Via Facilis

Could it be?
No way. But it is!
My god, look who finally bothered to show up!
It's Dr. G!
drg in the written word, if not the flesh.
The one, the only, the infamous!
And where have you been lately?

Well, let me begin by stating the obvious:
A long time between posts.
Three months.
A lot has happened.

In that time, I have taught at Chapin, a private school for girls in New York City.
Teaching lets me tap into my own reserves of imagination and creativity.
And to replenish those resources.
I never want to be one of those folks who go around talking about teaching, then have to sheepishly admit that that teaching is a distant memory.

They are great girls at Chapin.
They know when they're working hard;
they don't kid themselves when they're hardly working.
They candidly, refreshingly take responsibility when that's the case.
Chapin girls are willing, able, and keen on going deeper, broader, and forward into the material.
When these girls have a teacher who sparks that interest, the spark ignites, unleashing a conflagration which is their passion to learn.

They restored my faith in those privileged to be at a private school in the heart of the City.

I thank them for that from the depths of my heart, from the underpinnings of my soul.

How prosaic!
I didn't know that souls even had underpinnings.
But surely you jest.
No, I don't.
Surely then you're overstating the case.
No, I'm not.

And stop calling me Shirley.

Meanwhile, I've been to the UK twice.
I've seen what our programs - cagse's programs - do over there.
I've met with the head teachers of the schools wherein our programs are ensconsced, and the teachers in charge of literacy, English, etc.
And I've met with the real powers that be:
the kids themselves.

They're not just doing well.
They're doing good.

Don't adjust your screen.
That is not a grammatical error.
"good" here is the substantive form of the adjective.
The adjective raised to the status of Noun.
And yeah, that's a fragment.
Anybody want to edit it?
No?
Good.

So why the UK? Why London?
We have a number of schools there using my text Via Facilis: Mastering Latin and Understanding Language.

Caveat Lector! (Let the Reader Beware!)
Read the whole title of that text, not just the first four words.
Understanding Language is the key.

But the students taking these classes must be older, right?

No.

The students are 9 and 10 years old.

They are from every cultural background imaginable.

No need to mention "diversity" across the Pond.
It would be redundant.

I had the privilege of teaching one of the classes.
What enthusiasm! What desire to learn! What eagerness of spirit!

Every type of kid imaginable was in that class. The eager beaver who wants to be not simply noticed, but heard.
The inspector type.
A veritable successor to Maggie Thatcher.
A future head of MI5.

They love learning Latin.
But it's not just that.

These 9 and 10 year olds love understanding language.

Even those who don't speak or know English well are enthralled with the class.
It is an eye-opening experience to have these young people look me in the eye and tell me clearly that a verb is constructed of three pieces:

base
thematic vowel
personal ending

That if you change the ending, you change who's speaking, who's the actor of the verb.
That the base tells you the basic meaning.
That the thematic vowel tells you the class of verb you have in front of you.

Their confidence in their understanding is palpable.

These students see Latin and how cagse teaches it for what it truely is: a powerful tool that will get them wherever they need to go, and allow them to thrive wherever they happen to find themselves.

This is not simply writing postcards to people long dead.
That's a quaint exercise.
It's also a gimmick.
Kids recognize such cheap gimmickry for what it is.
And an approach employing such "methodology" is ultimately condescending.

Condescension is Poison.

It is the one thing teachers cannot exhibit or harbor in any remote way when teaching kids - not if they entertain any shred of hope that their students will learn effectively.

cagse doesn't do that.
our belief is that students can learn the complicated and complex - provided that it is dealt with head on.

cagse specializes in making the complex and complicated accessible.
We have no patience for dumbing down concepts.
We simplify in the mathematical sense.

We of cagse ACCESSIFY.

We know it's working.
Remarked the head of one of our participant schools,
"We've already seen a positive impact on literacy."
This at a school where whole months are dedicated to the familiarization of the students to each of their constituent languages.
There have been forty of these "get to know your chum's language months" so far.

And the program is only seven weeks old.
That's one class per week.

The effect is that powerful.

drg

So, you say you want your very own education consultancy?

Actually, I didn't. Well, I didn't like the title "education consultancy."
We're talking about changing not simply the fabric of education, but the manner in which that fabric is woven.
"education consultancy" seems too self-satisfied, too self-important, too self-absorbed for so critical a mission.

But my colleague and executive director, the great, the inimitable, the unmatched, the Master Team Builder Par Excellence, Dr. Annette Kramer, pointed out the obvious to me:

"People won't have any idea what we do if we don't say that's what we do."
Or words to that effect.

She had a point.

So we're an education consultancy.

That answers that question.

But why the UK?

Long-winded, blog answer for that.

Annette had been to the UK on many different missions before taking up her position with cagse.

She knew many people in education very well.
Everyone from the ground up.
She'll talk to anybody any time any place.
And she has this amazing knack for meeting people in key positions, usually on a plane, a train, or some such similar fast-moving vehicle.
I think it's genetic, but that's not exactly my field.

In short, Annette knows everybody, and those people she doesn't know, she will soon meet.

Meanwhile, the UK government has imposed literacy requirements on its schools. Schools must meet the requirements which are laid out in somewhat complex form on the UK government web site.

But schools are at a loss as to how to meet those requirements.
cagse is not.

But why didn't you start cagse in the US?
Well, technically we did.
We're a registered LLC.

But.
And this is a big BUT.

The US is a bizarre place to introduce Latin and Storytelling.
Half the schools have Latin and think their Latin programs are superior;
the other half don't think it's worth their time.
Yes, there is a movement to replace existing Latin programs going on, but as yet it is not at a critical stage.

You could ask two different people the same question, "How's Latin in this country?"
and get two completely different answers: "Nobody does that anymore" or "I didn't know schools still did that here" vs. "Latin is making a comeback." Don't bother consulting the New York Times (a rag if ever there was one) on the matter. They come up with figures for those who take Latin from the years in the '50s and 2005. Not the best comparison.
But hey, nobody ever accused the Times of getting a story right.

But the US does like stuff that comes from the UK.
Cambridge and Oxford bring "instant credibility" and "name recognition".

So. We prove ourselves in the UK.
We show that the program for Latin and, coming soon, the program for Storytelling, help state schools more than meet key expectations for literacy.
Combine that with the fact that my Executive Director is a dynamo, a five foot juggernaut who can move not simply mountains, but whole mountain ranges.
Add in a touch of US knowitallness.
Gently mix in US academic insecurity regarding UK programs.

And Voila!

Go to the UK.

If you can make it there, you'll make it anywhere.

Wait, isn't that what Frankie said about New York!?

Yep.

New York's Next.

drg

Key Stage Literacy 3 (kids 11-14 years old) of the UK's National Curriculum speaks to the critical role the learning of Modern Languages should play in the education of its young people. Here is their first paragraph:

“Languages are part of the cultural richness of our society and the world in which we live and work. Learning languages contributes to mutual understanding, a sense of global citizenship and personal fulfilment. Pupils learn to appreciate different countries, cultures, communities and people. By making comparisons, they gain insight into their own culture and society. The ability to understand and communicate in another language is a lifelong skill for education, employment and leisure in this country and throughout the world."

I will not dwell on my disbelief, my utter chagrin at the polyanna, geo-political naivite which produced these painstakingly p.c. pronouncements, other than to say that the magnitude of recent events (set into motion by these same different countries, cultures, communities, and people) we are asked to ignore is truly awe-inspiring.

Instead, I will focus on Two Things.

Thing One:
there is a fundamental disconnect between what the Government would like its young people to do - learn a foreign language - and what the reality is in state schools.
Such a requirement is redundant given the current constituency of state schools.

As I wrote in a recent post, cagse has its Latin program in close to twenty state schools, including one which designates each new month as a particular language month. Its aim is to represent every one of the native languages its students speak.

They are on their 41st Language Month.
And counting.

These are kids who come from every background and country imaginable.
They are already learning a foreign language...
even as they speak:
English.

They do not need to learn how to "appreciate" other countries, communities, people, and cultures; they are themselves representatives from those very places. They know this stuff firsthand.

What these students require is a scientific methodology to understand language whereby they can harness their linguistic skills at will.

Having these students - who do all their schoolwork and classwork in a foreign language to begin with - learn yet another modern foreign language is redundant at best. At worst, it is a waste of their time.

Thing Two:
What this paragraph misses is something truly fundamental in connection with learning a foreign language.

When students learn a new language, they come face to face with a hard reality:
Other languages express things differently from their own.
That two different languages can and usually do get to "meaning" in two different ways.

Those differences are not stupid, or dumb, though students may initially think they are.

They are what they are.

Students have no choice but to accept these linguistic differences if they wish to learn the language.

Acceptance leads to Understanding.

What is the acceptance of someone or thing for what they are, not what they ought ("ought"????) to be?

Tolerance.

Thus, a powerful trinity of thought:

Tolerance
leads to
Acceptance
leads to
Understanding

This is the compelling reason for young people to learn a language beyond their own.

Ah, but which one?

"That, Detective, is the Right Question."

Tomorrow: Paragraph 2.

drg

Last week - directly below this post, actually - I commented on the sentiments expressed by the authors of The National Curriculum regarding modern languages.

This is That Post, Part II, Paragraph II of Modern Languages:

"Learning languages gives pupils opportunities to develop their listening, speaking, reading and writing skills and to express themselves with increasing confidence, independence and creativity. They explore the similarities and differences between other languages and English and learn how language can be manipulated and applied in different ways. The development of communication skills, together with understanding of the structure of language, lay the foundations for future study of other languages and support the development of literacy skills in a pupil's own language.

I'm a Latinist/Classicist/linguist.
I agree with the sentiments of this paragraph wholeheartedly.
The question is how to effectively achieve its purposes.

Here is my response:
Learn Latin.

"But Latin isn't a modern language."
"True."
"It's also dead."
"Also true."
"So?"
"So, word one: Frisp."
"Frisp? Never heard of it."'
"French
Romanian
Italian
Spanish
Portuguese

Which are all recognized languages of the European Union.

We also refer to them as Romance Languages."
"So?"
"So the structural basis of these languages is Latin.
Learn Latin, and you exponentially increase your capability of learning a Romance Language."

"Okay, but what about the other EU languages? Latin can't help with those, can it?"
"Actually, it can."
"How?"
"Many of the languages of the EU are inflected."
"Infected?"
"No, 'inflected'. A language that is inflected establishes meaning by changing the forms of its words, particularly nouns, pronouns, adjectives, and verbs. The form of the words shows their function in a sentence."
"And?"
"And Latin is also inflected.
Learn Latin, and you exponentially increase your capability of learning a non-Romance language."

"But it's still not spoken, right?"
"Right."
"So how does that address the "listening, speaking, reading, and writing" part of the paragraph?"

"In terms of listening and speaking, it doesn't."
"But isn't that a problem?"
"Actually, it's a solution in conundrum's clothing."
"You'd better explain."
"Sure. When students learn a foreign language, it often happens that their proficiencies - speaking and listening - mask their deficiencies - reading and writing."
"So they can't read or write."
"And how would you rate the literacy of someone who can't read or write?"
"Low?"
"There is a technical term for it. A person who cannot read or write his own language is 'illiterate'."
"So much for national literacy."
"You said it."
"But how does Latin help deal with this problem?"
"Which problem?"
"The literacy problem."
"With which language?"
"Better start with foreign languages."
"Fair enough. You have to ask why students find reading and writing difficult in the first instance."
"Okay, consider it asked."
"They find reading and writing difficult because they have done very little of those exercises with their own language. To really read and to really write, you have to more than inherently know a language; you have to understand it. You have to understand how words relate, how they fit together to make sentences, ideas, concepts, etc. You have to have done time, so to speak, working with the nuts and bolts of language - its grammar, its syntax, its vocabulary. To write it out long-hand, type it, chant it, play with it. Become friends with it. Writing is the tactile recording of literacy. Reading allows you to see how others go through that experience. Literacy is, in effect, the expertise with which you deliberately handle your own language. So if you are going to master another language, you will have to spend some serious time with your own."

"But why Latin then?"
"Because when students learn Latin, they cannot hide behind a good ear and convincing accent. They must focus on the other two aspects: reading and writing. Latin forces them to account for everything. That, in turn, forces them to account for everything in English. Which reenforces what they are doing with language in Latin. It becomes a benevolent cycle, feeding on itself."

"So, you're saying that Latin is good because it addresses reading and writing almost exclusively?"
"Basically, yes."
"So it makes students hyper-aware of their choice of words, and why they are saying what they are saying?"
"Yes. It turns a potentially passive exercise into an active one. It requires that they develop critical tools of linguistic discernment."

"And the student who takes Latin will be ready to study a modern language in all aspects?"
"Yes. They will be happy to be speaking a foreign language, but it will not be so completely different in terms of vocabulary or structure. They will have already been there. They will be jazzed up about going forward in their study of language."

"And this same student will have done a tremendous amount with the building blocks of English, too? All that grammar and vocabulary?"
"Yes."

"But doesn't that take care of two major concerns of the government?"
"What do you mean?"
"Well, there's the national literacy recommendations, and there's the modern language entitlement, too."

"Right."

"Wouldn't a serious study of Latin help students, particularly at Key Stage 2, make significant strides in both these areas?"

"Let me get this straight. You're saying that you think that the study of Latin at...?"
"Key Stage 2."
"What's that mean in American English?"
"Ages 7 to 11."
"Oh, right. Okay, so you're saying that you think that the study of Latin at Key Stage 2 will facilitate both a growing mastery of English and set the stage for the thorough learning of Modern Languages? As required by the UK government?"

"Yes."

"I couldn't have said it any better. Thank you."

"You're welcome."

drg