More in what's becoming a series of posts about reading history books to children and trying to avoid ethnic/intercultural stereotyping, and fostering the right attitude towards the crimes of history as well as the misfortunes (not mistaking one for the other.)
In other words, the intersection of History and Morality -- for the homeschooler.
Extracts on History and on Theology from that classic of the homeschooler's canon, Dorothy Sayers' essay The Lost Tools of Learning ...
GRAMMAR STAGE
The grammar of History should consist, I think, of dates, events, anecdotes, and personalities. A set of dates to which one can peg all later historical knowledge is of enormous help later on in establishing the perspective of history. It does not greatly matter which dates: those of the Kings of England will do very nicely, provided that they are accompanied by pictures of costumes, architecture, and other everyday things, so that the mere mention of a date calls up a very strong visual presentment of the whole period.
...[T]heology is the mistress-science without which the whole educational structure will necessarily lack its final synthesis. ... At the grammatical age, therefore, we should become acquainted with the story of God and Man in outline--i.e., the Old and New Testaments presented as parts of a single narrative of Creation, Rebellion, and Redemption--and also with the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten Commandments. At this early stage, it does not matter nearly so much that these things should be fully understood as that they should be known and remembered.
LOGIC STAGE [Dialectic]
History, aided by a simple system of ethics derived from the grammar of theology, will provide much suitable material for discussion: Was the behavior of this statesman justified? What was the effect of such an enactment? What are the arguments for and against this or that form of government? We shall thus get an introduction to constitutional history--a subject meaningless to the young child, but of absorbing interest to those who are prepared to argue and debate.
Theology itself will furnish material for argument about conduct and morals; and should have its scope extended by a simplified course of dogmatic theology (i.e., the rational structure of Christian thought), clarifying the relations between the dogma and the ethics, and lending itself to that application of ethical principles in particular instances which is properly called casuistry....
OK, so here's what sounds right to me: Stick to fairly objective material for history in the grammar stage, things that can be memorized, free of opinion or too much analysis. Relate it to ethics and morality by classifying the behavior That is, when you come across some sort of behavior -- good or bad -- that seems to require comment, guide the student to consider: Was this action good or bad? If good, what virtue is exemplified? If bad, what sins or wrongs were committed? Or, if you like, what Commandments were broken?
In the dialectic stage -- roughly, middle school/early junior high -- that's when you can start talking about justification, proportionality, the dilemmas created by competing interests, things like that, and connections between events. That's when you can start evaluating how people enact different belief systems, and distinguish between enacting poorly a good ethical system, and enacting well a flawed ethical system.
Sayers doesn't say anything specific to history about the Rhetoric stage, but for completion, here it is...
RHETORIC STAGE
The doors of the storehouse of knowledge should now be thrown open for them to browse about as they will. The things once learned by rote will be seen in new contexts; the things once coldly analyzed can now be brought together to form a new synthesis; here and there a sudden insight will bring about that most exciting of all discoveries: the realization that truism is true.
It is difficult to map out any general syllabus for the study of Rhetoric: a certain freedom is demanded. In literature, appreciation should be again allowed to take the lead over destructive criticism; and self-expression in writing can go forward, with its tools now sharpened to cut clean and observe proportion. Any child who already shows a disposition to specialize should be given his head: for, when the use of the tools has been well and truly learned, it is available for any study whatever. It would be well, I think, that each pupil should learn to do one, or two, subjects really well, while taking a few classes in subsidiary subjects so as to keep his mind open to the inter-relations of all knowledge. Indeed, at this stage, our difficulty will be to keep "subjects" apart; for Dialectic will have shown all branches of learning to be inter-related, so Rhetoric will tend to show that all knowledge is one. To show this, and show why it is so, is pre-eminently the task of the mistress science.
...Generally speaking, whatsoever is mere apparatus may now be allowed to fall into the background, while the trained mind is gradually prepared for specialization in the "subjects" which, when the Trivium is completed, it should be perfectly will equipped to tackle on its own....
At the Rhetoric stage is perhaps where you can really dig into history through culture, trying to understand motivations from the perspectives of different peoples.
Comments