Afraid to Teach the Truth

Yesterday we talked of the some of the heroes of 9/11. We know they are men and women that we need to remember because they epitomize the best of us. The same is true in Britain, who (other than America) lost more people on 9/11 than any other country, and whose Queen had no hesitation in expressing her sympathy for America that day.

Nor was it coincidental that the US Marine Band played God Save the Queen at the British Embassy in the aftermath of 7/7. We are both societies that celebrate brave people, and freedom, mostly anyway.

This is from Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch.

This is what a society that has capitulated looks like. UK teachers should teach about 9/11 forthrightly, and explain to their students about the Islamic teachings that motivated it, and the nature and magnitude of the global jihad threat. Instead, they cower in fear of Muslim parents and students. That’s no way to win a war. And they won’t win it.

“Teachers ‘scared’ to teach lessons on 9/11 terror attack,” by Camilla Turner, Telegraph, September 9, 2017:

Some teachers are too scared to discuss 9/11 with their pupils as they fear a backlash from Muslim parents, a leading expert in counter-extremism education has warned.

Kamal Hanif OBE, who was appointed by the Government to turn around three schools at the heart of the “Trojan Horse” scandal, said that some teachers have a “misplaced” concern that they will cause offence if they raise 9/11 in the classroom.

He said that some teachers – particularly those who work in schools with a high proportion of Muslim students – see it as a contentious topic and shy away from teaching it.

“Teachers sometimes have a fear that this might be controversial,” he said.

“[They think] if we teach about this we might get Muslim parents objecting.”

Mr Hanif, who is executive principal of Waverley Education Foundation and has advised the Department for Education (DfE) on combating counter-extremism in schools, said that such views are misguided.

“There is a fear [among teachers] but it is not really grounded in anything,” he said.

Sadly those teachers may have a point, but still, I think it reflects very poorly on them. If that is all the respect that they have for their (which parallels our) history, well, I am pleased that they are not teaching my children but rather dismayed that they are teaching anyone’s.

If one is not proud of one’s heritage, how is it possible for one to teach it, and make no mistake, British teachers are rarely reticent about inserting their views into what is taught to children. The real problem is what those teachers believe. Do they really believe in British society, or are they part of the oft rumored ‘fifth column’? Well, I don’t know, American experience suggests that many of them may simply be poorly educated themselves. Far too often the adage, “Them that can do, them that can’t teach” has been proved right. If so, the Britain, like America, needs educational reform, not from the educational bureaucracy, or the government, but from some representative grouping of the people. Perhaps the parents, maybe?

That is one of the things that are becoming more and more obvious in our countries. Education has become out of touch and out of control of pretty much any responsible party, and the so-called reforms we have seen from the government have been mostly rearranging the deck chair on the Titanic. I think the Titanic may well prove a most appropriate metaphor for government education, oversized, poorly captained, and flooding uncontrollably, because of faulty navigation.

But the Brits, like Americans, are better than some of what we hear, and perhaps they will find a solution, I know many of them are looking.

Advertisements

The Lost Tools of Learning

dorothy

Yesterday in our post on what college is for, our newest subscriber, and paradoxically, an old, although very young, friend of Jessica and mine, Faith Williams, linked to an essay by Dorothy Sayers, presented at Oxford in 1947. It is far too good, and appropriate to remain buried in comments here.

Ms. Sayers takes as her subject The Trivium, the medieval equivalent of primary and secondary education. The source link provides this background on it.

Paul M. Bechtel writes that Dorothy Leigh Sayers (1893-1957) briefly entered on a teaching career after graduating from Oxford. She published a long and popular series of detective novels, translated the “Divine Comedy,” wrote a series of radio plays, and a defense of Christian belief.

During World War II, she lived in Oxford, and was a member of the group that included C.S. Lewis, Charles Williams, J.R.R. Tolkien, and Owen Barfield. By nature and preference, she was a scholar and an expert on the Middle Ages.

In this essay, Miss Sayers suggests that we presently teach our children everything but how to learn. She proposes that we adopt a suitably modified version of the medieval scholastic curriculum for methodological reasons.

Get yourself a large mug of coffee or tea, this is a quite long essay, but there is not a spare word in it. You will learn much about what we have lost, and how we are eating our seed corn, and have been from the time of the Renaissance. Do enjoy it, but even more add it and its arguments to your arsenal in the continuing fight to improve education.

That I, whose experience of teaching is extremely limited, should presume to discuss education is a matter, surely, that calls for no apology. It is a kind of behavior to which the present climate of opinion is wholly favorable. Bishops air their opinions about economics; biologists, about metaphysics; inorganic chemists, about theology; the most irrelevant people are appointed to highly technical ministries; and plain, blunt men write to the papers to say that Epstein and Picasso do not know how to draw. Up to a certain point, and provided the criticisms are made with a reasonable modesty, these activities are commendable. Too much specialization is not a good thing. There is also one excellent reason why the veriest amateur may feel entitled to have an opinion about education. For if we are not all professional teachers, we have all, at some time or another, been taught. Even if we learnt nothing–perhaps in particular if we learnt nothing–our contribution to the discussion may have a potential value.

However, it is in the highest degree improbable that the reforms I propose will ever be carried into effect. Neither the parents, nor the training colleges, nor the examination boards, nor the boards of governors, nor the ministries of education, would countenance them for a moment. For they amount to this: that if we are to produce a society of educated people, fitted to preserve their intellectual freedom amid the complex pressures of our modern society, we must turn back the wheel of progress some four or five hundred years, to the point at which education began to lose sight of its true object, towards the end of the Middle Ages.

Before you dismiss me with the appropriate phrase–reactionary, romantic, mediaevalist, laudator temporis acti (praiser of times past), or whatever tag comes first to hand–I will ask you to consider one or two miscellaneous questions that hang about at the back, perhaps, of all our minds, and occasionally pop out to worry us.

via The Lost Tools of Learning

If you are, as I am, a proponent of the classical methods of instruction, and even more if, as I have, you have found that being able to learn, is an universal skill, not reserved for individual ‘subjects’, here then, is your armory, from whence issued, those phenomena of the late medieval and early modern age, the peripatetic man of knowledge.

Most of you know, I am an electrician, and a very technical one, if you’ve read here long, you also know that I love history, which sounds paradoxical, but it isn’t, I long ago learned that anything I learned about pretty much anything helps me in my work, and my professional work, helps me to understand almost everything else better. As I have often said, when I was young it was widely recognized that music and mathematics were closely related, and you may not know but a proper design of anything is defined in engineering as elegant. That goes to the heart of this discussion, in my opinion.

Arm yourself, for the lists, for there are many in our world, who stand to lose from a properly educated citizenry, and only that citizenry who will gain.

Thank you, again, Faith.

%d bloggers like this: