The mission of Nolan Catholic High School in Fort Worth, Texas is “To provide a college preparatory education and evangelize students to become the servant leaders of tomorrow through education in faith, formation in hope and perseverance in charity". It is obvious that the purpose of school is not only to educate the student academically, but to educate the child as a whole. This type of mission statement is seen in Catholic schools across the nation and world, but how does it play out in the classroom? If you were to ask a Catholic school teacher how to educate the whole child, he or she might respond, “I am a model of acceptance and love in my classroom.” While these are great practices to bring into the classroom, they are not necessarily based on adequate pedagogy to achieve the ultimate goal of educating the whole child. Educating the whole child should, of course, include love and embody service, but teachers do not directly teach students what it means to be a good student. Catholic school teachers must also help students acquire the characteristics that embody lifelong learners. These characteristics are called intellectual virtues and, in most cases, are not an obvious component of classroom teaching. In both Catholic and classical education there is support for the idea that it is appropriate to directly teach intellectual values ​​in the classroom. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay In 1852, John Newman's The Idea of ​​a University stated that the aim of education should be to "[learn] the broad lines of knowledge, the principles on which it rests, the scale of its parts, its lights and its shadows, its large points and its small ones..." and by acquiring this knowledge, "a mental habit is formed that lasts throughout life, whose attributes are, freedom, fairness, calm, moderation and wisdom" Here it is obvious that Newman believes that a thorough and complete education includes the cultivation of habits that enable students to learn beyond the classroom. Turning to classical education, Aristotle identified five major intellectual virtues that reveal truth to the human mind: deduction/induction, correct reasoning. , prudence, initiation and wisdom (1893). He believed that these virtues were acquired with time and experience but that it was also important to have examples to learn from. Intellectual virtues are a realm that has been thoroughly explored in the fields of philosophy and educational psychology. Suggestions from various modern psychologists on how to integrate intellectual virtues into the classroom will be explored, as well as a triarchic theory that divides intelligence into three different realms. It is the intention of this article to blend the two together in a statement that has never been published before: Robert Sternberg's theory for successful intelligence is nothing more than the explicit teaching of intellectual virtues. To begin to determine where the focus on integrating intellectual virtues should lie, it is important to be familiar with John Dewey's perspective in The Child and the Curriculum (1902). In this publication Dewey, American philosopher and psychologist, examines the conflict between two educational approaches. The dichotomy between teaching the curriculum and teaching the child plagued the country in the early 1900s. A child's development and knowledge are very different from those of adults. Their perspective is drawn to the observable world, but they are curious and learn through experience as they build connectionswith those around them. This encourages self-realization and as a result, the child is educated to some extent both academically and morally. The requirements of a curriculum-based learning environment are: specific and mastery focused. Active experience with the material is limited as truths are revealed through study. Dewey goes on to argue that the curriculum and the child are not two separate entities but rather “two limits defining a single process” (1902). That said, Dewey would likely have supported the idea that children have the innate potential to acquire intellectual virtues through experience, but an explicit pedagogical structure is also needed to teach them. If there is a history, in both Catholic and classical education, that teaches these virtues reinforced by Dewey, it is critical to understand what exactly the training of intellectual agents in the classroom looks like. of schools and parents”, say Roberts and Wood analyzing the context of intellectual virtues in a school environment (2007). Epistemology is the study of the nature of knowledge and the rationality of beliefs. From this definition epistemic goods can be defined as the purpose of intellectual life. If a person loves knowledge and views it as a good to be acquired, he or she is more likely to seek ways to actively engage with and understand the material. A science classroom is a great environment for this knowledge-seeking endeavor as collaboration and humility are abundant throughout the academic journey. A fascination with academics and the willpower to persevere in a challenging context are virtues that students often bring to the classroom in order to access the material on which faculties such as memory and deduction rely. Students bring a wide variety of faculties with varying levels of executive functioning to the classroom, it is up to the teacher to guide students in using their faculties to their maximum potential. Finally, through the lens of Roberts and Wood, the accumulation and use of these virtues are identified as a practice. Practices related to intellectual virtues are the “means of intellectual life” (2007) and dictate what is pursued throughout the academic career. This begs the question, “Does the teacher need to dramatically and explicitly modify their interactions and curriculum to foster an environment in which epistemic goods are accessed through intellectual virtues?” Not necessarily. Using the work of Roberts and Woods, one could argue that the intentional and compassionate teaching practices of Catholic school teachers are sufficient. For example, when a student answers a question incorrectly, “the teacher might express the virtues of empathy, attentiveness, courage, love of knowledge, humility and patience by staying with the student a little longer, trying to draw more thoughts from her. on the question and its answer” (2007). Moving forward, Jason Baehr delves into identifying and implementing intellectual virtues in the classroom. Previously, epistemic goods were defined as the purpose of intellectual life. Baehr would define this even more specifically, stating that the pursuit of epistemic goods embodies the way in which intellectual character serves as a “dimension of the self in which cognitive function intersects with personal character” (2017). In this regard Aristotle would have classified intellectual virtues within the scope of character development. Baehr reveals a robust list of intellectual virtues, such as curiosity, open-mindedness, intellectual autonomy, intellectual humility, wonder, attentiveness, intellectual thoroughness, thoughtfulness, and intellectual perseverance. This list is not.