From Ghost of Joe Campion

Rev. Bowdern, S.J.

Fr. Halloran, S.J.

Tom Olson and Pat Mower visit with Fr. Halloran, August 2002

All-Class Reunions 2023

PdC Reunion Report by John Dudek '65

On the left: Sandlebacks - On the right: Dudeks

Interesting that there were no golfers from the classes of 1964, 1966, 1974 or 1975. And we had a new fleet of golf carts!

All-class Chicago Reunion by John Kowalczyk '65

My wife and I were the only '65 people among the 85 folks who partook of the All-Class Reunion Dinner Cruise on the Chicago River last evening. We experienced a lovely two-hour ride with live music, good food, and free beer and wine. Met grads from '55, '71 and '75, but there were several other classes also represented. At the end we all got "goodie" bags with Campion tees, hats and coffee mugs. We live about 20 blocks North of the boat dock, and rode city busses to and from the event. Most of the people arrived in two large chartered busses from their hotels. We talked with folks who took trains to and from, and others who parked South of the river and walked across the Michigan Ave bridge. At no time did we see, hear or even feel anything unsafe, let alone violent.

They expected 135 people for Mass and dinner, and for Sunday brunch 85 people. The Jesuits Midwest guys organized a nice weekend.

Glenview mini-reunion by John Kowalczyk '65

Photo of Lunch June 9, 2023. We met at Hackley’s on Harms Road, Glennview. left to to right: Cowhey, Batorski, Clancy, Corbett, Chris Wagner ‘66, Kowalczyk, Dudek. We solved the world’ political problems, and came close to curing all of our ailments.

From the Desk Of John Duskey '63

There was a very successful all-class reunion in Chicago on June 9-10, attended by a large group of alumni and friends, mostly from the 1970s. About 150 people attended the Saturday evening Mass at Holy Family Church and a similar number at the banquet afterwards. Most of the former Campion students were from the 1970s, with only a few from the 1950s and 1960s. A surprising number were from the classes of 76-77-78, i.e., those who were students when the school closed, but did not graduate from Campion. But it was good that all alumni were invited. In my case, I can honestly say that I was made to feel welcome. It was good to break down any perceived ‘dividing wall’ between classes.

It was interesting to hear them talk about student life during their times, as it was so different from our experiences in the late 1950s and early 1960s. We had common experiences with only a few teachers. The Jesuit scholastics and even the priests we knew were mostly gone by the 1970s. At times, I felt that I was attending the reunion of a different school.

In many ways, after the “Big Change’ of 1966, Campion did become a very different school. Campion, as it existed in the early sixties, had some weaknesses in the classroom curriculum, which were more than made up for by the rigid curriculum outside the classroom. Many of those classroom curriculum weaknesses were corrected after 1966, and those that remained were not easily corrected, as they were common problems to many schools in that era.

The later version of Campion, with some upgrades to the classroom curriculum, had fewer restrictions on student life outside the classroom. The Knight yearbooks give an interesting view about all this. The earlier yearbooks make it clear who was teaching what, and who participated in the many activities that enhanced the learning experience, e.g., Sodality, Debate team, Knight yearbook, Campionette, Masquers, Athletics and Band. Later yearbooks had many photographs, but fewer words to describe student life.

I want to make it clear that criticism of the curriculum does not imply criticism of the teachers. I think I could honestly say that our teachers, Jesuit and lay, did the best they could, given their experience, knowledge and ability. In nearly all cases they enabled successful learning experiences. This pertains to both their work in the classroom and their work in educational activities outside the classroom. All the faculty deserve our thanks and appreciation.

The person primarily responsible for the curriculum is the principal, in our case, Fr. William Doran. For several years, he operated under some financial constraints, but eventually was able to make substantial improvements.

As regards Mathematics, the field is well-defined and I have heard few complaints. The one notable deficiency was in senior year, when we studied Trigonometry and Solid Geometry. There was no Calculus, even the honors section. Fr. Edward Hipschen had been on the Campion faculty since 1939, and had taught history and math, and served one year as assistant principal. He was the best teacher available at the time, and he taught senior math. In later years, with additions to the faculty, Calculus was offered.

The Science curriculum was a weak area. There was no biology and the physics class, taught to juniors, was really an introductory science class. It was very popular among the students as the demonstrations caught their interest and the explanations given by Fr. John Scott were easy to understand. Eventually this course became a freshman general science class, and the school hired Mr. Vern Gunderson to teach Physics. For several years, Chemistry was taught to seniors by different lay teachers and Jesuits, but, fortunately, in fall 1962, Mr. Maurice Oehler was hired and provided an excellent program of instruction. He stayed at Campion until 1971.

There is a general problem about the study of science that is by no means unique to Campion. People tend to believe that science is a collection of knowledge that has been determined by scientists of various types, and, once determined, is correct and can never change. This seems to be the case, as far as most subjects go during high school. However, in college level and graduate work it becomes clear that science is a continuously evolving field, as research continues and doubts can be clarified. The Master’s thesis I wrote on strain-aging in rutile (titanium dioxide) in 1971 represented what we knew at that time. Further work on that same subject may show my thesis to be obsolete. There are continual changes in the fields of biology and medicine, as further research is going on all the time. What appears to be true today might be disproven soon afterward. Also, beware of research that is funded for the purpose of proving a pre-determined outcome. Funding agencies can make things seem true.

Social Studies occupied limited time/space in the curriculum. There was a course called Western Civilization, taught to freshman by Fr. Francis Aspenleiter, who was on the Campion faculty 1949-1970. He was the author of the textbook, first published in 1951, which centered on European history. In his later years at Campion, Fr. Aspenleiter shifted his attention to the teaching of religion, and other faculty took over the teaching of History. The other course which was taken by all sophomores was United States History, which was usually taught by one of the Jesuit scholastics. Students who had been placed in a track that only required two years of math, took additional courses in history and economics. In fall 1962, Fr. Doran initiated a change so that all seniors would take one semester of Sociology, which was taught by Fr. Thomas Hoffman. This was good. With increased social consciousness on the horizon, we knew that more changes would be coming.

Half of the students took four years of Latin and half took only two years, with the addition of two years of Spanish. In addition, students in “A” class were offered the opportunity to take Greek (and most of them did). Some students met outside of the regular classroom time to study French. There were some great Jesuit teachers who taught Latin and Greek: Fr. Zachman, Fr. Poeckes, Mr. Wambach and Mr. Teske. But scholastics were limited to a three year term of service, and not every newly assigned scholastic would be able to teach the subject well. As far as the Latin content goes, Sophomores studied Julius Caesar, Juniors studied Cicero, and Seniors studied Virgil’s Aeneid. Greek students studied the works of Homer. The school had either a Jesuit scholastic or a layman to teach Spanish.

English was taught in all four years, with a series of books on grammar/writing and the Fr. Maline/St. Thomas More series on Prose and Poetry. There was considerable emphasis on grammar/writing in the first two years, and a greater emphasis on Prose and Poetry in the last two years. This is reasonable, given the context of the school and the schedules of both teachers and students. Scholastics had prefecting assignments for chapel, meal time, athletics, and study halls, which filled their workdays. There wasn’t a whole lot of time to read and grade lengthy essays, if such writing assignments had been given to the students. So, the study of Rhetoric and composition tended to take a back seat. When I arrived at Marquette University in fall 1963, I took a course in Rhetoric and Composition; it was a great learning experience.

To be sure, Campion offered opportunities for the aspiring writer, particularly in campus publications. The art of argumentation could be studied by joining the debate team. But it was impossible to offer those opportunities to every student. And not every student would be able to take on additional work in his spare time. It seemed that every possible moment, inside and outside the classroom, was filled with good learning opportunities.

The purpose of an education is not to memorize a whole lot of information; it is to learn how to think. Whatever we study, we should have that goal in mind. Students should enhance their ability to think about several topics that will be useful to them in later life. This includes social issues, the use of technology and math and science, and even about sentence structure when we put our thoughts in writing. We did not study philosophy at Campion, though I’m sure if we had the time, we could have. Students usually encounter Plato, Aristotle, and the others after they arrive at college. Plato raises some important questions about curriculum. After my undergraduate work at Marquette, I questioned the value of studying poetry, and my statement eventually found its way to a poet. (And he seemed to share it with just about everybody.) The poet’s answer: Imagination. I have previously quoted Leonard Nimoy’s statement that creativity can be learned if the mind is free. The project for all students is to learn more, because in greater experience and greater knowledge, we gain freedom.

I recently read and watched three film versions of the Thornton Wilder (1938) classic “Our Town,” It was set in the early 20th century and exposed racial and religious prejudice in the town. I found it interesting that the narrator cited two elements of the senior year curriculum, Cicero and Solid Geometry. You may recall that the final act of that play featured nothing but the dead and dying back in “Our Town.” Eventually, we will all die, but it is particularly tragic for those who die young. The narrator points out, when young people die, there is a lot of education gone to waste. If we are fortunate enough to live a long life, we should be able to spend many years making good use of the education we receive.