Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts

Thursday, May 19, 2011

HSC 1937 style

While going through some papers the other day I cam across the Leaving Certificate (the equivalent of the HSC) Latin Exam from 1937. It's interesting to see what has and hasn't changed. Back then there was some Livy to translate and comment upon, some Horace as well for the 'Higher Standard' (i.e. extension), and a longish translation from English into Latin for everyone.

Horace is still set as an extension text (Lyric Poetry last year, Satire this year), and Livy will be next year's year 12 prose text as well. And hardly anyone does prose composition any more (it is an option in the Extension exam - most years it is attempted by at most one or two candidates out of a hundred or so).

The most remarkable thing is, I think, that a three hour paper can fit on three A5 pages!

Friday, March 19, 2010

Reasons to Learn Latin; #3974

[The respective mayors of Sydney and London; Julius Caesar (left) and Boris Johnson]

A couple of articles for some light reading of the weekend. Firstly an entertaining and insightful piece by Boris Johnson (mayor of London) on the value of learning Latin. Here's a taste:

...there are times when a minister says something so maddening, so death-defyingly stupid, that I am glad not to be in the same room in case I should reach out, grab his tie, and end what is left of my political career with one almighty head-butt.

Such were my feelings on reading Mr Ed Balls on the subject of teaching Latin in schools...
(Thanks to Rogue Classicism for bringing this to my attention)

And closer to home Charles Purcell (of Chaser fame) imagines what Caesar would be like as benevolent dictator of Sydney.

If Julius Caesar was in charge of Sydney, we wouldn't still be arguing whether to build a cross circus maximus or integrated rail/ferry/chariot link. No longer would the scrolls and papyruses of the day have headlines like "Welcome to SnailRail", "Ferry system slow than horse-drawn buggies", "ancient Egyptians got to work quicker than Sydneysiders - study". Caesar would declare: "I came, I saw, I ordered the building of an integrated transport network." He would order construction immediately and no senator would dare object, lest he be sent to govern the barbarian provinces of Gaul (aka Mount Druitt).

The benign dictator would announce that Sydney's much-needed second airport would finally be built - in Mosman.
Don't miss the article's comments if you're a Terry Pratchett fan.

(Thanks to Lilian for bringing this to my attention)

Friday, November 07, 2008

Education at Rome

My year 8 class has recently been looking at what school would have been like in Roman times. Here is what my Oxford Companion to Classical Literature has to say about education at Rome:

"Education at Rome in the very earliest republican times was very limited in extent, and chiefly given in the home. There was a good training in religious cults, duty to the state, modesty of demeanour, and physical activity; an education calculated to produce frugal, hardy, patriotic industrious citizens, but intellectually narrow. Children were shown the imagines or busts of their ancestors and taught to read the inscriptions recounting their exploits. They were taken to hear the encomiums on great Romans who died. They learnt by heart the Twelve Tables of the law. We read that old Cato himself taught his son his letters, the laws of Rome, and bodily exercises.

"Later as a result of contact with Hellenic civilization, education was entrusted to a tutor or a school; the teachers were often slaves or freedmen, frequently Greeks, and the pupils were taught, among other things, sententiae or moral maxims, besides reading, writing, and calculation. A characteristic figure, introduced under Greek influences, was the paedogogus, a slave who attended the boy to school, waited for him there, and brought him home; he taught the boy to speak Greek and looked after his manners and morals.

"There was also the higher school of the grammaticus, where the teaching was literary, in Latin and Greek, language, grammar, metre, style and the subject-matter of poems. Under Greek influences music and dancing were introduced into education; these, and especially the latter, were not looked upon with favour by conservative Romans. The only physical training that they approved of was such as would fit young men for war.

"After a Roman youth had assumed the toga virilis, he might be attached as a pupil to an advocate or sent to receive training in oratory under a rhetorician. He might also study philosophy at Rome, or go for this purpose to Athens, Rhodes or some other Greek educational centre; Caesar, Cicero, Octavian, Horace, all went abroad for study. The effect of all the rhetorical education of later republican and early imperial times is seen even in Virgil, more in Ovid, and especially in Lucan and Seneca.

"It may be added that it was not until the middle of the 1st c. A.D. that the State attempted to any control of education; Vespasian instituted State professorships at Rome in Greek and Latin rhetoric, and Hadrian founded a chair of Greek rhetoric at Athens. The salary assigned by Vespasian to the professors was 100,000 sesterces, equal to the salaries in the second grade of the Roman civil service."


Tacitus gives us a good example of a traditional, conservative Roman attitude towards education, as practised by a range of famous Romans:

Nam pridem suus cuique filius, ex casta parente natus, non in cellula emptae nutricis, sed gremio ac sinu matris educabatur. Sic Corneliam Gracchorum, sic Aureliam Caesaris, sic Atiam Augusti matrem praefuisse educationibus ac produxisse principes liberos accepimus.

For in the good old days, every son, born from a chaste mother, was brought up not in the chamber of a hired nurse, but in the lap and bosom of his mother. We are told that Cornelia, the mother of the Gracchi was in charge of their upbringing in this way, and in the same way Aurelia the mother of Caesar and Atia of Augustus, and that they produced children who became great leaders.
(Tacitus, Dialogus 28)

Thursday, August 28, 2008

sine doctrina animus

ut ager quamvis fertilis sine cultura fructuosus esse non potest, sic sine doctrina animus

Just as a field, however fertile, is not able to be fruitful without cultivation, so it is for the mind without instruction.

Cicero, Tusculan Disputations, II.5.13

[My attention was drawn to this quote by the article The Romans Gave us more than Just Latin; the Latin source comes from LatinLanguage.us.]

Friday, June 13, 2008

Classicum

Last week a copy of Classicum- the journal of the Classical Languages Teachers’ Association- arrived in the post. There were a couple of interesting articles, including one by Dexter Hoyos (who taught me Latin at Sydney Uni), on why we translate from Latin to English. It seems an odd question, but his point is that focussing on translating Latin makes us overlook the skills we need to read and understand Latin. Here are a few excerpts:

Why do we translate Latin into English in our Latin courses? The answer might seem incontestable: to enable students to practise their grasp of Latin grammar, and teachers to have a ready check on their progress. Another question is perhaps more pertinent: why does translating from Latin (and, in some courses, into Latin) persist right through secondary school study and then university study too? And most pertinent of all, why do we in effect kiss goodbye – from the very beginning – to all hope that our students will understand what Romans wrote without making it into English?…

[Translating] does have its uses. We cannot teach elementary Latin without it to clarify points of grammar and meaning. Even at advanced levels it can be useful for explaining some points to students. Translating well is also intellectually satisfying in itself. Even so, as an element of Latin study it is like using a teaspoon to eat a meal: at best , useful but not ideal; at worst, a misdirection of effort…

There are two critical drawbacks to this [approach]. The first is obvious: if to understand one has to translate, how much of one’s life is needed for ‘reading’ the twelve books of the Aeneid or twenty-nine of Cicero’s extant speeches (not to mention all fifty-eight)? ... The second drawback is still more damaging. Translating-to-understand encourages learners to assume… that the proper medium for understanding and absorbing Roman literature is English… This is killing to any in-depth comprehension of a text…

The full article was originally published in CPL online and can be down loaded here. Professor Hoyos is also the author of the book Latin, how to read it fluently : a practical manual (read more about this book here- you'll need to scroll down the page a bit to find the relevant info).

Monday, October 29, 2007

magister bonus


Sumat igitur ante omnia parentis erga discipulos suos animum, ac succedere se in eorum locum a quibus sibi liberi tradantur existimet. Ipse nec habeat vitia nec ferat. Non austeritas eius tristis, non dissoluta sit comitas, ne inde odium, hinc contemptus oriatur.

And so the teacher should adopt before all things the attitude of a parent towards his pupils, and he should judge that he is acting in the place of those from whom the children were handed over to him. He himself should not have faults, nor allow them. He should be strict but not harsh, courteous but not lax, lest the former breed hatred, the latter contempt.

Plurimus ei de honesto ac bono sermo sit: nam quo saepius monuerit, hoc rarius castigabit; minime iracundus, nec tamen eorum quae emendanda erunt dissimulator, simplex in docendo, patiens laboris, adsiduus potius quam inmodicus.

He should have much to say about honesty and goodness: for one who is often warned is rarely scolded. He should be slow to anger, but neither should he ignore things which require correction. He should be clear in his teaching, patient in his work, consistent, rather than extreme.

Interrogantibus libenter respondeat, non interrogantes percontetur ultro. In laudandis discipulorum dictionibus nec malignus nec effusus, quia res altera taedium laboris, altera securitatem parit.

He should answer questions freely, he should ask questions of those who are silent. When praising the speeches of his pupils, he should be neither grudging nor effusive, for the one will lead to weariness of the work, the other produces over-confidence.

In emendando quae corrigenda erunt non acerbus minimeque contumeliosus; nam id quidem multos a proposito studendi fugat, quod quidam sic obiurgant quasi oderint... quem discipuli, si modo recte sunt instituti, et amant et verentur. Vix autem dici potest quanto libentius imitemur eos quibus favemus.

In marking the things which are to be corrected he should not be bitter or abusive, for those who scold in such a way as to imply hatred, drive many from the objective of their study... If his pupils are rightly instructed, he should be the object of their affection and respect. And it is scarcely possible to say how much more gladly we imitate those whom we like.

Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria II.4-8

Thursday, October 26, 2006

paterfamilias


Two things i've been reading recently have talked about fathers in Rome.

The Roman father had absolute power - the power of life and death - over his entire family: this is what paterfamilias meant. It was an absolute power over his legitimate children, over his slaves and his wife... In Rome, so long as one's father were alive, no one could act as fully independant, in particular in financial matters and in contract law. An adult son could own property only be means of a peculium, a sort of trust guaranteed by his father, but revocable at any point. While his father was alive a son could not make a will, nor inherit property in his own right. That son might be a magistrate, even consul, but if his father were alive he was still under his patria potestas.

[Watson, p275]

This attitude can be seen in the following declamation:

A father was accused of treason. One of his sons deserted, the other fought heroically. The father asks the hero to ask for suppression of his trial as his reward. The hero asks instead for impunity for his brother, and represents his father at the trial. The father is acquitted and disowns his son.

My son may say: ‘I am brave.’ What good is that to me if you defy your father all the more? He says: ‘The choice is mine.’ Is anything really yours while I am alive? I sent you into battle: it is my courage, my law, my choice. I should not be asking too much if I said: ‘Help with my friend’s trial.’ What if I said ‘Help with your father’s’?

‘But suppression is dishonourable,’ he says. What is that to you? I am the judge of my own situation. ‘But it was superfluous,’ he says. ‘You were innocent.’ So what? Had I asked you because I was guilty? I was afraid of the luck of trials. Conspiracy is hard even on the innocent.

‘But I chose my brother’s life,’ he says. You preferred someone else to me, a guilty man to an innocent, a convicted man, who certainly deserved death, to an accused man. If you pity your kin, at least help those on whom the judge has not yet decided. ‘What then?’ he says. ‘Should he have died?’ If you’re asking me, I am busy, I don’t hear; if you ask our country, he is a deserter. In itself it would be a cruel thing for your brother to die, but compared to me it is tolerable.

‘I saved my brother,’ he says. And now your father disowns you. He owes you gratitude for a good deed, I punishment for a wrong. But what if you were not doing it out of respect, but to kill me? ‘I represented you,’ he says. If you had not, would you have been merely disowned?

[pseudo-Quintilian, #375]

Monday, October 16, 2006

The Lesser Declamations of Pseudo-Quintilian


Over the school holidays (apart from having a great time in New Zealand) I had the pleasure of borrowing a book from the library which had never been borrowed before. It’s been a really interesting read- though I can understand why The Lesser Declamations II of pseudo-Quintilian isn’t exactly racing off the shelf.

These declamations are essentially speeches given in response to fanciful legal scenarios, used to train young Romans in what was considered to be the most important skill for a Roman statesman- the art of Oratory. The complexity of the cases imagined was designed to test the skills of aspiring lawyers and politicians, and often students were required to present both the for and against arguments of the same case.

Here are a few examples of the kinds of scenarios treated by pseudo-Quintilian which my year 8 class will be looking at over the next week.


#317- A general challenged by his son.

qui provocatus ab hoste non pugnaverit, capite puniatur.

filius imperatoris ad hostes transfugit. provocavit patrem. ille non descendit in certamen solus, sed acie commissa vicit hostes: in quo proelio et filius eius cecidit. accusatur quod provocatus ab hoste non pugnaverit.

Whoever is challenged by the enemy, but does not fight, must be put to death.

A commander’s son deserted to the enemy. He challenged his father. The latter did not come down to fight alone, but joined battle and defeated the enemy; in the same battle his son was also killed. He is prosecuted because he did not fight when he was challenged by the enemy.


# 321- Brother and doctor accuse one another of poisoning.

fratres consortes inimici esse coeperunt. diviserunt. alter ex his medicum instituit heredem. postea redierunt in gratiam.

is qui medicum amicum habebat, cum cenasset apud fratrem et domum redisset, dixit suspicari se venenum sibi datum. respondit medicus potionem se daturum remedii, et dedit; qua epota ille discessit. invicem se reos deferunt veneficii frater et medicus.

Brothers sharing an inheritance became enemies. They went their separate ways. One of them made a doctor his heir. Later they were reconciled.

The one who had the doctor as his friend, after dining with his brother and returning home, said he suspected that he had been given poison. The doctor replied that he would give him a potion as an antidote and did so. Having drunk it the man died. The brother and the doctor accuse each other of poisoning.


#332- The wills of a rich man and a poor man.

pauper et dives amici erant. dives testamento alium amicum omnium bonorum instituit heredem, pauperi iussit dari id quod ille sibi testamento daret.

apertae sunt tabulae pauperis. omnium bonorum instituerat heredem. petit totam divitis hereditatem. ille qui scriptus est heres vult dare tantum quantum in censum habet pauper.

A poor man and a rich man were friends. In his will the rich man made another friend heir to all his possessions, but ordered that the poor man be given what he gave in his will to himself.

The poor man’s tablets were opened. He had made the rich man heir to all his possessions. He claims the rich man’s whole inheritance. The man who was named heir wishes to give as much as the poor man has in his census.