Yesterday I read a post SOMEWHERE - don’t ask where, because today I can’t seem to find the discussion again - about the return to vocational education. It was on a message board, not on a blog. And I don’t even really remember exactly what the original post said, it was something to do with a school in some state changing their ‘paths’ in high school, calling one ‘vocational’ but it was still really too ‘college prep’ for most vocational students. (Not to bore you with all these details, but I was kinda hoping one of those few someones who actually read this blog might have run across it somewhere and clue me in as to its whereabouts!) I FOUND IT!
Why should a high school student eager and able to be California’s best carpenter have to struggle with “Hamlet” to get his diploma? And as the value of bachelor’s and master’s degrees gets less and less in the job market, what will happen when everyone has a Ph.D., and no one can clear clogged drains?
The problem isn’t with HAMLET. The problem is making students take a TEST on Hamlet. The problem is making students WRITE lengthy, uninteresting papers about Hamlet.
The problem is that traditional high schools are all about getting from point A to point B. And while students are on the journey they must be provoked and sorted, so that only a special few are allowed to continue to point C. (Well, it used to be precious few, now it seems that EVERYONE must be ‘prepared’ to move ahead to point C.) So much provoking and sorting doesn’t leave much time for just ENJOYING literature.
Charlotte Mason wrote in A Philosophy of Education,
It is the man who has read and thought on many subjects who is, with the necessary training, the most capable whether in handling tools, drawing plans, or keeping books.
I notice that she doesn’t add, ‘and has been tested on’ those many subjects.
AND
From Ambleside Online: (Since they say it so much better than I.)
Although Charlotte Mason had nothing against students learning skills they might be able to use at a job, she was very much against vocational training when it replaced a broad, mind-enhancing education for the personal growth and enrichment of the student.
Why not education for “personal growth and enrichment”?
There is a point here. YES! I think those carpenters need to read Hamlet. They need to think about Hamlet. But they need to be allowed to do that on their own terms and without the pressure of a test and a grade at the end.
And the lesson is for myself. Maybe Rooster is going to be a carpenter. If he goes to college he is going to start at community college, it’s not like I have to verify his course of study to Harvard. Yes, I want him to read Hamlet. And many other classics. On his terms. Without worry that there will be a test or a paper at the end. Just a kick in my own pants to remind me to lay off… what we are doing is working. Maybe not working just like the public schools, but isn’t one of the reasons why they aren’t there in the first place because I don’t like the way they work?
(And this in NO way means I’m going to lay off his writing instruction. I just believe that at this point, it needs to be separate from his literature studies so as not to steal the joy from reading the classics.)