Song/chant methodology (Classical Sources Message Board)

Song/chant methodology
Author: Carol in CT	June 6, 1999 at 21:34:55

I must confess that I'm experiencing some ambivalence
toward song/chants. I belong to an email loop that involves
users of Sonlight curriculum who are interested in a
classical approach and it seems that the instant recipe for
making anything classical is to add a few
chants/songs/drills, e.g., Shurley Grammar, Lyrical
Science, Geography Songs, Veritas Press History and Bible
cards, Saxon Math, etc. (This is not making any comment on
the quality of these programs--they all seem to be good in
and of themselves; well, in Saxon's case, maybe serviceable
would be the word, considering some of the discussion in
the ccs digest)

Why is this considered classical methodology?

Other classical education proponents do not dwell on this
type of methodology: Laura Berquist in Designing Your Own
Classical Curriculum discusses the importance of memorizing
various groups of facts but doesn't make a point of
searching out curricula that uses songs/chants. The
Bluedorns of Trivium Pursuit do not emphasize it either.

Granted, songs and chants are useful and fun and kids learn
them easily but to say that doing that makes one's approach
to education classical seems to be an oversimplication. It
also seems to put us at risk of reducing the wonderful,
exciting world of the liberal arts to a string of facts
that can be put to jingles. Frankly, I shudder at the
thought of history flashcards!

Any other opinions on this?

Follow Ups

Here's a simple idea... KC 06:35:09 6/17/1999 (0)
One more thing... Angela (VA) 18:56:22 6/16/1999 (0)
Using songs to learn Angela (VA) 18:45:29 6/16/1999 (0)
Carol, no "bites" yet!, and it's such a good question! NT KC 13:21:48 6/14/1999 (0)

Post Followup

Name:
E-Mail:
Subject:
> I must confess that I'm experiencing some ambivalence > toward song/chants. I belong to an email loop that involves > users of Sonlight curriculum who are interested in a > classical approach and it seems that the instant recipe for > making anything classical is to add a few > chants/songs/drills, e.g., Shurley Grammar, Lyrical > Science, Geography Songs, Veritas Press History and Bible > cards, Saxon Math, etc. (This is not making any comment on > the quality of these programs--they all seem to be good in > and of themselves; well, in Saxon's case, maybe serviceable > would be the word, considering some of the discussion in > the ccs digest) > > Why is this considered classical methodology? > > Other classical education proponents do not dwell on this > type of methodology: Laura Berquist in Designing Your Own > Classical Curriculum discusses the importance of memorizing > various groups of facts but doesn't make a point of > searching out curricula that uses songs/chants. The > Bluedorns of Trivium Pursuit do not emphasize it either. > > Granted, songs and chants are useful and fun and kids learn > them easily but to say that doing that makes one's approach > to education classical seems to be an oversimplication. It > also seems to put us at risk of reducing the wonderful, > exciting world of the liberal arts to a string of facts > that can be put to jingles. Frankly, I shudder at the > thought of history flashcards! > > Any other opinions on this?
Optional link URL:
Link title:
Optional image URL: