In part one of this two-part essay, published last week, I reflected on Clare Basil’s “definitional” challenge to the growth of classical—schools that take “a unifying approach to intellectual and moral formation by developing the integrity of mind and heart,” as she puts it. Basil had cited three challenges to that expansion: “definition” (must all classical schools enact the same precise mission and objectives?) “consistency,” (must classical schools share the same protocols for evaluating success?), and “data” (must we gather more and better empirical data about the efficacy of classical schools?). The overarching purpose of her inquiry concerns the potential for classical schools to promote “moral and civic virtue” in their students.
Addressing the “definition” challenge, I concluded that one clear definition may not actually be necessary to productive growth if classical educators can continue to “cross-pollinate” and agree on a few essential, defining characteristics.
In this second and final part, I explain how the challenges of “consistency” and “data” can be overcome.
Read More