Home Schooling book review: A Charlotte Mason Education
by Melanie Bettinelli on June 04, 2006
Since I started to read homeschooling blogs I’ve begun coming across the name Charlotte Mason quite a bit. The first few mentions didn’t grab me. I didn’t have a great interest in finding out more. But finally my curiosity began to be piqued. This was one of the first books I found that dealt directly with her philosophy of education, though I realized in retrospect that Laura Berquist’s Designing your Own Classical Curriculum is influenced by Miss Mason’s philosophy.
I checked out a Charlotte Mason book from the library, but in the ninth month fog my brain couldn’t process it (I’m sure things won’t be much better now or for a little while as I’m still in the new baby sleep deprivation, and recovering from surgery, brain not working to top capacity). The language is too nineteenth century and the thoughts too dense. Perhaps I’ll give her a go later, but for now I’m having much better luck reading other people’s summaries and interpretations of her work.
That said, I really liked this book, A Charlotte Mason Education
Subtitled A Home Schooling How-To Manual, that’s a pretty good description of the book’s style. After a brief bio of Mason and an introduction to the basic method, the book is organized by subject area. Levison describes briefly how each subject is approached and gives some suggestions for resources. Very easy to read, easy to understand. A good reference and quite friendly.
Comments
Melanie,
I know there are many guides out there, by Protestant and Catholic authors, for using Mason’s methods in homeschooling. While many of the *tools* of her method are fine (and used in other methods of education), such as the use of “living” books and dictation, Mason herself concerns me. Just scanning the following webpage gives me the distinct feeling that she may say a lot of things that sound good, but are off the mark.
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/leslienoelani/2_01.html
Mason knows Rousseau was a villain, but lauds his genius-why did she not look for a better guide in her philosophy of education, especially as she supposedly was a Christian?
I am not a great thinker (something I hope to help my children achieve), but I do not think it is wise to rely only on someone else’s distillation of a method. I would encourage you to get back to the actual works by Mason before you let her influence you.
The frustating thing about all these wonderful sounding theories of homeschooling is that, as a Catholic parent, we are obliged to evaluate methods for spiritual influences as well as academic soundness.
Posted by Melissa on 06/10/06 at 12:09 PM
Melissa, I think you might be interested in the next book review—Real Learning by Elizabeth Foss—I’ll be posting because the author’s approach combines much from Charlotte Mason with philosophy from Edith Stein (St Theresa Benedicta of the Cross.)
In my approach to homeschooling I’m not looking to buy wholesale into any one method or philosophy of education. Rather, I’m seeking to find the best of what’s out there and deciding what accords with my own beliefs about education (which are quite strong). In any case, I will be tailoring what I do to the specific needs of each of child and to my own temperment and abilities as a teacher. And everything, of course, will be done in a spirit of prayer, always asking the Holy Spirit to be present in our home and to guide me to do what is best for Isabella and her future siblings.
As far as Rousseau’s influence on Charlotte Mason or for that matter Mason’s influence on my thinking, I don’t think one need be absolutist. The Catholic Church has a long tradition of incorporating from pagan philosophy that which suits her needs while rejecting that which is foreign to her. St Thomas Aquinas was greatly influenced by the pagan Aristotle but I hardly think one can accuse the Angelic Doctor of being corrupted by Aristotle’s spiritual influence.
If Mason found something worthwhile in Rousseau does it necessarily mean she embraced all of his ideas? ( Note that I say “if”; I haven’t read enough Mason or Rousseau to make a judgement either way on the matter.)
But even if Rousseau is a negative influence and I find on further study that there is objectionable content in Mason’s writings; if I also find much that is worthwhile in Miss Mason’s methods, can I not incorporate that which is useful to me while rejecting that which is foreign to my philosophy? To reject her methods outright because she was a Protestant or even because she embraced some wrong-headed philosophy would be to throw out the good with the bad and is not at all in keeping with the Catholic intellectual tradition.
Can you point to anything in Charlotte Mason’s methodology that contradicts Catholic ideas because the way you voice your reservations seems very vague. I’m unclear what you mean by"spiritual influences.” So far what I’ve seen from Catholic homeschoolers who borrow from Charlotte Mason’s methodology seems quite in keeping with Catholic principles. I like the idea of “living books” (though I’m not as excited about the terminology) I like the practice of narration, I like the idea of nature study, of studying artists and composers. So far I haven’t seen anything in the methodology that is objectionable.
I do intend to read some of Mason’s writings at some point because my curiosity has been aroused, but I don’t see why I should be wary of implementing ideas derived from her thought without doing so. If the method works does it matter what philosophy underlay the originator so long as I find the actual practice does not contradict my own philosophy of education?
Posted by Melanie Bettinelli on 06/11/06 at 12:00 AM