- Spencer, Tom 1996. The Classical Model: Trivium 101. In Repairing the Ruins: The Classical and Christian Challenge to Modern Education, ed. Douglas J. Wilson, 89-97. Moscow, ID: Canon Press. (All rights reserved. Reproduced by permission from Canon Press.

DURING MY FIRST OR SECOND YEAR AT LOGOS SCHOOL, WE WERE still trying to develop our  secondary program. As part of this effort, we invited the secondary parents to an information meeting to discuss future plans. During the presentation the speakers had discussed the philosophy and purpose of “classical education.” Afterwards we took questions from parents. One parent asked, “What does classical education mean?” Several attempts were made to respond to this question. Trying to answer the question made us realize that the board, administration, and staff of Logos School had not yet agreed upon a common definition of classical education. We obviously needed to figure out exactly what we meant. Developing a common understanding of this phrase has been a long process. The first source that we used to develop our philosophy of classical education was Dorothy Sayers’s essay, The Lost Tools of Learning.

Last summer, I completed work on my master’s degree in education administration at the University of Idaho. Over the past several years, the obvious disregard and disdain for history on the part of professional educators has intrigued me. So many individuals involved in public and private education never even stop to ask the question, “How did our forefathers address the educational needs of their children?” Today, some individual will come up with some “innovative” educational idea (usually an old idea dressed up in new clothes). This will probably be a theoretical model. Schools across the country will then implement the idea, never asking questions about the previous success of the new theory, method, or technique. Is this not truly amazing? Think about it. Would you consider undergoing a new medical treatment that had not been carefully researched? Would you be willing to purchase a new product that producers had not tested? Why are we so willing to experiment on our children? After four or five years, educators will realize that the new theory is not working. Meanwhile, they have shortchanged our children. We cannot give children their wasted years of education back.

A recent example of these phenomena was described in a newsletter from the Sing, Spell, Read, and Write corporation.† The editors reported that after several years of experimenting with whole language instruction, Delaine Easton, California State Superintendent of Schools admitted, “We have made an honest mistake.” She based this conclusion on years of poor tests scores. Oh well, they had only been using these methods for the past ten years!

We act as if the past is irrelevant to the problems facing us today. Our society is changing. Information is exploding. Demographics are shifting. We could not possibly learn anything from those who were in the business of education one hundred years ago, or even fifty years ago.

Is there any other field where people are so quick to jump on the bandwagon before asking questions about demonstrated success? Educators do not apply or even consider the scientific method. This is unfortunate and foolish. Certainly the society that we live in today is different from that of our grandparents, and even our parents. Yet has the process of learning changed? Have students changed in the way that they learn? Have the characteristics of children changed so significantly that ways that were successful in the past are irrelevant today? I do not believe so.

We have much to learn and we must start by asking the right questions. A study of history reveals the existence of highly literate societies. How did they educate their children? What topics were considered important? How did they teach their children how to learn? As the Teacher said, “Whatever is has already been, and what will be has been before; and God will call the past to account” (Ecclesiastes 3:15). We should start our educational design by looking at what we have tried before, sorting out the wheat from the chaff. We should look for evidence of successful education, great works in art and literature, enduring music. Then, we should look to see how the process of education was completed. Perhaps we can learn from those who have addressed these questions in previous centuries.

Thankfully, some individuals believe that we can learn from history. In the 1940’s, Dorothy Sayers found the educational system in England lacking. In an address delivered at Oxford University, Miss Sayers suggested looking back in time for a solution to the educational problems of her day. This essay is an attempt to summarize the basic tenets of classical methodology (as we have defined it).

The basic building block for the structure of classical education is the Trivium. The Trivium literally means “the threefold way.” It includes three different subjects that were studied in preparation for the Quadrivium. The composition of the Trivium has varied at different times in history. For our purposes, the Trivium consists of the three subjects, grammar, logic, and rhetoric. No matter the particular subjects composing the Trivium, one thing has not changed: The purpose of the Trivium has always been to prepare students for the Quadrivium. To implement the classical structure successfully, teachers must understand that the students are being prepared for their future educational pursuits. In other words, the measure of the successful education goes beyond the present. The students are given the tools of learning during the Trivium; they apply these tools as they study subjects later in the Quadrivium.

The first stage is the grammar stage. Grammar of course, refers to the study of language. Our use of the word grammar has applications beyond English classes. Each subject that we study has a grammar associated with it. There is a grammar associated with Bible, science, foreign language, history, and math. The grammar is “the fundamental rules of each subject.” The grammar of history consists of important events, persons, dates, and locations. The grammar of math consists of such things as multiplication and division tables. When children study grammar according to the classical structure, they are learning the facts associated with each subject area. It will be helpful if students memorize many of these facts.

Dorothy Sayers does specify one subject for study during the grammar stage, namely Latin. The study of Latin provides many distinct benefits to the students. One benefit is student’s enhanced understanding of the structure of the English language. In addition, the child will find many uses for their knowledge of Latin vocabulary. This will enhance their understanding of science, literature, and the vocabulary of other related languages.

The next stage is the dialectic stage. The key component of this part of the Trivium is the study of formal logic. The student in this stage learns the importance of defining terms accurately. They learn the key components of a well-structured argument. They learn how to organize thoughts, to avoid the use of fallacies, and to detect and name fallacies present in the arguments of others.

The third and final stage of the Trivium is the Rhetoric stage. The students will now learn how to express their own thoughts and ideas clearly, in both written and oral forms. The students will understand how to make persuasive arguments and to construct eloquent appeals. Students will learn how to enhance their own work using the tools of rhetoric. They will also develop some defenses against the attempted manipulations of others who employ rhetorical devices.

This is the structure and format of the Trivium in brief. Remember, although we teach subjects during these stages, the study of “subjects” in not the final goal. Rather, we give the student the “Tools of Learning.” These tools will be put to use later on. If successful, the student will be well equipped at the conclusion of the Trivium for the work that lies ahead, namely the Quadrivium. (The Quadrivium is understood to be the study of individual subjects. Historical examples are arithmetic, music, geometry, and astronomy.)

The true brilliance of Dorothy Sayers’ vision is found in the way she relates the three parts of the Trivium to three stages of childhood that she classified.

The three stages of childhood are the Poll-Parrot, the Pert, and the Poetic. (After awhile, the names will become an aid rather than a hindrance to remembering the three stages.) Children in the first stage, the Poll-Parrot stage (ages 9-11), have a tremendous ability for observation and memory. Their minds at this time are like empty hard drives on a computer. They are ready to receive a great deal of information. They enjoy the sounds of strange words. The also enjoy recitations, individually and in groups.

The next stage is called the Pert stage (ages 12-14). Think of the typical American junior-high school student. They like to argue. They enjoy correcting the mistakes of their parents and teachers. They are beginning to develop the ability for abstract thought.

Finally, students enter the Poetic stage (ages 14-16). Students finally show the ability to formulate their own creative written and oral expressions. They are ready to demonstrate their desire for independent thought. (A cartoonist captured this characteristic when he drew a world map according to a teenager. The largest county in the word, by far, was in the center of the map. This country was called Me. There were some other small countries far off in the distance.) These are the three stages of childhood, characterized by Miss Sayers, according to their academic interests and abilities.

Miss Sayers’ model is brilliantly simplistic, matching the three stages of childhood to the three stages of the Trivium. The form and structure of Sayers’ classical model looks like this. The stages of childhood are listed on the left, with the corresponding part of the Trivium shown on the right:

Students in the first stage like to memorize—it comes easily. Therefore, they should receive the tool of learning called “grammar” during this time. Teach them basic facts about English, history, science, and most importantly, the Bible. As an adult, have you ever sat down to play “Concentration” with children in this stage? If you have, you probably lost. I know of one father who was accused by his son of not trying his best during a Concentration game. The father really was trying to win.

While in second grade, my sons have been taught the names of the major bones in the human body. They learn to identify phalanges, tarsals, and metacarpals. The children love the sounds of these words. Although some parents are skeptical about their children’s ability to learn this information, they are very surprised to see how much their children can learn. The students learn by chanting the names of the bones out loud together in class.

The elementary teachers at Logos have really grabbed hold of the classical philosophy in the past few years. Walking down the halls you can hear students in different elementary classrooms reciting English grammar or state facts out loud. The students enjoy this. Elementary teachers must be reminded that their work is establishing a foundation for future study. It definitely requires vision.

Students in the Pert stage like to argue, so let’s teach students how to argue correctly. These students will receive the tool of formal logic. They will learn how to structure their own arguments correctly. They will learn to look for fallacies in the logical structure of the things they read and in the things they hear.

We teach formal logic to eighth-grade students. Each year, the eighth-grade students debate the freshmen on the topic of “How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?” Students debate other topics as well; in fact, we encourage all of our junior- high school teachers to have the students debate issues in a variety of classes.

Students in the Poetic stage receive the tool of Rhetoric. They learn how to prepare eloquent and persuasive arguments. They learn the importance of style. They apply the tools of learning previously received to the subjects that interest them the most. This is further preparation for the Quadrivium, the study of specific subject matter. Three stages of the Trivium plus three stages of childhood equal a time tested prescription for a successful education.

Juniors and seniors at Logos are required to take Rhetoric. During the past two years, seniors have been required to compose two thesis papers during their senior year. The first paper must be persuasive. The second must argue an original thesis. The students present the papers to two or three faculty members. Students must demonstrate their understanding of the subject by nswering questions from the staff.

Where do you find a staff equipped to provide this type of an education? Frankly, it will be difficult. Most of us did not receive this type of education ourselves. You may have to look instead for staff members who share the vision for this educational philosophy and are willing to work hard. Staff training will be very important. I recall the first time that we went through the Dorothy Sayers’ article together as staff at Logos. We had a difficult time coming up with specific ideas that could be implemented on a day-to-day basis. However, as Richard Weaver would have it, “Ideas have consequences.” Become familiar about the goals and objectives of classical education. Over time, the staff members will find more and more ways to implement the classical vision in their classrooms.

Our recent staff meetings have included an interesting exercise. We have taken all of the teachers’ lesson plans for one week into the staff meeting. (For example, all of the eleventh grade teachers.) We write the word “Scriptures” in the center of the board. The daily objective for each class, history, Latin, math, etc. are then written around the word Scriptures. The teachers are then asked to explain two things. First, how do we apply a Christian worldview to each objective? Second, how are the objectives integrated with one another? The discussions have been encouraging. After a number of years, the staff members (and the principal) are beginning to understand the connections. We then discuss how we can best encourage this understanding in the minds of our students.

Dorothy Sayers’ model prescribes the form and structure of an educational philosophy. However, her essay more generally addresses the matter of content. She does indicate her preference for teaching a few key subjects, Bible, Latin, logic and rhetoric. One could argue however, that it is not necessary to teach classical subjects (Latin, ancient history, Classical literature) to meet the goals and objectives of a classical education. This is one area that differs slightly in the vision for classical education described by Douglas Wilson in his book, Recovering the Lost Tools of Learning. Doug writes that classical also refers to the content that is studied.

Is this philosophy of education an effective way to teach students? By what measure do we evaluate the success of this program? First, education is a long term investment. Some of the graduates from our first large senior class in 1992 are just now completing their college education. (Logos graduates have been accepted at Claremont-McKenna College, Dartmouth University, LeTourneau University, Pensacola Christian College, University of Idaho, and Washington State University.) Most who have entered college have achieved academic success. The students do seem to be well prepared academically.

What about standardized test scores? Which test is best suited to measure the success of a classical education? Frankly, there  isn’t one. However, the test results have been positive. The students have done well and the trend shows higher scores over time. Perhaps this reflects the maturity of our program at Logos School. Seven of ten students graduating in the spring of 1995 took the ACT exam. The national average, in 1995, was 20.8 (on a scale of one to thirty-six). The Logos class of 1995 had a composite score of 27.28. To date, eight of seventeen members of the class of 1996 have completed the ACT exam; their average is 24.6.

These results are encouraging. Over our thirteen years of existence, nothing has changed our belief in the value of this philosophy. Students are not only receiving a quality education, but they seem to appreciate the education that they are receiving as well. Our major concern is avoiding working the students too hard. The higher we set the bar, the harder the students seem to be willing to work. We are eager to watch the lives of our graduates. Miss Sayers closed her essay with these words, “For the sole end of education is simply this: to teach men how to learn for themselves; and whatever instruction fails to do this is effort spent in vain.”

† The Inside Track, International Learning Systems, November 1995.