This really got me thinking about my role as a mother homeschooling her kids, and as a teacher. And your point about the mantra about the good and the beautiful really resonated with me, and made me think about how virtue is modeled through the curriculum, and specifically beyond the curriculum. I think so much of how I try to teach my kids virtue isn't only through the explicit curriculum, but how I model my actions in the classroom (for my students), and how I live life in front of my kids and the questions I ask them. In the classroom, virtue is taught in part through curriculum (here, for example, I think about how I teach about Nazi Germany in my German classes, memory, and responsibility as we engage in contemporary German culture). There are certain texts from the era that I don't think I can effectively teach high schoolers. But just as important as the curriculum is how I model behavior for my students. If the classroom is a space for mutual respect, students see not only how to treat one another, but how someone who has a position of authority (even if limited) treats those who do not enjoy the same privileges within the community. Students learn how to disagree respectfully, they learn the limits of appropriate discourse, and they learn how to speak with those who do have some power over aspects of their daily lives. For my kids, so much of our literary discussion goes off on tangents. "Why do you think Percy did that?" "What would you have done? Why?" become really fruitful discussions that help my kids learn to be thoughtful about their reflections and, I hope, empathetic. Of course, all of this teaching of virtue has a limit, and that limit is not unlike teaching content: an instructor can model or show, but it's up to the student to decide if they want to pay attention to the lesson, and if they want to apply the lesson to future actions. Further, if they find that the lesson came too soon, it's my consistency in modeling and the choice to return to very similar discussions that result in the opportunity for that formation to stick. My kids are (hopefully) learning to be empathetic based off of how they hear me speak and see me act, and with consistency, hopefully they learn to be thoughtful individuals.

Sometimes I think you are more Charlotte Mason than you realize! In my understanding of Classical Ed, the teachers are steering the students toward a specific understanding whenever they encounter literature or art, especially in the younger formative years. Mason believed that art has its own power and children should be free to encounter it with as little interference from teachers as possible.

What are your thoughts on classical Christian education as a pipeline to white supremacy? I think you think that a classical education includes classic books from all over the world, but anecdotally (in my neck of the woods) there are lots of defenders of classical education that think white, Western European civilization is the best and the only one worth defending. How do you keep the idea of classical education while vigorously pushing back against all forms of white supremacy?

My kids were in a “classical” school until it was no longer a good fit for our family. Then we made the giant leap to homeschool (where we found and devoured your books). Now we are in a new phase of life with 1 in college and 1 in high school. I no longer have melt downs on if I made the right decision by pulling them from school. I have the advantage of seeing both sides (maybe even 3 sides because I was the parent and then a para inside the classical classroom before jumping into homeschool, plus the kids’ vantage). I remember the banners that lined the hallways “it is easier to build strong children, then repair broken men” (Fredrick Douglass). We had end of the year ceremonies for most virtuous student, character, etc. My kids even now still quote their old admins/teachers. The message was clearly taught and well received. But the school changed leadership and politics made the school unrecognizable forcing teachers to put down the classics and stop teaching the big questions to guide students to find the answers themselves. Rather quickly, the staff quit and years later the turnover rate remains insane. We had a few golden years there, but now my judgement is clouded with most public education because no one is reforming education for the students (which requires leaving politics of curriculum/testing scores/budget/ at the door). All of this to say, I enjoy your thoughts and debates on this page. I think the only thing that will help improve education (whether home or public) is open dialogue like you encourage.

I’m not surprised that I find myself absolutely in agreement with you and all that’s written here. Character is a complex part of one’s personality and cannot be taught through teachers and books, and yet that’s what we find in classical schools then and now I imagine. They call it character, but it’s something else. It’s a preparation of sorts for a certain life that the child does not get to choose. It is men “with character” who fight wars, after all. Children are who they are, and they will find their way one way or another.

Doubtful about how much any of our character formation actually makes a huge difference as a parent? That’s a pretty bleak perspective. I don’t agree that children are born to be a particular person and there’s little we can do to help them be who they ought to be. If what you say is true, then I see education as a waste of time.

I remember reading in some child development book that a parent could inculcate character-related stuff through age 10 or so, after that the instruction was less durable. Personality, on the other hand, was cast in the womb, and no amount of parenting will change that.

We can certainly model good character and habits, and we can encourage good habits (and allow them to feel the consequences when they don't- eg failing a quiz because they didn't finish their reading)- but I agree, explicit character instruction is not effective.

I mean, as a second-gen homeschooler, I have seen a lot of people grow up. I know homeschoolers who grew into thoughtful, virtuous, admirable people, and I know homeschoolers who made so many terrible life choices. I know public schoolers who grew into thoughtful, virtuous, admirable people, and I know public schoolers who made terrible life choices. Same for private schoolers. The heavily character-based Christian educations do not in my experience correlate that closely to intended outcomes. You make the best educational choice you can for the kids you actually have.

"What is classical education?" I rarely hear this question at my workplace, a local curriculum store, as most of our new-to-homeschool customers are just wanting something a bit better than what they were getting at the public school. But when I am asked to describe classical education by a new homeschooler, my answer is something like, "Well, there's a lot of Latin, and sometimes Greek. And there's a lot of literature, mostly what we'd consider classic literature. Stuff gets memorized, like math facts and grammar rules, but classical education isn’t the only educational philosophy that values memorization. Some commonly used techniques in classical education are copywork, dictation, narration, memorization, recitation, all of which can used across any and all subjects. So there's flexibility, efficiency, and the ability to customize easily. Just use the elements that work for you." And if they want more details, I simply refer them to my favorite classical curriculum guide, WTM. It never occurred to me that character development was considered a feature of classical education. Isn’t character development something that parents do, regardless of educational philosophy?

You state some of my own difficulties with teaching literature and with classical education over the years. I'm out of the game now, but years ago the elderly lit teacher before me would not teach the high schoolers The Lottery, nor would she teach them Poe. Long before classical ed trends, she was avoiding the ugly, evil, and false. We do students a disservice when we present a false world where all humans act well. I believe strongly that young people's characters are formed while we teach them. But it's in the perverse nature of teenagers to refuse to be formed as adults intend they be formed, and instead to evaluate and choose for themselves. I always felt it was my job to present all the information and to stretch their brains beyond the limited assessment they entered my classroom with. At some level, as Christians, the "character formation" must be the Holy Spirit's job, not ours.

Reminiscing on my own student days, I feel adults did have an impact on my character. Not through what they teach in the classroom, but through their behavior, and who they “were” as persons. They (and the books I’ve read) have also sometimes provided ideas that inspired me in various areas, including character growth. I’m sure you have more influence over your children than you think. Also, I’m sure you realize that while reading books or hearing lectures about virtue obviously does not automatically make the recipient virtuous, it can spark and inspire.

Truly, our children are separate from us as individuals literally from the moment the umbilical cord is cut. None of us has control over the choices they ultimately make. What I have not seen in this discussion or comments is mention of The Good Book, the Holy Bible. Perhaps this discussion is meant to be strictly focused on secular classical education which, in that case, clears things up for me. However, Christian parents have a clear mandate from God in how to train up a child and how to help them to be well-taught to recognize fools and foolish ways. Do Christian parents do this perfectly? Of course, no, they do not. Regardless, we are taught to try. Guarantees? Nope. But we ought to die trying.

Thank you for the honesty here. I can attest from painful experience that immersing students in a setting in which they’re repeatedly told how much superior their education is to everyone else’s does NOT lend itself to the formation of humility, for one thing.

I am in the place of life, family, homeschool where I'm having trouble not laughing at phrases like, "too much power to teachers" and "character training/ forming"... My homeschool class was discussing "what defines civilization?" I clearly am lacking on power or character training because my precious classically taught 12 year old boys dogmatically declared that civilization is when you get to use a shared wiping sponge. I am proud they stored that bit of knowledge for 4 years, since we last studied Ancient Rome, but there is very little I can actually do to form them!

Interesting points. So, what would you do with CS Lewis’s statement that the purpose of education is to cultivate a child’s loves: to teach a child to love what he ought to love and hate what he ought to hate? I certainly think my now-grown sons were influenced by stories of virtuous people in history and the ideals of thinkers and doers, like Washington, or Teddy Roosevelt, complex though they were (we don’t hero worship but we can learn and be inspired, right?) So, would you say there is no value in aiming for the heart as we teach our young children grammar, history, literature, etc.? I understand what you’re saying here but it also kind of seems like you’re saying as parents, directly attempting to incentivize and instill virtuous character in a classical education is irrelevant to the task of education and moreover, actually you’re saying it’s a waste of time because it’s ineffective? I would genuinely like a response to this. Not playing gotcha 😂 - but I do feel like if I educate my children at home, and give the better part of my 20s 30s and 40s to it as I have, it’s not really worth it just to teach them to be “a complete human” or whatever. I want to capture their imagination and appetite for that which is worthy of their lives, I’m not interested in uneducated reprobates, you know what I mean?

I agree with all your points, and I think #3 fixes your issue with #2 - I don’t want to give that much power to teachers either, but I disagree that you need a teacher in order to receive the impact from the book. All learning is really learning that we do ourselves, which takes the weight off of the teacher to teach interpretation, and gives instead the responsibility to facilitate access. This is related to why I have enjoyed my homeschooling years- you can’t be exposed to the material without learning yourself. I am constantly learning with my “students.” Does #3 matter? Yes, because students will become like their teachers. ❤️

We have three children who all have minds of their own and went through regular school and college and I am continually amazed at their understanding, courage, determination and character. Thank you for you thoughts love them. Reggie Diane

I ran my homeschool with the theme, “In defense of western civilization.” I wanted to push back against public schools in recent years who teach with an overarching theme of, “America and Western Civilization are bad, have always been bad, and will always be bad.”

Interesting. I think kids listen in church more than their fidgetting indicates, and they certainly imitate the people around them! The caught more than taught bit is true (and scary). Sometimes the parent's place when their kids are taking deep discussion classes is to ask antagonistic questions over supper, then help their kids be respectful as they disagree in essays and class discussions. The requests to help make their essays polite while disagreeing almost always happen when the parent is (or would like to be) falling asleep at bed time!

You’re my favorite ❤️

Wild applause. Thank you, and I agree about character formation. My now adults all seem okay (despite… waves arms…), and I too like them very much. But… I remember reading a gazillion years ago that kids seem to inherit their intelligence from their mom in part because she is usually the earliest and largest influence on their vocabulary. Mom’s vocabulary is deep and wide? Et voila, so are the offsprings’. Of course it’s not quite that straightforward, but when I later found the kids playing “board meeting” in the church basement while the mamas were all setting up for a non-profit fundraiser? Something about that struck like a bolt of lightning: they were watching in ways I hadn’t anticipated. During the homeschooling years, I appreciated the opportunity to use “the classics” partly as morality tales (humans are gratifyingly universally messy), and partly as contemplation of beautiful language. Even so, I’ve sort of concluded that the greatest benefits to my children were in the relationships fleshed out between us all during the persistent, extended, wrastling of Difficult Things. (What some call Type 2 fun.) I think that a good teacher, let’s say in public high school, gets to introduce a book or concept, but the exploration of that takes place within the student’s wider experience, and hopefully, within a well-constructed and supportive family framework. It seems inordinately difficult for that process to unfold inside that classroom in such a way as to lend itself to my ideas about “character building.” Thank you for this, Susan. And cheers to these delightful grown-ups of ours.

I have been thinking about this question for the last 24 hours. It's a good question. Especially from someone who has seen plenty of kids grow into adults. I love classical Christian education and have said very similar things about virtue and character formation when I explain why I love classical education to others. Here's my main takeaway so far: Our kids imitate more than we realize. Classical education is for the *family*, not just for the child. We (as Christian parents) are worse and less virtuous than we want to admit, and the virtues are for all of us to keep in front of us, not just the kids. The focus on character and virtue does (and has- for me!) had an impact on how we spend our days at home and how we live. I don't expect that direct character-formation training has much effect in making changes to what is essentially personality type. But I do think that classical education can mold a family's habits/rituals/accepted norms/etc in a way that can be a safeguard for them, character-wise. We're not molding kids into a specific thing we hope they will be; but we're giving them a taste for virtue and a distaste for vice that hopefully will serve them well as they make decisions (big and small) as they age. And I have seen evidence in adults that this is a real and fruitful thing to try to give a kid when they're young! Still love this question and will probably be thinking about it for awhile!

Susan Wise Bauer have you read Climbing Parnassus by Simmons? Although I have reservations about some of his views, I always think about his stance on the role of the humanities in society when this conversation arises. Although both of my kids pursued degrees outside of the humanities, their classical education roots have served them well. My electrical engineering kid laments the lack of historical and literary understanding by many of his public schooled peers. We are all grateful to have tackled the big questions early in their journey to becoming tax payers.

Debi Martin