dude, you’ve got to get over this victimization ‘tude. While your post here is about this George Wythe College, you can just feel all the derision you have toward the rest of the world of education. You ain’t been victimized dude. Stop with that attitude.

Sounds interesting. Let’s have a look at the website.

George Wythe College stands on the belief that Statesmanship is the product of a particular educational system, known to the great leaders of the past, but lost to modern academia.

Hmm. For some reason, a red flag just went up. What is ‘modern academia’? Is that some kind of code phrase? You mean most universities don’t teach the scientific method? Oh, wait — they do that. Does it mean that they’re not godly enough? Let’s keep going.

It is a principle-centered process grounded in the belief in God and immutable moral law,

Yikes! There’s the God flag. Believe in God if you want, but let’s not pretend that moral laws are immutable. They’re designed by people within a culture, and different cultures have different moral laws. The ones we have might not even be optimal.

I’m a bit concerned now. Let’s move over to the testimonials.

“In [Istanbul], I conferenced with a number of United Nations Delegates, and was successful in promoting the pro-family agenda in an extremely positive manner…George Wythe is preparing me and others to change the world.”

Promoting the pro-family agenda? Is this part of the curriculum? I’m beginning to think you’ve got hold of a conservative think tank here, not a university.

“George Wythe College is more than a college. It is a belief that there is a goodness in the world, that there is truth to be found, that there is a right and a wrong, and that I can change the world by changing myself.”

See, in most universities, you learn how to conduct scientific research so you can contribute new knowledge to the scientific community. But here, it seems that you learn to absorb a certain set of values so that you can go forth and promote a certain brand of conservative policy.

Connor, old man, I hope you have a good experience at your new school. They seem to place a good deal of emphasis on learning to think for yourself. I’d be curious to see if they mean it. The measure of this will be what happens when you get results that differ from the received wisdom of your mentors. Let me know if that happens — I’d like to hear about it.

Connor,

What’s the difference between a Bob Jones University and George Wythe College? To this point, I see nothing different. You can go there, and you can promote it all you want. I really don’t care. But stop attacking the system that provided you with the education and research skills you currently have.

Connor,

George Wythe looks interesting and like something that someone like you could indeed benefit from.

Like Daniel suggests, some programs in some fields are well served by teaching how to “conduct scientific research so you can contribute new knowledge to the scientific community.” That works for certain fields of science - genetics, physics, or medical research for instance. But I certainly wouldn’t argue those are the only fields of advanced learning that anybody ought to pursue.

I also don’t quite see the victimization that Dan sees. I do think it’s kind of hard to get all students to pursue what you’re calling the ‘Oxford model’ and consequently I see great value in other teaching models that help reach even the kind of students that really have no interest in learning but I think it’s OK to say that you don’t enjoy that or seek after that for your advanced studies.

It’s certainly true that in the fields you are expressing interest and at the level you wish to pursue them, the model George Wythe proposes looks promising. It’s not like you’re looking for a vo-tech to teach you the latest technology and research methods (I’ve got the impression that you already have the computer vocational skills necessary to make a living). Philosophy, Governance, Diplomacy, etc. are a little different than that. But I’ve seen those subjects taught the vo-tech way: “here’s how the system works now and here’s the buttons you need to push because everybody pushes them and all the good jobs use this system.” I actually have a friend who is doing a Masters in “Diplomacy” from a big name school and his description of the program sure seems kinda “vo-tech” . . . so I do think it happens.

I’ve been trying to motivate myself to read things like the Federalist Papers and the kind of preceding literature that inspired our Founders to write documents like those. I’m always surprised when I find some of those things so relevant to today’s problems but so unknown. It just seems like the only people these days who might even read the Federalist Papers, for instance, are law students rushing through a “Constitutional Law” class with specific objectives in mind. Consequently the Professors and texts guide them through pre-determined passages with expected outcomes.

I can’t see much downside to signing up for something that motivates you to explore the classics of “statemanship” - they seem much ignored and too often boiled-down to unquestioned platitudes.

‘Gratz on being accepted, and I hope you enjoy yourself.

Master of political science, eh? (Just don’t quit your day job……heh heh…)

What you wrote about the different kinds of education models got me thinking about the basic question, “what’s the best way to ‘educate’, a person.”

The most common method is of course based on fear of failure. This is understandable, since on the whole, people are more likely to try to avoid that which they fear, than they are to reach for that which they value or love. People tend to respond more predictibly (albeit poorly) to fear, than they do to inspiration or encouragement.

But I think fear is a particularly poor educational and motivational tool, because avoiding fear is a “minimization” process. We tend to only expend the minimum amount of effort required to overcome our fear or discomfort. Then, in the absence of anything to inspire us, we remain stagnant.

The whole view of “minimizing potential energy” works well as a metaphorical device, to explain much of the “Bureaucratic-Educational Industrial Complex.”

Now, I’m an amateur musician. I’m recalling here many experiences I’ve had playing under the baton of great,; conductors, and also under poor ones.

I think the exact same things that make a truly great and inspiring conductor are the ones that make a great teacher/ mentor/ leader; as all teachers need to be leaders.

Specifically, Students are taught by example, not by rote and memorization of rules. They are encouraged to love and seek out *correct principles*, not to work in order to avoid consequences. Teachers encourage and inspire personal excellence,, but allow students to fail and make mistakes, and merely point them in the right direction when they do so. Students are not bullied or coerced into conformity, nor measured against any gold standard, but creativity, cooperation, enthusiasm, problem solving, clear insightful thinking, and self-extension are rewarded in ALL students!

Teachers should consider earning the utmost attention and trust of their students to be a challenge, not something they are entitled, to…

More than anything, a teacher should strive for students to develop a LOVE for that which is being taught, because then they will teach themselves!

I had an interesting discussion the other day with a fellow engineering major. He was complaining about the poor state of math and science education (and hence scientific awareness) in America. What struck me was how he said when he tells other people that he’s studying engineering and mathematics, almost everybody says “I hate math,” or “I suck at math,” or “I don’t know anything about math.”

Is the only lasting thing that public schools has taught them, is a profound sense of their own failure?

Anyways, what was everybody saying?

I know the Dans here take it personally because of their affiliation to the Prussian model of education, but I stand by my assessment that this model does nothing to truly educate a person. They may be crammed full of facts and knowledge, but I think actual learning is different.

See, now that’s just plain inaccurate.

You’re not an educator, Connor, so it’s okay if you don’t know what’s happening in the area. Let me tell you.

University educators are well aware of the dangers of the model you’re describing. The folks at GWU may be telling you that they’ve rediscovered the true lost art of teaching (good heavens, will Mormons believe anything if it’s presented in a restorationalist frame?!), but these principles are well-known and well-used in universities today.

A whole body of research has been done on how to overcome what you call ‘The Prussian Model’. It goes all the way back to Rousseau, who suggested getting away from the tabula rasa or ‘blank slate’ model. Other educators since (especially Paulo Friere) have been sharply critical of what’s known as the ‘banking theory’ of education. Recent approaches involve outcome based education, and problem-based learning.

If you came to one of my linguistics classes, you’d be presented with real language data, and some tools to help you analyse it. You might have some important things to memorise, and that would help you to know what people have done in the field up to the present so you wouldn’t reinvent the wheel. But I’d try and make it interesting. By the end of the activity, you’d have brought your own unique knowledge and experiences to bear on a linguistic problem, and you would have experience in doing something that perhaps you hadn’t thought much of before.

If you want to find out more about current teaching models, you may want to browse the International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (or IJTLHE).

They didn’t figure all this out in Cedar City. It’s been going on for a long time.

But Daniel, don’t you know, that’s like a socialist journal, probably funded by the Rockefellers.

DUDE! Where’s the college’s library? They don’t have a link anywhere on their website for their library. I’m sorry but a college that doesn’t even have a library is not a very good place to study.

I attended a Thomas Jefferson Education Forum in 2006 in Salt Lake City. I loved it. I wish I had more time to pursue formal education there, but instead content myself with slowly pursuing what I can on my own. I’m a little envious of you, Connor :).

I hope you’ll post about more of your experiences with GWC.

Be careful while “[rubbing] shoulders with like-minded individuals” to avoid one trap that I have seen many advocates of GWC fall into - that is, believing (incorrectly) that there in no value to be had in the latin or prussian models of education. Those may not be the models that suit your need, or even the prevailing need of the time but that does not mean they have no place in educating people.

I do know quite a few proponents of GWC and a Thomas Jefferson Education who believe this, but take note that even Oliver DeMille never says that.

My brother Robb is attending GWC currently in Cedar City. It is my opinion that many of these students will be the future leaders of America. My brother has experienced a transformation while going to school there. I attended a regular University to get my “Piece of Paper” that says I am a master of something when in reality the school did little to prepare me for my field. GWC people are most likely the people who will be left holding the Constitution up when it is finally torn to shreds. We will need men like Connor to educate the ignorant masses on the proper role of government.

Connor:

As a general rule, I do not envy what others do, have, or say or purport to do, have, or say. That being said, your decision to affiliate yourself with the George Wythe College is, indeed, enviable. I offer you my heartfelt congratulations and express my sincerest thanks for being inspired enough to recognize the absolute superiority of this unique institute of higher learning. I do not believe in coincidence, and I am certain the Lord has seen to it that you have been guided toward this opportunity. I have no doubt you will excel in your studies and will emerge prepared to be a leader in our troubled land.

As to the commentary of the usual perpetrators of babble, I would again say, phooey!

If I were to go back to school (not going to happen), GWC would be on my list of schools. I was very impressed by the book explaining their educational philosophy, and I would like to see it in action.

Congratulations, and good luck in your endeavor.

Look man, I hate to break it to you, but you’ve been conned, bad! Before your common sense slips forever from your grasp I implore you to open your mind and see this distorted organization for what it is. Socially warped and academically deficient. They’re playing you for a fool.

Open your mind? Opening your mind would be looking outside the box (the box being what is spoon fed at the slowest common denominator in public schools).

I don’t believe mormonism has anything to do with it either. There are references to George Whythe’s teaching methods outside the world of the LDS, I’d even be willing to bet there’s a lot who don’t know who he was. One book in particular that I know off the top of my head is “John Adams” by David McCullough which talks briefly about his methods and how they helped Thomas Jefferson and John Adams.

Personally, I do not like the current state of public education. No child left behind is not helping either. I also can see what it’s done to one of my children and what it was starting to to do to another, exactly what it did to me - I hated school, I hated learning and would fight every step of the way and do the bear minimum to get through. I don’t want my kids to go through the same struggle and end up hating learning.

We use the Thomas Jefferson method in our home and I think it’s a great deal better then public schooling, but that is just an opinion…

P.S. Congrats on getting excepted Connor, I hope my kids will get in when they’re old enough!

I’d like to know the name of the GWC grad who got into Law School. Was he accepted based on a previous degree from an accredited university? GWC speaks so much of leadership. Leading what? What of any importance have GWC grads ever led? Give me some examples. If this is such a great system, why are the majority of GWC grads not “leading” in the real world? The way you put it, they should be leaps and bounds above everyone else.

I don’t believe from the classics is bad, I just believe it to be secondary to putting food on the table (more like a hobby than preparation for the real world). I also agree with the previous comment about not reinventing the wheel. I don’t need to go back and read a book by Newton to understand mathematics or physics. Was he a genius? Absolutely. Does that mean he was a good teacher? Certainly not. Is it possible someone else may be able to teach the same principles in a more effective and meaningful way? I certainly hope so. Is my education somehow tainted by learning it from somebody else? Learning from the work of 1,000s of mathematicians, physicists and engineers building on Newtonian theory may be slightly more reliable than 1 guy from the 1600s. I mean the guy was amazing, no doubt, but he didn’t have all the answers (though he did have a lot of them spot on).

Aaron,

You’d be surprised at how many people fail to comprehend the philosophy of the natural sciences because they’ve never read Newton. Just saying.

Well, sure, you could build an airplane just fine, but understanding the deeper philosophies and assumptions that we make about the natural world requires a historical basis.

Has anyone ever not been accepted into George Wythe College?