A Call to Trivialize Education
John Howard says a national school curriculum is common sense, according to a report by ABC News. Whether defined by the states, or federally, I advocate that all Australian curricula place an emphasis on “trivial” matters, thus creating an electorate that detects misdirections by dissembling politicians and commentators.
I’m using the word trivial using it’s original sense, meaning "of the Trivium", the traditional study of grammar, dialectic (logic) and rhetoric. I’d also argue for more emphasis on the rest of the Seven Liberal Arts, the "quadrivial" studies of number: of itself (arithmetic); in space (geometry); in time (music); in time and space (astronomy). Ok, maybe we don’t need a population that knows the names of the stars, but imagine a society where everyone understood our place in the kosmos, and can think critically about the spin placed on the flurry of numbers that determine social and economic policy.
A trivial education would put people on an equal terms with Howard, whose mastery of the trivial disciples allows him to speak a truth, while ensuring that most listeners believe he is saying the opposite.
For example, when asked a few months ago about the possibilities of a recession, Howard responded "Anyone who talks of a recession in the current economic climate has rocks in his head." The general population took this as meaning that Howard saw no threat to Australia’s economy. Those with some appreciation of macro-economics simply thought Howard was stupid, or lying. However, with an understanding of the role of sentiment on the economy, a deeper reading shows that Howard was absolutely correct: Anyone raising valid concerns about our precarious economy (seeing past the mere GDP), will undermine the consumer overconfidence holding it together, bring on the inevitable recession sooner and harder, damaging themselves in the process, and that is a stupid thing to do.
Yes, expect Howard to argue against "trivializing education". A well-educated population might not be fooled by the rhetoric of the social regressives.
I wonder whether this post depends on a trivial or non-trivial understanding of the term "trivial"? I do know John Howard would enjoy such precise ambiguity.
Stories the server thinks are related:
Posted: by David Bath February 2nd, 2007 under Society.
Comments: 5
Comments
Comment from Kieran
Time: February 2, 2007, 5:38 pm
You might be interested to note that there is already a focus in later years highschooling on something that is fashionable termed “issues”. Basically this calls on students to deconstruct persuasive writing (newspaper articles, songs, opinions pieces, letters, etc), evaluate the “issue”, as well as form and present an opinion.
I’m personally more inclined to agree with Ivan Illich, that it’s not the content of the curriculum that is impovrishing our society, but the manner in which it is conveyed (ie. the hidden curriculum).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Illich
http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~ira/illich/
Comment from David
Time: February 2, 2007, 8:03 pm
Kieran - Comment 1
I welcome secondary training in dialectic, but "issues" writers say what they mean (i.e. pro-or-con a proposition). Hidden curricula have long been used successfully by both left and right.
However the Trivium (or even the 1967 Grade 2 version of training in parsing) gives an even more critical skill: to discern when people might say what the don’t mean.
Grammatical skills are very important when scanning values-laden statements, which are rich in the subjunctives that make accurate paraphrasis difficult, misinterpretation easy.
Howard is good at "dog-whistling", but he benefits most from his rare genius at creating what I have termed "precise ambiguity", or described in a linguist’s blog as "referential opacity and felicity conditions for speech acts and other issues in philosophy of language"
Howard uses these skills to keep his face clear of the "I’m lying" micro-expressions that alert the public to a lying politician. Only a "micro-smug" remains, a hint that I should start re-parsing furiously.
Comment from Kieran
Time: February 2, 2007, 8:36 pm
One of the things Illich argued was that the relationship between the teacher and the student plays a large role in what they learn.
The teachers position as a figure of authority undermines the development of critical thinking, because we see the figure of authority as the source of knowledge and truth.
Take this on to later in life, and one can see how the relationship between the citizen and the state is similiar. The citizens unquestioning attitude towards the state is fueled by attitudes learnt from the classroom, namely we are applying to the state the same attitude we held towards our teachers.
I recently came out of the secondary education system highly dissillusioned with both the institution and my teachers. Hence when I encountered Illich’s ideas in University they found such fertile footing.
However, that said, I am not so sure about Illich’s prescription for society. Namely, decentralizing education and the de-establishing education. Focusing instead upon learning driven by the students life long desire for information.
In light of this you’ll understand why I am skeptical about a renewed focus on classical education. I’m nostalgic about an education system based on trivium, something which admittidly I’ve never experienced in a formal setting. But this said, how effective will an effort to teach people these core skills of the aware citizen be within an education system based upon the authority of a teacher over students?
Comment from David
Time: February 3, 2007, 1:36 am
You are correct of course. A medieval curriculum in the modern era is inappropriate, a "classical" education a useful luxury. However, the subject matter of the Trivium, and the skills to deal with them provide the foundation of all other efforts to develop a civil society. Without an ability to examine with rigor the artful spin of politicians and pundits, to deconstruct their skillful rhetoric, it is difficult to subject their propositions to analysis, and the man-in-the-street is too easily bored or fooled.
I don’t expect most VCE students to know a gerund from a genitive, but at least they could be left with an understanding of adverbs, pronouns and the skills recognize ambiguous constructions that people of my vintage covered during mid-primary government education.
Of course, we all hope for evolving teaching methods, an environment with good books, the occasional inspiring teacher, and the time to explore areas outside the set curriculum.
Back to my point.
It seems socially regressive or authoritarian forces flourish where thought is constrained by impoverished language. Orwell understood this double-plus good, and showed us a world controlled by means of limited vocabulary.
But language can also be restricted by syntactic de-skilling. Indeed, this is easier (and less obvious) than controlling the vocabulary: you don’t have to burn books - you just have to do nothing, and wait until the average person cannot work through a nuanced sentence or one with subsidiary clauses.
It’s hard to be optimistic about the synthesis of Snow’s Two Cultures and the consequent evolution of a better society when both are being discarded for more "practical" qualifications so easily purchased from the degree-factories.
Consider how few in our new Dis-Englightenment can work through the works of the Enlightenment. Is it any wonder the freedoms advanced then are receding now? Is it surprising how many accept the notion of a perpetual war to bring peace?
I’m waiting for some post-modern genius to release an updated 1984, that uses a language impoverished by castrating the grammar rather than the lexicon.
The typical sentence of Gibbon has more words than some blog posts, yet almost each of his paragraphs is richer in ideas and cautionary wisdom than many modern books. Which is more likely to be read?
quod erat demonstrandum
Pingback from The Dead Roo - » A couple of new regular features at the Dead Roo…
Time: February 4, 2007, 2:18 pm
[…] by David’s call for education to pay more attention to the core trivium (grammar, logic and rhetoric), I’ll be doing a regular review/hatchet-job […]
Write a comment