Homeschooling and Why Charlotte Mason
Our family has found a happy rhythm, and a resting place, in (however imperfectly) embracing a Charlotte Mason approach to homeschooling (homeschooling is not new to my family for myself and my husband both spent many years in our parents' homeschool, which has made it a somewhat natural decision for us to continue this lifestyle). However, I hadn't heard of Charlotte Mason until about 4 years ago, when I started searching for answers to many questions that I had about education, in view of starting a school for our children. She has been a great help for her philosphy is a resting place for me as I endeavor to rid myself of comparison, hustle, and unhelpful agendas within our home. Since I have spent 4 years studying her philosophy and methods, I thought it was time that I begin to write a little about it, especially about her Second Principle of Education which seems to be the most controversial, and possibly most misunderstood principle in her philosphy. Unfortunately, many people arrive at the Second Principle and give up right there, assuming that her principles do not align with their beliefs: I say unfortunate because she has so much to offer teachers who have high ideals but lack experience; she has so much to offer a school system based largely on performance, competition, and head knowledge instead of truth, kindness, character and heart; and she has so much to offer teachers in their every day efforts to steward well the little charges that God has put them over. Charlotte's First and Second Principles of Education are stated as follows: "1) Children are born persons, and are born 2) neither good or bad but with possibilities for both good and evil."*
On the surface, her choice of words here feels lacking. What exactly is she saying? Many assume that she is denying the orthodox understanding of original sin, but such a hasty judgement does not line up with her work as a whole. Mason was a member in good standing with the Anglican Church, and did not consider herself to be a theologian. Her life's goal was to assist parents with the education of their children, regardless of where the children attended school. Nothing in her large body of philosophical work would incline one to label her as a reformer of christian doctrine, and though she did aspire to reform the English educational system, she also knew that this reformation would have to be led primarily by parents. Interestingly to us with the modern day popularity of homeschooling she did by no means encourage the parents to pull their children out of the public schools! Rather, she would have them join their efforts with the schools. From the past 4 years that I have spent soaking up Charlotte's deeply Christian philosophy, I am inclined to interpret her principle something like this:
In view of humanity's condition of sinfulness: children are born neither "good" or "bad". In our fallen state of post-enlightment and industrial revolution, I think we might understand this statement better as a denial of humankind being somewhat akin to our machines. You could say that we are not made to be simple cogs in a system, retained if we are useful (read: economically useful), rejected if not. I think what Charlotte is getting at here is the inherent dignity of the child, and the fundamental necessity of an education. There are not "good children" deserving of education and "bad children" undeserving of education; all children are born persons and cannot live apart from the daily enlightenment from the Holy Spirit which humanity has largely seperated from its source and labeled "education". It is not that humans have a so called "right" to an education, it is that we cannot survive or thrive apart from one. Charlotte says that ideas are the food of the mind, such as bread is for the body. The ideas, the atmosphere, and the habits that the child grows up in are in great part what feeds their soul. All parents believe that the atmosphere they foster (or neglect to foster) around their children matters, else why would we even try? If you interpret Charlotte's principle in this light, it clears up a lot of grey area and wrong thinking. Our children have possibilities for good or for ill, so we nurture them in the fear and admonition of the Lord, not trusting in our own efforts, but in the saving work of God the Father, the Holy Spirit, and Christ. This interpretation is entirely consistent with the larger body of Charlotte's work and I am confident in presenting it. Ambleside Online, which is a popular and widely used free homeschooling resource, interprets the principle this way: "2. Although children are born with a sin nature, they are neither all bad, nor all good. Children from all walks of life and backgrounds may make choices for good or evil."
Far from being lacking, I think that Charlotte's first two principles draw the reader in, to consider her meaning. I think that she was setting down a firm position to build on for one of her most persistent themes throughout her works being that what we do matters ! More than anything, she had to fight to convince parents of this truth, and of their responsibility in raising the children that God gave them, instead of passively letting the state step in to do a job it could never do. Once she succeeded in admonishing parents as to the seriousness of their responsibility, everything else was much easier by comparison. She insisted that education was less about how much head knowledge one gained, and more about how much a child cared; this is true for parents as well!!!
My hope is that those who may spend the time to read this come away with a curiosity about Charlotte and the important things she has to say about education. I hope that whatever reservations one has might be interpreted in view of the great work that she did and her heart for economically disadvantaged children. Though many things in our modern educational system have changed, we still fight some of the same beasts, particularly as concerns the philosophy of mankind and by extension, the philosophy of the child. I will link her 20 principles here below, along with a helpful modern interpretation of each one for anyone who is interested! While no author is perfect and we should not blindly follow anyone, some are certainly better than others, and when it comes to educational philosophy, Charlotte has the most comprehensive and life-giving educational philosophy that is widely available (that I know of!). I have found that in striving to improve the atmosphere of our home for our homeschool, what has happened is that my own life has been enriched with a desire for myself to continue to be a student; with a love of beauty, goodness, and truth; with an extensive appetite for many different genres of art, literature, and music. Truly, education is an atmosphere, and discipline - a life!! If you are just starting your own homeschool and have questions, feel free to message me with questions about free resources that may be helpful to you. And let me know if this kind of blogpost is helpful!! I should have some more Charlotte Mason inspired writing to share, if there is any demand for it. I have attached links below, even though this blog is kind of awkardly formatted to accommodate them. My apologies about that!
Helpful Links:
Comments
Post a Comment