultivate the relevance of specific disciplines to life as a whole.
I believe there is rich continuity between the four years of education in my high school curriculum. The basic skills of reading, writing, and arithmetic will be implemented in almost every class to varying degrees. At least half of the time students spend in study will be dedicated to integration and articulation of course material, both horizontally and vertically, so that grade levels as well as class subjects will blend together at certain times. Thursday, Friday, and Saturday are specifically set aside for this kind of curriculum integration. Although I am not really concerned with standardization across districts, I believe my students would be able to enter into another school without feeling confused or left behind. Balance of the curriculum will largely depend on the choices of the students because almost half of the learning will be student-directed. However, the classes that are mandatory exhibit a relatively normal spread of subjects.
My curriculum brings together elements of broad-fields design, reconstructionist design, and humanistic design. The curriculum is broad-field because it strives “to give a sweeping understanding of all content areas” as mentioned before (Ornstein & Hunkins 2014, 162). The reconstructionist elements of design fit together with the missionary mindset of Catholic education; the Christian is built up in knowledge and grace so that he or she can influence positive change in the world. The question of “what’s wrong with the world?” is one of the primary focuses of Christianity, and it needs to be answered by the Church’s social vision of a “right” world. Also, as opposed to a behaviorist approach to education, my curriculum uses the humanistic design model. To large extent I agree with Maslow’s stages of human need, and I want my curriculum to help students reach that highest stage of “self-actualization” that involves self-confidence in the world, simplicity and levity, awareness of problems, openness to novelty, empathy for the suffering, interpersonal sophistication, a preference for democratic decision-making, and a philosophical sense of humor (Ornstein & Hunkins 2014, 168). Such a human being is a gift to his or her family and friends, and a prolific contributor to social advancement.
As a source for implementation of subjects, in broad-field manner, I referred in part to my own high school curriculum at Brophy College Preparatory in Phoenix, AZ, recently ranked in the top 5 academic high schools in America (Brophy College Preparatory, 2014). I also drew upon the new core curriculum at Franciscan University of Steubenville (Franciscan University of Steubenville, 2014). As an additional source I looked at the seminar-based “Great Books” model of Thomas Aquinas College in Santa Paula, California (Thomas Aquinas College, 2014). Other important influences include the mixed-monastic model implemented in the religious Community of the Beatitudes and the rehabilitative school of life Cenacolo. For much of the humanistic and reconstructionist elements of my curriculum design I sifted through the work of John Taylor Gatto, Gene Odening and Mark Passio (Gatto 2012; Odening 2011; Passio 2013). From the teaching of Gatto, I specifically assimilated his “14 principles of elite education:” 1) a philosophy of human nature, 2) training in the active literacies (daily writing and frequent speeches), 3) incite into the major institutions in the world today, 4) exercise of courtesy and manners, 5) independent initiative, 6) physical teamwork, 7) theory of social access, 8) responsibility, 9) a self-maintenance routine, 10) familiarity with artistic masters, 11) the skill of accurate observation, 12) confrontation with personal fears, 13) philosophical sophistication of thought, and 14) the constant development and testing of one’s judgment.
All these parts of my curriculum are infused into a boarding-school environment. The advantages of this method are many and include: an increased sense of community among teachers and students and also between classmates, an immersive learning environment relatively free of worldly distractions, a six-day school week, and mandatory spiritual and physical disciplines. Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday are spent in a “normal” classroom-lecture environment, with only one class per day and three classes per quarter. Thursday, Friday, and Saturday are used for student-initiated studies/experiments and collaborative work. These days are loosely organized with faculty available for guidance and training. All students will be required to have something to present to teachers and students that they have been constructing in their free-work time. Teachers will assure that student projects are associated, not too restrictively, with class content, multiple disciplines, and will orchestrate integration with electives. Sunday will always be entirely open-ended. The school schedule will look roughly as show in the Powerpoint slides attached.
INSERT Explanation of year-long school structured to the time cycles of nature
The major theme of 21st century education has been the crusade for increased standardization, under the banner of global competition (Furda, 2014). The plain definition of “specific, measurable, concrete statements describing what all students must know and be able to do as a result of their schooling” is not an unreasonable request on the surface. The desire to see all children freely educated (and to have some guarantee that this is what occurs at school) is a good motivation. It helps teachers plan and implement instruction, to assess student development more accurately, and to measure the success of one school to another across communities or even across the globe (Furda, 2014). Nevertheless, standards should never exhaust the scope of an education.
The difficulty of standards is deciding what content is most essential and how specific the standards should be. It seems obvious enough that standards should be broader and broader as the district scale increases, because this allows the smaller communities to address and adapt to local needs without hindrance from bureaucrats who cannot possibly know what is better for small communities than the communities themselves (unless we are talking about basic human rights violations or some example of that nature). The danger of top-down micromanaging is that a panacea mentality will inevitably exclude more than it includes. Human beings are simply too unique to be ruled monarchically and that understanding used to be the genius of American democracy and free-market capitalism. Monopolization, whether of business, government, education, or all of thee above, is destructive to society. This understanding has to be an essential element of education itself if we are to avoid repeating history’s great mistakes.
Another important practice, related to standardization and educational scope is school-based accountability. While the value of data measurement is apparent because of its ability to increase efficiency and numerical accuracy, there remain elements of the human person that simply cannot be precisely measured (Furda, 2014). Oversight is an important part of life in society; it does not seem practical or healthy in this world to simply leave everyone to their own devices. That being said, true accountability has to flow in both directions. Such was the idea behind the “balance of powers” in the American constitution, and such is the rationale behind the “servants of the servants” hierarchal structure of the Christian Church. As history attests, it is all too easy for one party to assert its governing authority to the denigration of the other parties, and therefore, a certain distrust of centralized power is quite prudent. Following this train of thought, my school would balance achievement goals with growth measurements to allow an equal share of accountability between teachers and students.
I include standards and accountability in this discussion of my curriculum scope and design because so often in public education the two are interlaced. The scope is the standards and accountability is based upon teaching the full scope. To some degree accreditation will also parallel with standard and accountability measures. In my own curriculum I am limiting standardization to a very broad set of skills, not necessarily corresponding to modern subject area criterion. Science, mathematics, and literacy will be integrated into a holistic set of courses. Accountability and accreditation might have to rely solely on the Catholic system of oversight, which today is coming into conflict with the national system more and more, especially in higher education, but I am confident that I could at least engage the public system in a discussion about the value of my model and its practical effectiveness.
The breadth and depth of curriculum scope are usually divided into the domains of cognitive, affective, psychomotor, and moral (Ornstein & Hunkins 2014, 156). Although I am not opposed to these domains, I have divided my own curriculum based on the ancient model of the Trivium: Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric. Grammar is essentially the cognitive domain, the content of human knowledge, the symbols of our civilization. Logic combines the cognitive, affective, and moral/spiritual domains because it is the analysis and assimilation of information into one’s being and person. This stage is often bypassed or rushed in most curriculums, because students are taught to accept that the teacher is always right, to simply memorize information and move on. Taking the time to let truth be an emotional and spiritual encounter with reality is rarely considered, yet this is true learning that will be fun, memorable, and cherished, this is learning as an end in itself and not solely a means to a well-paying job. Rhetoric is also a combination of domains including the affective, moral, and psychomotor especially. Rhetoric is the ability to teach, persuade, and communicate the truths that one has appropriated. This involves training in all the active literacies of public writing, speaking, and performance. This element of the curriculum focuses on interpersonal relationships and social awareness.
The interesting thing for us is the composition of the Trivium, which preceded the Quadrivium and was the preliminary discipline for it. It consisted of three parts: Grammar, Dialectic, and Rhetoric, in that order. Now the first thing we notice is that two at any rate of these “subjects” are not what we should call “subjects” at all: they are only methods of dealing with subjects. Grammar, indeed, is a “subject” in the sense that it does mean definitely learning a language—at that period it meant learning Latin. But language itself is simply the medium in which thought is expressed. The whole of the Trivium was, in fact, intended to teach the pupil the proper use of the tools of learning, before he began to apply them to “subjects” at all. First, he learned a language; not just how to order a meal in a foreign language, but the structure of a language, and hence of language itself—what it was, how it was put together, and how it worked. Secondly, he learned how to use language; how to define his terms and make accurate statements; how to construct an argument and how to detect fallacies in argument.[4]
INSERT more from “The Lost Tools of Learning.”
In so far, as the scope of this curriculum has depth it is in these three areas of Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric; all courses are organized according to the development of the human person in these capacities. A rough comparison can be made between the Trivium and Kieran Egan’s three main ideas in curriculum design: Plato’s academic idea (Grammar), Rousseau’s development idea (Logic), and socialization (Rhetoric) (Ornstein & Hunkins 2014, 150-51). The breadth of study comes from an integrated approach to related disciplines. Almost every traditional subject is covered, but often not explored beyond a basic understanding. The impetus of the curriculum is knowledge as it relates directly to the human condition and the social milieu, and if a student seeks depth in a certain discipline beyond the fundamentals, it will likely have to involve a personal initiative. The curriculum is designed to accommodate such creative initiatives, which my curriculum will allot to their own space and time, and teachers will be available to support and guide student effort to this effect (there will be more discussion of this accommodation for student creativity later).
The first essential aspect of my curriculum design is the “horizontal organization” of curriculum components. The purpose of this method is to allow ideas to pass freely between classes so as to minimize the compartmentalization of subjects that are intermingled and interrelated in the real world. This is also meant to eliminate what John Taylor Gatto called teaching “confusion,” “the un-relating of everything,” so that students feel at liberty to engage their genuine enthusiasms regardless of what class they happen to be in (Gatto 1992, 2-4). Connected to horizontal organization is a whole-to-part sequence of learning (Ornstein & Hunkins 2014, 157). This arrangement also will help cultivate the relevance of specific disciplines to life as a whole.
I believe there is rich continuity between the four years of education in my high school curriculum. The basic skills of reading, writing, and arithmetic will be implemented in almost every class to varying degrees. At least half of the time students spend in study will be dedicated to integration and articulation of course material, both horizontally and vertically, so that grade levels as well as class subjects will blend together at certain times. Thursday, Friday, and Saturday are specifically set aside for this kind of curriculum integration. Although I am not really concerned with standardization across districts, I believe my students would be able to enter into another school without feeling confused or left behind. Balance of the curriculum will largely depend on the choices of the students because almost half of the learning will be student-directed. However, the classes that are mandatory exhibit a relatively normal spread of subjects.
My curriculum brings together elements of broad-fields design, reconstructionist design, and humanistic design. The curriculum is broad-field because it strives “to give a sweeping understanding of all content areas” as mentioned before (Ornstein & Hunkins 2014, 162). The reconstructionist elements of design fit together with the missionary mindset of Catholic education; the Christian is built up in knowledge and grace so that he or she can influence positive change in the world. The question of “what’s wrong with the world?” is one of the primary focuses of Christianity, and it needs to be answered by the Church’s social vision of a “right” world. Also, as opposed to a behaviorist approach to education, my curriculum uses the humanistic design model. To large extent I agree with Maslow’s stages of human need, and I want my curriculum to help students reach that highest stage of “self-actualization” that involves self-confidence in the world, simplicity and levity, awareness of problems, openness to novelty, empathy for the suffering, interpersonal sophistication, a preference for democratic decision-making, and a philosophical sense of humor (Ornstein & Hunkins 2014, 168). Such a human being is a gift to his or her family and friends, and a prolific contributor to social advancement.
As a source for implementation of subjects, in broad-field manner, I referred in part to my own high school curriculum at Brophy College Preparatory in Phoenix, AZ, recently ranked in the top 5 academic high schools in America (Brophy College Preparatory, 2014). I also drew upon the new core curriculum at Franciscan University of Steubenville (Franciscan University of Steubenville, 2014). As an additional source I looked at the seminar-based “Great Books” model of Thomas Aquinas College in Santa Paula, California (Thomas Aquinas College, 2014). Other important influences include the mixed-monastic model implemented in the religious Community of the Beatitudes and the rehabilitative school of life Cenacolo. For much of the humanistic and reconstructionist elements of my curriculum design I sifted through the work of John Taylor Gatto, Gene Odening and Mark Passio (Gatto 2012; Odening 2011; Passio 2013). From the teaching of Gatto, I specifically assimilated his “14 principles of elite education:” 1) a philosophy of human nature, 2) training in the active literacies (daily writing and frequent speeches), 3) incite into the major institutions in the world today, 4) exercise of courtesy and manners, 5) independent initiative, 6) physical teamwork, 7) theory of social access, 8) responsibility, 9) a self-maintenance routine, 10) familiarity with artistic masters, 11) the skill of accurate observation, 12) confrontation with personal fears, 13) philosophical sophistication of thought, and 14) the constant development and testing of one’s judgment.
All these parts of my curriculum are infused into a boarding-school environment. The advantages of this method are many and include: an increased sense of community among teachers and students and also between classmates, an immersive learning environment relatively free of worldly distractions, a six-day school week, and mandatory spiritual and physical disciplines. Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday are spent in a “normal” classroom-lecture environment, with only one class per day and three classes per quarter. Thursday, Friday, and Saturday are used for student-initiated studies/experiments and collaborative work. These days are loosely organized with faculty available for guidance and training. All students will be required to have something to present to teachers and students that they have been constructing in their free-work time. Teachers will assure that student projects are associated, not too restrictively, with class content, multiple disciplines, and will orchestrate integration with electives. Sunday will always be entirely open-ended. The school schedule will look roughly as show in the Powerpoint slides attached.
INSERT Explanation of year-long school structured to the time cycles of nature
|
|
EXAMPLE CURRICULUM
Courses, Electives, and Credits
My curriculum divides all credits evenly so that every day, Monday through Saturday, represents sixth courses per quarter, and thus, a total of 96 classes (24 per year) after four years. This seemingly large number of classes will be mitigated by the fact that only half of them are pre-established by the faculty, and all of them will involve continuous integration (no strict separation of subjects). Rather than feeling rushed along, students will (hopefully) be engaged in a congruous development of personal interests and ideas throughout their stay. For this reason, each of the 96 “classes” will be equally weighted.
The “core” curriculum is outlined below [integration (Int.) represents two days per week]:
1. Health (Grammar), Philosophy (Logic), Communication (Rhetoric)
1.1.
1.1.H. Human Biology (nutrition, aggressive vs. preventative medicine)
1.1.P. Metaphysics (absolutism and the limits of knowledge)
1.1.C. Great Books 1 (broadly themed classics)
1.1.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
1.1.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
1.2.
1.2.H. Human Physics (basic physics, power-breathing and stretching)
1.2.P. Human Person (phenomenology, existentialism, psychology, neurology)
1.2.C. Great Books 2 (human history, aesthetics)
1.2.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
1.2.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
1.3.
1.3.H. Practical Geometry (basic, practical uses for the self-sustaining trades)
1.3.P. Ethics (Christian as superior)
1.3.C. Great Books 3 (political)
1.3.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
1.3.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
1.4.
1.4.H. Anthropology (evolution of biology and culture)
1.4.P. World Religions (integrating Geography, different concepts of divinity)
1.4.C. Great Books 4 (ancient history)
1.4.Int. [Year-end student-teaching project]
1.4.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
2. History (Grammar), Sexuality (Logic), Public Presence (Rhetoric)
2.1.
2.1.Hi. History 1 (Ancient to Renaissance, politics and ideas)
2.1.Sx. Human Development (basic psychology of development)
2.1.PP. Speech (informative, persuasive, evocative)
2.1.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
2.1.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
2.2.
2.2.Hi. History 2 (Reformation to NWO, politics and ideas)
2.2.Sx. Gender Studies (psychology and theology of gender)
2.2.PP. Mannerisms (emotional intelligence and the value of formal behaviors)
2.2.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
2.2.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
2.3.
2.3.Hi. Scripture (Jewish history and Biblical studies)
2.3.Sx. Relationships (psychology of friendship and dating)
2.3.PP. Story-telling (entertaining and teaching through oral stories)
2.3.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
2.3.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
2.4.
2.4.Hi. Doctrine (development of Christian doctrine through the early Church)
2.4.Sx. Vocations (from celibacy to marriage)
2.4.PP. Social Improvisation (gaining access to diverse cultures and classes)
2.4.Int. [Year-end student-teaching project]
2.4.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
3. Modernity (Grammar), Discipline (Logic), Humility (Rhetoric)
3.1.
3.1.M. Quantum-worldview (basic mathematics, Fibonacci sequence, fractal-geometry)
3.1.D. Research (resourcefulness, watching new ideas)
3.1.Hu. Drama (introduction to the masters, performance arts)
3.1.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
3.1.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
3.2.
3.2.M. Naturalism (neo-paganism, pantheism and panentheism)
3.2.D. Ecology (the legitimate domination of nature, stewardship)
3.2.Hu. Drawing (introduction to the masters, painting or sketching)
3.2.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
3.2.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
3.3.
3.3.M Consequentialism (and other determinist world-views)
3.3.D. Christology (emphasizing human dignity and salvation through the Church)
3.3.Hu. Music (introduction to the masters, singing or instrumental options)
3.3.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
3.3.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
3.4.
3.4.M. Social-theory (sociology, alternative governments)
3.4.D. Trinity (the trinitarian model of society, solidarity and subsidiary)
3.4.Hu. Dance (introduction to the masters, formal and informal)
3.4.Int. [Year-end student-teaching project]
3.4.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
4. Authority (Grammar), Heroism (Logic), Charity (Rhetoric)
4.1.
4.1.A. Obedience (being centered in the Church > family > society, necessary authority)
4.1.He. Contemporary Conflicts (the landscape of modern institutions, diplomacy/war)
4.1.Ch. Citizenship (participating in democracy in America)
4.1.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
4.1.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
4.2.
4.2.A. Decision-making (testing judgment; free-will for the good)
4.2.He. Intervention (testing resistance to change; speaking-truth; correction as charity)
4.2.Ch. Apologetics (essential answers to )
4.2.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
4.2.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
4.3.
4.3.A. Adaptation (the practice of reform, technological advancement)
4.3.He. Discernment (praying about facts and decisions in the world)
4.3.Ch. Evangelization (the art of encountering Christ in the other)
4.3.Int. [At least 1 group project and 1 solo-project]
4.3.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
4.4.
4.4.A. Entrepreneurship (Accounting, Management)
4.4.He. Charisms of Gift (meeting felt needs with developed talents)
4.4.Ch. Romance (practicing spontaneity and renewal; life as nuptial union with God)
4.4.Int. [Public-teaching final-project]
4.4.App. [Final presentations and Time-logs]
On integration (Int.) and application (App.) days there will be a kind of free-association between classes and electives. Electives will function more like clubs than courses and will certainly not be confined to a traditional classroom setting. Four electives will be required: Gardening/Medicine, Martial Arts, Construction/Mechanics, and Survival skills. The reason these four electives will be required is founded on the principle of problem-centered curricula that seeks to prepare students for “real-world” needs. It is my view that personal or community gardening and herbal-medicine for supplementary sustenance is a practice that will soon be in high demand, and is already seeing a rapid comeback in the market. Martial arts will not be focused on combat training, but rather as the word indicates, on the art of the body, preparation for every range of possible bodily function. Basic construction and mechanical knowledge is necessary for obvious reasons, but is founded on the belief that the human home, and personal property more generally, is at the very heart of social stability, and there should not be an unneeded reliance upon others for basic maintenance. Survival skills may seem like an eccentric use of time in modern America, but because I believe our children should be other-focused, and concerned with human suffering, survival skills is a required elective that will train students to deal with emergencies of all variety, and will involve visits to hospitals, charities, and police departments in order to acquaint students with the emotions and realities of suffering. The other established electives will be Latin, Greek, Spanish, French, German, Team Sports, Dance, Music, Graphic Design, Debate, Politics, Theology, and Math & Sciences, but students will be free to start new electives according to their own initiatives, pending staff approval and the availability of simple oversight.
As a final note, the evaluation system for my curriculum would attempt to balance scientific and humanistic methods. Although the traditional knowledge-retention tests would have a place, more emphasis will be on assessing the forgotten values of “creativity, compassion, commitment to action, and enthusiasm” (Ornstein & Hunkins 2014, 241). While it is possible that standardized tests might be allowed in my school, they would not carry the same gravity as they do in most public systems today, so that improving the scores would be a low priority. I am uncertain how my students would rank on the global math and science scale at the end of their four years in my school, but they would definitely score well in language arts related skills. Most of the assessment will operate on a growth measure rooted in the personal relationships between administrators, teachers, and students. To create a “balance of power” and openness to curriculum improvement and professional development, I would like to see a mutual evaluation between administrators, teachers, and students, so that all three groups assess each other. These evaluations would be primarily for the sake of improving the school and would not be connected to any punitive actions or merit-based pay.
Courses, Electives, and Credits
My curriculum divides all credits evenly so that every day, Monday through Saturday, represents sixth courses per quarter, and thus, a total of 96 classes (24 per year) after four years. This seemingly large number of classes will be mitigated by the fact that only half of them are pre-established by the faculty, and all of them will involve continuous integration (no strict separation of subjects). Rather than feeling rushed along, students will (hopefully) be engaged in a congruous development of personal interests and ideas throughout their stay. For this reason, each of the 96 “classes” will be equally weighted.
The “core” curriculum is outlined below [integration (Int.) represents two days per week]:
1. Health (Grammar), Philosophy (Logic), Communication (Rhetoric)
1.1.
1.1.H. Human Biology (nutrition, aggressive vs. preventative medicine)
1.1.P. Metaphysics (absolutism and the limits of knowledge)
1.1.C. Great Books 1 (broadly themed classics)
1.1.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
1.1.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
1.2.
1.2.H. Human Physics (basic physics, power-breathing and stretching)
1.2.P. Human Person (phenomenology, existentialism, psychology, neurology)
1.2.C. Great Books 2 (human history, aesthetics)
1.2.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
1.2.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
1.3.
1.3.H. Practical Geometry (basic, practical uses for the self-sustaining trades)
1.3.P. Ethics (Christian as superior)
1.3.C. Great Books 3 (political)
1.3.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
1.3.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
1.4.
1.4.H. Anthropology (evolution of biology and culture)
1.4.P. World Religions (integrating Geography, different concepts of divinity)
1.4.C. Great Books 4 (ancient history)
1.4.Int. [Year-end student-teaching project]
1.4.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
2. History (Grammar), Sexuality (Logic), Public Presence (Rhetoric)
2.1.
2.1.Hi. History 1 (Ancient to Renaissance, politics and ideas)
2.1.Sx. Human Development (basic psychology of development)
2.1.PP. Speech (informative, persuasive, evocative)
2.1.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
2.1.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
2.2.
2.2.Hi. History 2 (Reformation to NWO, politics and ideas)
2.2.Sx. Gender Studies (psychology and theology of gender)
2.2.PP. Mannerisms (emotional intelligence and the value of formal behaviors)
2.2.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
2.2.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
2.3.
2.3.Hi. Scripture (Jewish history and Biblical studies)
2.3.Sx. Relationships (psychology of friendship and dating)
2.3.PP. Story-telling (entertaining and teaching through oral stories)
2.3.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
2.3.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
2.4.
2.4.Hi. Doctrine (development of Christian doctrine through the early Church)
2.4.Sx. Vocations (from celibacy to marriage)
2.4.PP. Social Improvisation (gaining access to diverse cultures and classes)
2.4.Int. [Year-end student-teaching project]
2.4.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
3. Modernity (Grammar), Discipline (Logic), Humility (Rhetoric)
3.1.
3.1.M. Quantum-worldview (basic mathematics, Fibonacci sequence, fractal-geometry)
3.1.D. Research (resourcefulness, watching new ideas)
3.1.Hu. Drama (introduction to the masters, performance arts)
3.1.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
3.1.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
3.2.
3.2.M. Naturalism (neo-paganism, pantheism and panentheism)
3.2.D. Ecology (the legitimate domination of nature, stewardship)
3.2.Hu. Drawing (introduction to the masters, painting or sketching)
3.2.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
3.2.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
3.3.
3.3.M Consequentialism (and other determinist world-views)
3.3.D. Christology (emphasizing human dignity and salvation through the Church)
3.3.Hu. Music (introduction to the masters, singing or instrumental options)
3.3.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
3.3.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
3.4.
3.4.M. Social-theory (sociology, alternative governments)
3.4.D. Trinity (the trinitarian model of society, solidarity and subsidiary)
3.4.Hu. Dance (introduction to the masters, formal and informal)
3.4.Int. [Year-end student-teaching project]
3.4.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
4. Authority (Grammar), Heroism (Logic), Charity (Rhetoric)
4.1.
4.1.A. Obedience (being centered in the Church > family > society, necessary authority)
4.1.He. Contemporary Conflicts (the landscape of modern institutions, diplomacy/war)
4.1.Ch. Citizenship (participating in democracy in America)
4.1.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
4.1.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
4.2.
4.2.A. Decision-making (testing judgment; free-will for the good)
4.2.He. Intervention (testing resistance to change; speaking-truth; correction as charity)
4.2.Ch. Apologetics (essential answers to )
4.2.Int. [At least 1 group project and at least 1 solo-project]
4.2.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
4.3.
4.3.A. Adaptation (the practice of reform, technological advancement)
4.3.He. Discernment (praying about facts and decisions in the world)
4.3.Ch. Evangelization (the art of encountering Christ in the other)
4.3.Int. [At least 1 group project and 1 solo-project]
4.3.App. [Presentations and Time-logs (continuation in later years allowed)]
4.4.
4.4.A. Entrepreneurship (Accounting, Management)
4.4.He. Charisms of Gift (meeting felt needs with developed talents)
4.4.Ch. Romance (practicing spontaneity and renewal; life as nuptial union with God)
4.4.Int. [Public-teaching final-project]
4.4.App. [Final presentations and Time-logs]
On integration (Int.) and application (App.) days there will be a kind of free-association between classes and electives. Electives will function more like clubs than courses and will certainly not be confined to a traditional classroom setting. Four electives will be required: Gardening/Medicine, Martial Arts, Construction/Mechanics, and Survival skills. The reason these four electives will be required is founded on the principle of problem-centered curricula that seeks to prepare students for “real-world” needs. It is my view that personal or community gardening and herbal-medicine for supplementary sustenance is a practice that will soon be in high demand, and is already seeing a rapid comeback in the market. Martial arts will not be focused on combat training, but rather as the word indicates, on the art of the body, preparation for every range of possible bodily function. Basic construction and mechanical knowledge is necessary for obvious reasons, but is founded on the belief that the human home, and personal property more generally, is at the very heart of social stability, and there should not be an unneeded reliance upon others for basic maintenance. Survival skills may seem like an eccentric use of time in modern America, but because I believe our children should be other-focused, and concerned with human suffering, survival skills is a required elective that will train students to deal with emergencies of all variety, and will involve visits to hospitals, charities, and police departments in order to acquaint students with the emotions and realities of suffering. The other established electives will be Latin, Greek, Spanish, French, German, Team Sports, Dance, Music, Graphic Design, Debate, Politics, Theology, and Math & Sciences, but students will be free to start new electives according to their own initiatives, pending staff approval and the availability of simple oversight.
As a final note, the evaluation system for my curriculum would attempt to balance scientific and humanistic methods. Although the traditional knowledge-retention tests would have a place, more emphasis will be on assessing the forgotten values of “creativity, compassion, commitment to action, and enthusiasm” (Ornstein & Hunkins 2014, 241). While it is possible that standardized tests might be allowed in my school, they would not carry the same gravity as they do in most public systems today, so that improving the scores would be a low priority. I am uncertain how my students would rank on the global math and science scale at the end of their four years in my school, but they would definitely score well in language arts related skills. Most of the assessment will operate on a growth measure rooted in the personal relationships between administrators, teachers, and students. To create a “balance of power” and openness to curriculum improvement and professional development, I would like to see a mutual evaluation between administrators, teachers, and students, so that all three groups assess each other. These evaluations would be primarily for the sake of improving the school and would not be connected to any punitive actions or merit-based pay.
|
|
References
Brophy College Preparatory. (2014). Curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.brophyprep.org/academics/curriculum/
Crain, W. C. (2011). Theories of development: concepts and applications (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Prentice Hall.
Furda, Mark. (2014). Curriculum. Class notes.
Franciscan University of Steubenville. (2014). Majors and programs: the core curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.franciscan.edu/CoreCurriculum/
Gatto, John. Taylor. (2012). 14 Principles of an elite boarding school curriculum: build a better you. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qArZMuqE4FY&index=8&list=FLdPRDUzxmfBeGkuz510V94Q
____________. Dumbing us down: the hidden curriculum of compulsory schooling. Philadelphia: New Society Publishers.
____________. 2009. Weapons of mass instruction : a schoolteacher's journey through the dark world of compulsory schooling / John Taylor Gatto. n.p.: Gabriola Island, BC : New Society Publishers, c2009.
Illich, Ivan. 1971. Deschooling society. n.p.: New York : Harper & Row, 1971.
Maritain, Jacques. 1943. Education at the crossroads, by Jacques Maritain. n.p.: New Haven, Yale University Press; London, H. Milford, Oxford University Press, 1943.
More, Thomas, Sir, Saint. 2008. Utopia / Thomas More. n.p.: Rockville, Md. : Arc Manor, 2008.
Newman, John Henry. 2014. The idea of a university / BL. John Henry Newman. n.p.: [Place of publication not identified] : Assumption Press, 2014.
Odening, Gene. (2011). The trivium method: what you should have been taught in school but weren’t. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AszYrxtzNQE&list=FLdPRDUzxmfBeGkuz510V94Q&index=3
Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2014). Curriculum: foundations, principles, and issues (6th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Passio, Mark. (2013). Natural law seminar: natural law the real law of attraction. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1pkJaNbzLU&list=FLdPRDUzxmfBeGkuz510V94Q&index=5
Paul, Ron, and Steve Coulter. 2013. The school revolution : a new answer for our broken education system / Ron Paul. n.p.: [New York] : Hachette Audio, [2013].
Shyamalan, M. Night. 2013. I got schooled : the unlikely story of how a moonlighting movie maker learned the five keys to closing America's education gap / M. Night Shyamalan. n.p.: New York, NY : Simon & Schuster, 2013.
Thomas Aquinas College. (2014). A liberating education: syllabus. Retrieved from http://www.thomasaquinas.edu/a-liberating-education/syllabus
http://www.beatitudes.us/
http://www.comunitacenacolo.org/
[1] Nature. Chapter VIII: Prospects.
[2] Lost Tools of Learning.
[3] Paraphrasing Mahatma Gandhi
[4] Dorothy L. Sayers. “The Lost Tools of Learning.”
Brophy College Preparatory. (2014). Curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.brophyprep.org/academics/curriculum/
Crain, W. C. (2011). Theories of development: concepts and applications (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Prentice Hall.
Furda, Mark. (2014). Curriculum. Class notes.
Franciscan University of Steubenville. (2014). Majors and programs: the core curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.franciscan.edu/CoreCurriculum/
Gatto, John. Taylor. (2012). 14 Principles of an elite boarding school curriculum: build a better you. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qArZMuqE4FY&index=8&list=FLdPRDUzxmfBeGkuz510V94Q
____________. Dumbing us down: the hidden curriculum of compulsory schooling. Philadelphia: New Society Publishers.
____________. 2009. Weapons of mass instruction : a schoolteacher's journey through the dark world of compulsory schooling / John Taylor Gatto. n.p.: Gabriola Island, BC : New Society Publishers, c2009.
Illich, Ivan. 1971. Deschooling society. n.p.: New York : Harper & Row, 1971.
Maritain, Jacques. 1943. Education at the crossroads, by Jacques Maritain. n.p.: New Haven, Yale University Press; London, H. Milford, Oxford University Press, 1943.
More, Thomas, Sir, Saint. 2008. Utopia / Thomas More. n.p.: Rockville, Md. : Arc Manor, 2008.
Newman, John Henry. 2014. The idea of a university / BL. John Henry Newman. n.p.: [Place of publication not identified] : Assumption Press, 2014.
Odening, Gene. (2011). The trivium method: what you should have been taught in school but weren’t. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AszYrxtzNQE&list=FLdPRDUzxmfBeGkuz510V94Q&index=3
Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2014). Curriculum: foundations, principles, and issues (6th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Passio, Mark. (2013). Natural law seminar: natural law the real law of attraction. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1pkJaNbzLU&list=FLdPRDUzxmfBeGkuz510V94Q&index=5
Paul, Ron, and Steve Coulter. 2013. The school revolution : a new answer for our broken education system / Ron Paul. n.p.: [New York] : Hachette Audio, [2013].
Shyamalan, M. Night. 2013. I got schooled : the unlikely story of how a moonlighting movie maker learned the five keys to closing America's education gap / M. Night Shyamalan. n.p.: New York, NY : Simon & Schuster, 2013.
Thomas Aquinas College. (2014). A liberating education: syllabus. Retrieved from http://www.thomasaquinas.edu/a-liberating-education/syllabus
http://www.beatitudes.us/
http://www.comunitacenacolo.org/
[1] Nature. Chapter VIII: Prospects.
[2] Lost Tools of Learning.
[3] Paraphrasing Mahatma Gandhi
[4] Dorothy L. Sayers. “The Lost Tools of Learning.”