She said that she believed there was, basically, a law of education out there yet to be discovered, that the outline of such a thing was then discernible, and she expected further discoveries in the field.
She thought that when fully revealed, this law of education, this workable, effectual philosophy of education would have certain characteristics:
1. It "must be in harmony with the thought movements of the age-"
In the past when I have read this section, I have assumed that she meant that a workable philosophy of education must be contemporary- in harmony with the advances of each contemporary age. But I think it's possible that what she meant was something else- the age she referred to was specifically her own, and by 'thought movements' of that age, she likely had some specific 'thought movements' in mind that she believed were universal, timeless truths only just being discovered. I think she may be specifically referring to advances in her own era in in understanding the fields of biology and physiology.
2. This newly discovered philosophy "must regard education, not as a shut off compartment, but as being as much a part of life as birth or growth, marriage or work; and it must leave the pupil attached to the world at many points of contact."
This is my favorite of these characteristics she seeks to lay out in her taxonomy of education, and this is my current favorite point in this entire section of volume 3.
Education should not be a shut off compartment- it's not something that happens only during formal school hours, while under the tutelage of professionals. It's a natural part of life.
Any system of education which compartmentalizes or isolates education from the rest of life, from things as organic and natural as birth, growth, and marriage is a bankrupt philosophy.
A sound philosophy of education will profoundly touch the child who receives such an education, and will leave her 'attached to the world at many points of contact.' Charlotte Mason expressed the same idea in a different fashion later in this volume:
“The question is not—how much does the youth know when he has finished his education—but how much does he care? and about how many orders of things does he care? In fact, how large is the room in which he finds his feet set? and, therefore, how full is the life he has before him?” (School Education, pp. 170-171)
Any student who 'finishes' being educated without caring about 'many orders of things' has been placed in a narrow, constricted room with a cramped and pinched expectation for the future.
How do we know when children (and adults) are 'attached' to the world? When they are interested in a variety of subjects and truly care about a wide and generous range of topics- and I do not mean topics such as collecting matchbooks or who won the latest American Idol or Dancing with the Stars.
Any student who 'finishes' being educated without being interested in a variety of topics, Miss Mason seems to be saying, without caring about a nourishing variety of interesting topics, is a student who has been defrauded and cheated.
That's how I understand this section. What do you think she means by 'attached to the world at many points of contact?' Pin It
I have read no Mason, so I don't presume to say what she meant, but that phrase really resonates with me from my experiences as an after-school tutor. What struck me over and over about my students is how little they were aware that their school knowledge was about the world they lived in. To them, fractions were numbers on top of each other with lines between them, not quantities of pizza or milk; "speed = distance over time" was a complicated formula, not an expression of how quickly something travels. I could multiply examples ad nauseam.
ReplyDeleteIn other words, there were almost no points of contact between the actual world and what their education had put into their minds. Nothing they saw or experienced in the world reminded them of anything they had learned in school; in fact, so compartmentalized and unreal was their knowledge that almost nothing they learned in one part of school reminded them of anything they had learned in other parts of school. A high schooler reading Shakespeare's _Julius Caesar_ was astonished when I told him that the play was about a real Roman general.
(The exception to this generalization are the policy lessons, such as recycling.)
That is fascinating. Just fascinating. Especially the exception.
ReplyDeleteI think that attaching the education of my children to the real world is easier to do than trying to show my classroom students that my history lessons had real world value. When my children encounter Abigail Adams or fractions or Robin Hood in their education, I know where those concepts attach in their real world because they are with me all of the time. I know that they have used fractions since they were tiny to measure ingredients in the kitchen, and I know that Robin Hood is anchored in a time period that they have already read about in another book. I know that we can have a discussion about the ethics of what Robin Hood does that is rooted in Scripture because I know that they are Christians. You get the drift. When I taught school, I could never be sure what my students had experienced or learned outside of my little 45-50 minute block of their time. I could assume that they had probably cooked at some point, but many of them had not. Most of them were Bible believers, but many of them were not and the ones that were might not give the Bible the same weight that I do. It is difficult to anchor their learning to the real world when their experiences are limited or at least so diverse as to be difficult to reconcile. It is possible to do, and I probably could have done it better. It is much easier to do with my homeschool
ReplyDeleteThe "many points of contact" make me think of some of the specific lesson examples she uses in different places in her books, the narration questions and so on that point to some connection with real events or objects. One that comes to mind is the question about what "F.D." meant on the English penny--that it stood for the Latin that meant "defender of the faith," and how and why that got to be put on the money. A similar but more current example is the story in Maybury's Whatever Happened to Penny Candy? about why some coins have reeded edges--it was originally to prevent "clipped" coins. When you pull out a coin, you're reminded of the story.
ReplyDeleteThere's also that little story she tells about a child visiting St. Paul's and noticing the marks of the Great Fire on John Donne's monument.
Also, in Vol. 6, the section about curriculum and history, she points out that learning history offers connections with present-day events (she specifically mentions the League of Nations, as a current event of that time).
What a great article. In order to make a concept, or idea something that will "stick" in a lifelong way, I think it has to be relevant to your life. I try to find as many ways to tie this to real life and to make it relevant as I can. But the "points of contact" could also refer to different ways of using the knowledge, each providing a tether point.
ReplyDelete"It is difficult to anchor their learning to the real world when their experiences are limited"
ReplyDeleteand
"In order to make a concept, or idea something that will "stick" in a lifelong way, I think it has to be relevant to your life."
My tutoring students seemed also to have very little in the way of experience of the actual world in their lives--in other words, very little to which anything could be relevant or to which they could anchor anything. In my bleaker moments I felt that the entire furnishing of their minds consisted of video games and pop music. And these were not what one thinks of as disadvantaged kids--their parents were for the most part highly educated professionals. Financially at least they were successful, enough so to pay (or borrow) hundreds of dollars a month for the tutoring center.
Stopping by from the homeschool carnival. Good post! @e have found that even many homeschoolers, who want only the best for their kids, seem to think that they only need to fill their kids heads full of trivia and facts and if the kids can recite them back they are educated. A lot of them even say that they "do school" from such a time to such a time and then they are done for the day.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the entry on this topic, I thoroughly enjoyed reading it and it has given me some things to think about. Look for it in the CM Blog Carnival on Tuesday. :)
ReplyDeleteI've always loved that quote about "how much they care." Truly gets to the heart of the matter. Thanks for a great post.
ReplyDeleteLove this post. It reminds me of Charlotte Mason's idea that Life is a Science of Relations - relating their learning to their real world - seeing connections between subjects etc... I love it how my children appreciate art and can recognise it when used in other areas. We had a chuckle the other day when we saw my brother's new business card - it was in a "Mondrian" style, though he wouldn't have known it!
ReplyDeleteWe are also reading aloud the book "Mr Pipes and the Hymns of the Reformation" - now my girls look at the authors of hymns in our hymnal and they know the stories of the authors, it makes their hymns really come alive and have new meaning.
Good stuff! I think of the word 'connections' as I read your post.
ReplyDeleteI think she wanted our children to make connections all around them. Not contrived, (as in unit studies) but in natural, everyday, situations.
Key may be what CM says about the true question not being how much the student knows but rather how much he cares.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your article