|   CM SERIES HOME   |   CONCISE SUMMARIES   |   PARAPHRASED IN MODERN ENGLISH   |



Charlotte Mason in Modern English

Charlotte Mason's ideas are too important not to be understood and implemented in the 21st century, but her Victorian style of writing sometimes prevents parents from attempting to read her books. This is an imperfect attempt to make Charlotte's words accessible to modern parents. You may read these, print them out, share them freely--but they are copyrighted to me, so please don't post or publish them without asking.
~L. N. Laurio


pg 56

Chapter 6 - Examining Some Educational Theories

The Theories of Pestalozzi and Froebel: The Advent of Kindergarten

It's refreshing to turn our minds to the school of German thought that gave us two great apostles, Pestalozzi and Froebel. From them we've gained an appreciation for childhood's enthusiasm, teachers who are loving and pleasant, and cheerful school days for children. It's unworthy to look a gift horse in the mouth, so it might seem ungrateful to criticize any weakness in a psychology that's brought so much good to education. But no stream can rise higher than its source, and I imagine that the concept that children are like cherished plants in a cultured garden has some kind of weakness. Maybe the children are tended a little too carefully. Maybe Nature is helped along too eagerly. Maybe the environment is too artificially perfect. It's possible that the rough-and-tumble routine of normal family life provides a better environment for acquiring the dignity and growth of personal character than the delightful contrived child garden [kindergarten literally means 'child's garden']. I think we've all noticed that children show keener intelligence and more independent thinking when they're playing at home and

pg 57

talking with family members than the angelic little creatures we see in kindergartens. In Fra Angelico's painting of 'The Last Judgment,' one of the scenes is of a circle of monks dancing around hand in hand with the angels on their way to Paradise. It's as if they've become as little children. They're obviously happy and very good--but, somehow, something seems to be missing. They seem to have lost the force of individual personality. They look incapable of making any kind of decision for themselves. And this may be a danger of kindergarten.

Lacking the Element of Personality

It's very true that 'if you make children happy, they'll be good.' But does that help them develop the kind of steadfast character that's the first condition of virtue? The other side of the coin is, 'Be good, and you'll be happy.' Kindergarten teachers are doing beautiful work, but too many of them are held back because they can't get away from the 'children are plants' metaphor. And that idea is totally lacking in the element of personality. Cherishing and developing a child's individual personality is a sacred  and vital part of education. But the German philosophers thought of man as an impersonal part of the Cosmos. All that's needed according to them is to place things in their proper condition in order for them to develop according to their nature.

The Struggle for Existence is a Part of Life

The weakness of this way of looking at things is that man seems to be under the laws of two universes--the physical and the spiritual. Energizing, resisting, repelling is the law of his existence. It might not seem to be necessary of children--perhaps their struggle for existence can begin after a peaceful, happy childhood has been provided for them. But the transition from the artificially peaceful world of kindergarten to real life must violate the principles of unity and continuity

pg 58

that should rule education. Surely all thoughtful kindergarten teachers recognize where the weakness of their Founder lies and have made some modifications accordingly. After all, no man is perfect. One example of their progress towards more modern thinking is using free brush-drawing that allows children to have some initiative, instead of the cramped pencil drawing of the old days of kindergarten. Nevertheless, we all need to remember our origins so that we can recognize and avoid pitfalls.

Herbartian Psychology

I only have room to touch on one more psychology. Interestingly enough, this one is setting Americans apart from the school of thought that considers psychology a purely physical science, and even British teachers are beginning to snatch at this idea like a drowning man grasping for a floating piece of straw. This is the psychology of Johann Friedrich Herbart. He's also German, and lived during the time of Pestalozzi and Froebel. His ideas about the nature of man are as different from the men we've already discussed as the north pole is from the south. And there's no denying that it gives a temporary working base for education. It isn't until we examine Herbart's ideas in connection with a couple of other great thoughts upon which the world is being educated that we see the weakness of his theory. Herbart begins to account for man, but without admitting the person. (Person is meant in the common, everyday sense.) He admits that there's a soul--but then he redefines it and says, 'The soul has no ability or tools to either receive or produce anything. On its own, it doesn't have

pg 59

ideas, feelings or desires. It has no awareness of itself or anything else. Not only that, but within itself, it has no form of intuition, no thought, no willing or acting, and no kind of predisposition whatsoever to any of this.' (Lehrbuch zur Psychologie, Part III, sects. 152--see Herbartian Psychology, by James Adams). There are still two possibilities for the soul, says Herbart: a passive inertness, and the ability to react to an idea. By this, he means that the soul isn't quite the same after it's been affected by an idea.

The Person is an Effect, Not a Cause

Well, anyway, Herbart simplifies our problem. He reduces all of the messy complexities of intellect, will, feeling, etc. to nothing! The soul is simply tossed out to the mercy of ideas, a free field with no limits for ideas, which are like living entities, in the way that Plato meant, and the ideas crowd and jostle each other to get in, and then, once in, they vie for the best spot. The sneaky little things lie just below the soul's front porch, just watching and waiting for a chance to slip in. Then, once in the door, they hurry to join their friends, the ideas that are most like themselves. They cling and stick to their own kind, forming clumps that Herbart calls 'apperception masses.' These masses take up a fairly permanent place in the soul. And what does the soul do? Apparently nothing, except to provide an empty stage for this rushing and clumping of ideas. The self, or soul of the person, whatever we call him, is the end result of this collection of idea clumps. He's an effect, not a cause, a resulting product, not an original essence from the outset.

Any philosopher who emphasizes the power of ideas deserves some credit in the field of education. Herbart gives us some glimpses of the perfect theory, and our function in supplying the child with suitable ideas,

pg 60

and with the best ideas, and how we should take care to select and arrange these ideas so that they naturally congregate together and form strong 'apperception masses' once they've managed to squeeze through the door.

A Tempting Concept: The Basis for Unit Studies

This presents a fascinating opportunity for us. If Herbart is right, then education is clear and simple. All it takes is selecting the right ideas to turn out a man made to order. This is a very tempting scheme of unity and continuity! It might be possible to spend an entire month on lessons planned specifically to create one single 'apperception mass,' perhaps about 'books.' We might plan object lessons on colors, shapes and sizes of books, as well as more advanced object lessons about paper-making and book-binding. There could be hands-on crafts about sewing and binding books, and age-appropriate lessons about the contents of books. Tots could learn ABC's and Little Bo Peep, while older students could focus on poetry and philosophy. A month in which the entire school, all grades, could arrange their education in groups of ideas that could clump into one big apperception mass around the concept of 'books.' This sort of thing was actually done a while ago in London. 'Apple' was the central idea of the apperception mass.

Personality is Eliminated

Finding principles that unify and provide continuity among ideas presented to the mind is fine. But we believe that this unity and continuity should originate from the soul of the person himself--otherwise this tempting collection of related ideas might result in a collection of random information that the mind never assimilates.

Turns Out Duplicates

Or, if you take two souls and provide them with the exact

pg 61

same ideas in the same exact order and don't allow any other ideas to get in, you could create carbon copies of the same person. This possibility would forever destroy the great concept of the solidarity of the race. I'll ask again, how does Herbartian theory advance our interest in individual personality, our sense of the sacredness of the person? The person becomes a non-entity. He's nothing more than the manifestation of the ideas that take hold of him. He doesn't have so much as an inkling of natural tendency to prefer one set of ideas over another. Everything is random. As far as the personal growth and evolution of he individual, there's no personal individual to grow. The person is merely clumps of ideas, and that's what expands and grows. The man is simply a handy jar to give the ideas a place to collect so they can do what they need to do. Herbartian psychology has lots of interesting concepts, but we can't accept it as our educational ideal without sacrificing a few leading principles that are popular in current thought.

Each System Has Failed To Pass Our Test

We've looked at three or four psychologies that are prevalent in education these days. We see that each has some truth, but none has the whole truth, or even enough truth for us to base educational practice on. So educators are having to get by on trial and error, or they borrow a bit from here and there as they need it. They're like students who are trying to solve a hard math problem where they know what the answer is supposed to be, so they try division, and then multiplication, and then subtraction until they get the answer they're looking for. I'm sure there are many capable psychologists who haven't written books yet, but who work out the complexities of education, not looking for the answer, but according to a code of

pg 62

inherent principles that they've already figured out for themselves.

A Psychology that Meets the Demands Upon It

What psychology do I offer as one that meets the criteria I indicated? I don't claim to be a philosopher. We're just modest, practical people looking for a sure foundation to base education on. We've brought our own unbiased minds and a few basic principles to the problem. We might not have put all the pieces of the puzzle together, but maybe we've found a bit of the border here, or a corner there that indicate not so much the different separate psychologies, but a shadowy form beginning to take shape of a coherent, living educational principle that will get clearer and more distinct until we finally recognize it as our educational truth. That discovery would be the reward and triumph of our age. I'll try to humbly explain what we've discovered. I realize that no one person or society can claim, 'This truth is mine, and that truth is yours.' All truth belongs to all of us, and nobody can know how much they've taken or how much they've added.

Educational Truth is Owned by Everyone

For years, the PNEU has been working definitely and consistently on a philosophy that looks pretty adequate to me. It seems necessary and it appears to be in touch with the common thinking of modern times. (The references that follow are all from the PNEU.) Children raised with this theory of education have certain qualifies in common, no matter where they live. They are all oddly enlivened. They're not bored. They don't perk up when it's time for recess, and then slump in their seats

pg 63

when they're at their desks, or at their home lessons with their tutor, which are known for their dullness. There's unity and harmony in their lives--they aren't one person when they're with their playmates, and somebody else with grown-ups. No matter who they're with, they're open, eager, sincerely interested in whatever's going on. There's also continuity in their education. Very young children are always excited about learning, but this desire for knowledge rarely survives two or three years of school lessons. Yet the natural progression of people goes from infancy to toddlerhood to childhood to youth to adult--there's no transition stage, just a natural, gradual living progression. What I propose for these children can't just be based on the evidence of a few unusual cases. It needs to be based on principles that are true for everyone.

We Think of Children as People

First of all, we take children seriously. After all, they're persons just like we are--in fact, even more so. The first thing we need to clarify is what we mean by persons. We believe that the thinking, intangible soul is one with the acting, visible body in such a close union that,

'The body helps the soul every bit as much as the soul helps the body.'

If God hadn't revealed the doctrine of bodily resurrection to us, then we'd have had to imagine it anyway, because we can't even conceive of an individual without a physical, bodily form. Our friend's mannerisms and the thousand subtle changes of his expression that express his moods, the elegant power of his skilled hands, his familiar and endearing way of walking--we're unable to separate these from our concept of him. Physiological science and rational psychology has advanced our understanding of what the amazing brain cortex is capable of. It's the very root of our consciousness. It provides us with images and impulses and is

pg 64

the source that gets the motor nerves to act. In other words, the brain is where habit starts. Education has an unlimited potential to teach a child the best habits of behavior, and the most noble habits of thought. Education can make sure that these wonderful habits are etched deep into the mind, ready to be spurred to action with the right stimulus. We believe all of this. Even more, we believe that the possibility for a rational education depends on the physiological foundation of habits etched in the brain. This is a new discovery, only learned in our generation.

The Person Wills, Thinks, and Feels

We believe that this ability of the brain to record habits isn't all there is to it. A person needs some way of expressing and relating to the world outside himself. We also believe that the person wills, and thinks and feels. The inner part of a person that makes him who he is is always there, even when he has no conscious awareness of himself. He's not made of separate parts or faculties that act individually. Whenever he does something, whether it's taking a walk or writing a book, all of him is involved. We're used to thinking of people in dual terms--body and soul--but we need to correct our thinking. Man is one whole entity. A person is one, not several. He's neither a collection of ideas nor a bundle of muscles and nerves--he's both. Yes, he needs both bodily and mental food, but that doesn't make him two people. Deliciously prepared food makes people smile, and wine can make their hearts glad. We all know how even our spirits are refreshed after a much needed meal. On the other hand, a person can be well-fed, but have dull eyes and a lifeless expression because he isn't receiving the ideas that feed his mind. Vital,

pg 65

living thought is as necessary for the physical body to be healthy as it is for the soul to be happy and healthy.

An Adequate Doctrine

Since this is our perspective, we believe that our own philosophy is adequate. We're following advances in biological psychology with great interest, and we're using every new thing that's useful to us. At the same time, we're also following the evolution of philosophy. We realize that physical science and philosophy both see the changing human animal from a different angle--people include both aspects while being more than the sum total of them. Our educational philosophy may not be conclusive, but at least it isn't narrow and limited. We haven't cone up against any issue of life or of the mind that our philosophy doesn't encompass. I'm not sure how necessary our philosophy is, but I have to accept that a philosophy that's thorough enough to include the whole nature of man and, at the same time, scientific advances, is necessary. We find that, unlike the other theories, ours is in touch with the three great ideas that seem to be popular right now. We view the child's person as very sacred. We don't obscure his individual personality behind his academic mind or his conscience or even his soul. In this day and age, perhaps we should also include his physical development. A person is a combination of all of these, and yet still more. Our philosophy protects the child's individual initiative and demands that the teacher take a back seat. Even when the teacher is the parent, the child's individuality shouldn't be overwhelmed. It's way too easy to bury the child's character with 'personal influence,' which was so prevalent in the 1850's.

Education is the Process of Making Relationships

We think of education as the art of making relationships, or,

pg 66

to be more clear, we think of education as the consideration of which relationship are appropriate for human beings and how those relationships can best be established. Humans come into the world with the capacity to make lots of different relationships. We as teachers have two concerns. First, we need to facilitate this by exposing children to the right ideas at the right time, and making sure that children have good habits that will allow them to make the most of their exposure to these ideas. And second, we need to stay out of the way so that our interference doesn't prevent the very relationships we want them to form.

Teaching Must Not Be Pushy

Half the teaching people get is so pushy. Oral lessons, lectures with their outline handouts, leave no room for a mind to form its own relationship with the material, even though the information originated from various great minds. When a student learns his science from a dull textbook, even though he sees the information illustrated in nature, or gets information from object-lessons, he never has a chance of forming his own relationships with natural phenomena because his well-intentioned teacher has led him to believe that knowing about things is the same as experiencing them personally. Yet every child knows that knowing about young Prince Edward isn't the same as knowing him personally. You might say that a teacher should master the art of stepping aside and staying out of the way. People sometimes say that the usefulness of a school consists in the books on its shelves. But they sometimes miss the fact that the choice of books is a huge part education, because the books are infused with the ideas of minds that will directly connect with the minds of the students, and those are the connections that students will form relationships with.

The Art of Staying Out Of The Way

I've known of teachers who have gone so far as

pg 67

to even compose the songs and poems their students use. Imagine! Not even our immortal poets are allowed to come between the poor child and the mediocre minds of our teachers! The art of staying out of the way means that the child is allowed the freedom to develop the relationships that are right for him. That is the art of education: when a teacher recognizes the two things he needs to do, and how to do them. The natural result of the teacher's success in doing these two things is the personal growth of the individual student.

I hope to explain more fully how our theory advances the solidarity of the race. One of the ways we accomplish this is that, instead of giving students outlines of history [that list off all the events that happened], we put them directly in contact with one of the thinkers who lived then. And we're not satisfied that they only learn the history of their own country. We also try to give them some interest and knowledge of what was going on at the same time in the other countries in Europe. To make sure that the history we teach seems more real to the children, we also use some of the literature from the same historical era, and the best historical fiction and poetry about that period. And we do the same with other subjects.

Nothing in this is new. What we're claiming isn't that we've discovered a new idea, but that our theory and work is unified and energized by a comprehensive philosophy of education and a solid psychological foundation.




Previous Page | Next Page




Paraphrased by L. N. Laurio
Please direct any comments or questions to me by emailing me at cmseries-owner at yahoogroups dot com.



|   CM SERIES HOME   |   CONCISE SUMMARIES   |   PARAPHRASED IN MODERN ENGLISH   |