21:16 Back to letting Charlotte Mason speak for herself: "We may not Choose or Reject Subjects.--You will see at a glance, with this Captain Idea of establishing relationships as a guide, the unwisdom of choosing or rejecting this or that subject, as being more or less useful or necessary in view of a child's future. We decide, for example, that Tommy, who is eight, need not waste his time over the Latin Grammar. We intend him for commercial or scientific pursuits,--what good will it be to him? But we do not know how much we are shutting out from Tommy's range of thought besides the Latin Grammar. He has to translate, for example,--'Pueri formosos equos vident.' He is a ruminant animal, and has been told something about that strong Roman people whose speech is now brought before him. How their boys catch hold of him! How he gloats over their horses! The Latin Grammar is not mere words to Tommy, or rather Tommy knows, as we have forgotten, that the epithet 'mere' is the very last to apply to words. Of course it is only now and then that a notion catches the small boy, but when it does catch, it works wonders, and does more for his education than years of grind. (School Education, p. 162-63) ""Latin is taught at the House of Education by means of narration after each section has been thoroughly studied in grammar, syntax and style. The literature studied increases in difficulty as the pupil advances in grammar, etc. Nothing but good Latin is ever narrated, so the pupil acquires style as well as structure. The substance of the passage is usually reproduced with the phraseology and style of the original and both students and children learn what is really Latin and realise that it is a language and not a mere grammar." Here we get Grammar, that is, construction, learned as we learn it in English, at the lips of those who, know, and the extraordinary readiness in acquiring new words shewn by the scholars promises English folk the copious vocabulary in one or another foreign language, the lack of which is a national distress." (Philosophy of Education, p. 213) 23:27 "Disciplinary Subjects of Instruction.--Having cleared our minds as to the end we have in view, we ask ourselves--'Is there any fruitful idea underlying this or that study that the children are engaged in?' We divest ourselves of the notion that to develop the faculties is the chief thing, and a 'subject' which does not rise out of some great thought of life we usually reject as not nourishing, not fruitful; while we retain those studies which give exercise in habits of clear and orderly thinking. Mathematics, grammar, logic, etc., are not purely disciplinary, they do develop (if a bull may be allowed) intellectual muscle. We by no means reject the familiar staples of education in the school sense, but we prize them even more for the record of intellectual habits they leave in the brain tissue, than for their distinct value in developing certain 'faculties.'" (School Education, p. 174) "But this [narration] is only one way to use books: others are to enumerate the statements in a given paragraph or chapter; to analyse a chapter, to divide it into paragraphs under proper headings, to tabulate and classify series; to trace cause to consequence and consequence to cause; to discern character and perceive how character and circumstance interact; to get lessons of life and conduct, or the living knowledge which makes for science, out of books; all this is possible for school boys and girls, and until they have begun to use books for themselves in such ways, they can hardly be said to have begun their education. The Teacher's Part.--The teacher's part is, in the first place, to see what is to be done, to look over the work of the day in advance and see what mental discipline, as well as what vital knowledge, this and that lesson afford; and then to set such questions and such tasks as shall give full scope to his pupils' mental activity. Let marginal notes be freely made, as neatly and beautifully as may be, for books should be handled with reverence. Let numbers, letters, underlining be used to help the eye and to save the needless fag of writing abstracts. Let the pupil write for himself half a dozen questions which cover the passage studied; he need not write the answers if he be taught that the mind can know nothing but what it can produce in the form of an answer to a question put by the mind to itself. Disciplinary Devices must not come between Children and the Soul of the Book.--These few hints by no means cover the disciplinary uses of a good school-book; but let us be careful that our disciplinary devices, and our mechanical devices to secure and tabulate the substance of knowledge, do not come between the children and that which is the soul of the book, the living thought it contains. Science is doing so much for us in these days, nature is drawing so close to us, art is unfolding so much meaning to us, the world is becoming so rich for us, that we are a little in danger of neglecting the art of deriving sustenance from books. Let us not in such wise impoverish our lives and the lives of our children; for, to quote the golden words of Milton: "Books are not absolutely dead things, but do contain a potency of life in them to be as active as that soul was, whose progeny they are; nay, they do preserve, as in a vial, the purest efficacy and extraction of that living intellect that bred them. As good almost kill a man, as kill a good book; who kills a man kills a good reasonable creature, God's image; but he who destroys a good book, kills reason itself--kills the image of God, as it were, in the eye." (School Education, p. 180-181) 25:15 "A corollary of the principle that education is the science of relations, is, that no education seems to be worth the name which has not made children at home in the world of books, and so related them, mind to mind, with thinkers who have dealt with knowledge. We reject epitomes, compilations, and their like, and put into children's hands books which, long or short, are living. Thus it becomes a large part of the teacher's work to help children to deal with their books; so that the oral lesson and lecture are but small matters in education, and are used chiefly to summarise or to expand or illustrate." (School Education, p. 226) "A book may be long or short, old or new, easy or hard, written by a great man or a lesser man, and yet be the living book which finds its way to the mind of a young reader. The expert is not the person to choose; the children themselves are the experts in this case. A single page will elicit a verdict; but the unhappy thing is, this verdict is not betrayed; it is acted upon in the opening or closing of the door of the mind. " (School Education, p. 228) 27:41 "At the House of Education the students narrate in French, (See Chapter X.) more readily and copiously than they do in English,--the courses of lectures in French history and literature which form part of their work. In German and Italian they are able to read a scene in a play and 'tell' the scene in character, or a short passage from a narrative. We rather emphasise Italian, the language is so beautiful and the literature so rich, and I should like to suggest that schools should do the same. Latin and Greek we learn in the usual ways, but we apply the method of narration to the former." (Philosophy of Education, p. 276--You all have really gotten the wrong end of stick about this Latin and Greek situation.)
Part 2 of Tell me you know nothing about Charlotte Mason, without telling me you know nothing about Charlotte Mason. Understanding the language of Charlotte Mason is really key here, as your translations of her philosophy and methods are flawed by misunderstanding her language. As a homeschool mom who has been leading moms in a monthly study group of her volumes for 9 years, I do understand that it is tricky, as her meanings are not always the same as ours. But she explains them in depth in the thousands of pages in her volumes. In my opinion, her 20 Principles are really a basic summation for those who were already trained in her teacher college or had read her volumes, to keep focus of her most important truths, but they would already have understood what she meant. Right now listening to ya’ll talk about teaching Latin and parents, ‘adding’ it because she wasn’t rigorous enough. Charlotte had Latin taught in her schools and programmes, and by high school she had 3 languages in her schedules. My 5 children have learned Latin, Plutarch, Shakespeare - my high school age daughter is reading The Fairy Queen, Don Quixote, Shakespeare, Francis Bacon, Plutarch, etc, all of which Ms Mason herself scheduled with her students. As for Latin… from Volume 3, pg 233-234, section on Language…”In Language, by age twelve, they should have a fair knowledge of English grammar, and should have read some literature. They should have more or less power in speaking and understanding French, and should be able to read a fairly easy French book; the same with German, but considerably less progress; and in Latin, they should be reading ‘Fables,’ if not ‘Caesar’ and perhaps ‘Virgil.’ “ Those students were not learning whatever they wanted on their own in the woods ;).
Also, at 32:00 you clearly felt strongly that classical education was misrepresented on a Wikipedia page, but don’t seem to realize that this is tone deaf to the fact that you’ve spent two videos doing just that with CM. Just greatly hoping this will be addressed with some humility and kindness.
This panel discussion is a perfect representation of the veneer of an education from which I saved my children by forgoing public school. Four adults shadow boxing one straw man after another. Not a good look for an educational company.
I'm glad for the address at the beginning of this video, but how can you definitively say CM is different from your idea of Classical when you admittedly don't have a firm grasp on what the CM philosophy is, and what she believes?
7:38 Mason's goal in no rereading wasn't to prohibit "getting everything out of the text" but to help students focus and digest the ideas presented rather than immediately jumping to asking analytical questions before you have wrestled with what is before you.
@@anonymous1984yso it's interesting that you say that. Many people assume that but in School Education, ch 16 she does recommend students use books in many ways "trace cause to consequence and consequence to cause; to discern character and perceive how character and circumstance interact; to get lessons of life and conduct" but the difference is the students are being asked to directly interact with the material vs through a teacher constructed medium like a worksheet.
@@anonymous1984y NO. Absolutely not. CM encouraged naturally inspired discourse rather than predetermined "comprehension hoops" to jump through. Discourse does involve questions. But, the purpose of discourse isn't to steer a child to some predetermined conclusion. Discourse allows the child to explore the images and ideas and come to their own opinion/conclusion. Again... assumptions based on a superficial "understanding" of CM leads to these misrepresentations.
"But perhaps someone will still ask, what is wrong with the oral lesson? Is it not a clever lesson, and do not the clever questions that follow it produce cleverer answers? Certainly when well handled, as it often is, the oral lesson creates that impression. But who does the work in such lessons? It is of course the teacher. He is really thinking. He selects and arranges the matter (serving up one one and the same dish for two score different minds), he chooses the language, he is making the effort to win or to compel the attention of every mind in the passive group before him. All this demands real mental effort of him, but little or none is demanded of the listeners. When it comes to questioning it is the same. Anybody can answer questions if he has listened- and The virtuous do listen even when they are bored; intellectual effort is demanded only of the one who puts them. It is he who must think clearly, and speak to the point. The answer in very truth leaps to the mind if the lesson has been well given and the question is well put. This clever questioning flatters the teacher, and has delighted many an inspector, but it does little for the child except leave him with certain scraps of information, that have little interest, little value and little permanence. For the child does no real work and that way he will not learn how to get knowledge and how to use it." From an address given by HW Household in 1931 "The Teaching Methods of Charlotte Mason and the PNEU.
No rereading means you should only read the text once before the child narrates. Don't repeat it if they weren't listening the first time, because it reinforces that habit of not paying attention. It only applies during the lesson.
Her philosophy is very Aristotelian regarding training in habits. The idea of no reread is only during the lesson to reinforce the habit of attention. They of course can reread it after school.
1:22 So… how do you know that her philosophy doesn’t align with your definition of classical education? Honestly - you had just stated that you all needed to dig deeper into her works before part 3. Many have pointed out that you misrepresented her philosophy many times in these two episodes. I’m not sure how you can be intellectually honest and make a statement like that. (Not a part of any Charlotte Mason mob either… just a mom of YOUNG children who is both reading Charlotte Mason and has appreciated what Memoria Press has shared in this podcast and at the HEAV convention in the past.)
31:47 THE WIKIPEDIA PAGE…. I would have loved for you to quote Charlotte Mason herself more (or at all, outside of the 20 principles…) and set this whole Wikipedia point aside entirely….
17:03 there's a fundamental misunderstanding and missing here of "science of relations" vs "mastering material" - Mason's methods are rooted in humility, both from the teacher and the student. We do not "master material." We learn to relate the world around us and build greater connections over the course of our lives.
Here's your dilemma and why you should have chosen not to post this part 2. There is so little understanding of CM that you can't properly debate your own misrepresentations. You spent multiple minutes on the re-reading topic while entirely failing to realize that she meant a single reading is required for a single school lesson because you have trained the habit of attention into children. Please stop with this nonsense. CM people are upset because you are criticizing a system of education that you clearly do not understand. CM is neither inaccessible nor are her writings changing 100 years after she published them. I hope people aren't listening to this and thinking this is an accurate representation of Charlotte Mason. Big, huge yikes part 2
Where did you read that CM doesn’t like Latin? If you look at her own teaching schedule template, you’d easily see that she taught Latin, French, Italian, and German. You’ve clearly lumped Charlotte Mason with modern day “unschooling” and new age/gentle parenting ideas, and that’s an unfair and inaccurate comparison, when you’ve clearly not read any further than bullet points. Bullet points of her principles are not arguments. It’s unfair, as well as disrespectful to attribute negative connotations to her philosophy of education when you’ve not taken the time to read thoroughly. Along with reading her works, please also take a glance at her teaching schedule and her personal schedule and you might be enlightened to see just how rigorous and disciplined she was. We can only hope to achieve as much as she did in a day much less on a weekly basis! I was glad that you added in an acknowledgment to the previous video’s comments and I look forward to hearing what you can offer to a more constructive conversation in the coming months. Please be more thorough and well-versed before you approach this subject again. I’ve been disappointed in these two latest podcasts considering I’ve followed you for the last couple of years, have enjoyed your videos, and have ordered some of your own MP products.
Charlotte's students spent entire terms studying just one book, for given subjects. (1 or a small few). They were not superficially running from one book and on to the next. Also, a good narration would not tend towards the superficial, but would rather capture all the essential elements of the material being narrated. And in putting it into one's own words, the reader comes to sort of own the material (to grasp it). Additionally, there are many hidden (assumed? - not in today's educational climate - ) benefits to narration, in terms of memory, critical thinking, reasoning, etc). Because of Charlotte Mason, we went much more deeply into subjects than we would otherwise have done. Indeed, one benefit of a more clearly outlined curriculum would be more breadth, as opposed to depth.
Understandable since this is a continuation from your first video, but again you're harping on things that are NOT at all what Charlotte Mason said or meant. The comparison you're attempting to make requires as deep an understanding of her actual works and philosophy as your understanding of "your brand/definition of classical". It may have been wiser to let this video die so you could work on providing your community with a true and honest comparison.
11:13 It's interesting to hear the discussion of kids not having attention. She was trying to hone their attention during a lesson. If you know you're going to hear something again, you're likely not going to look as deeply.
I have found these podcast episodes very helpful! Thank you Memoria Press for tackling this big topic! I look forward to the follow up episode. I think Charlotte Mason's methods have been misused and taken out of context by un-schooling and gentle parenting groups which has added a lot of confusion to these issues. I have personally really liked the McGuffey Readers and Ray's Arithmetic - both are often recommended by CM families. I think they have a lot of great points and resources but would love to discuss the differences in philosophy and pedagogy. Super helpful!
I am not a Charlottte Mason homeschooler nor Classical and haven’t read any of her volumes but I have heard a few experts speak on CM’s pedagogy for many hours. I felt like many of the people who commented in the last video However, I enjoyed this one much more. I am not saying that CM is the unschooler you are making her sound to be… but I am more a fan of structured education and having a set plan. I am very eclectic and put my curriculum together from many different companies, but I have to plan at least a whole school year at a time and I also have a long term path lined up that I would like us to walk through. Because of Dislexia and ADHD my timeline has had to be different. But I love what you guys create. In our case, I am planning on using your Literature Guides and Composition. When I see your guides, I feel like if I knew what you guys know, I would probably write the guides similarly to the way you write them. I love your structure, and how simple everything looks. So if there is something I dislike of CM is that. I need plans, I need a path. I need a team of experts who produce great products like yours. I still understand though that there are many different styles of personalities in this world and that it is normal to prefer a different method of education than mine. Not everyone feels comfortable with the rigor of Classical education. And not everyone feels comfortable with how relaxed CM might feel. I see what you mean with everything you argue but I don’t like to condemn everyone that doesn’t follow in my footsteps. I think that is arrogant and prideful and the Lord certainly does not want us to be arrogant and look down on others. Thank you for making this video.
So I can relate to what this person is saying. She is not saying CM didn't have plans. she is saying that as a homeschool mom, MP makes it more accessible to have a clearly laid out plan. As someone who has looked at lots of curriculum options, including simply Charlotte Mason , amblesife online etc, I still found myself very overwhelmed with practically how to implement CM methodology or plan a year or a day etc. MP materials are planned and structured clearly etc. Maybe somewhere in the interwebs are clearly laid out plans but it's not the same as how clear and simple MPs yearly schedule is and their entire track from K-12 to navigate and see what's going on. I think SCM does it pretty well and has lots of support via her podcasts and you tubes. But for whatever reason I was personally still not as settled about the direction of that curriculum and it's implementation. (But that is my personal preference). I don't think MP is perfect by any means. This is not a comment on which method is "better". I just think the above two commenters are not understanding the original commenter.
5:00… I think this is the issue that I (an adherent to a classical, CM style of education who has used many MP materials) and others have with the last episode. I recognize there was no time to address critiques between this and the last so I have high hopes for the next CM episode. This topic deserves the due diligence of thorough understanding. If it sounds off, then the time should have been taken to dive into what she meant by “no rereading.” This would have prevented some pearl clutching for sure. That’s just one example of a misunderstanding. I’m a long time follower of Classical Etc. and know that before the next CM discussion, a more thoughtful analysis will be brought to the table. Highly recommend Karen Glass and her book “Consider This.” Additionally, CM parents know that this is a viable and beautiful course of education. We don’t feel judgement as the intro suggests, just frustration over misunderstanding due to sloppy work. Again, this is a big topic and I adore this podcast and learning from this group. I just know they can do so much better.
Also adding that Martin is absolutely right in that Mason was teaching a specific set of kids in a specific time. She’s not a curriculum. She’s a philosophy of education. I always say that if she were alive today, she would have made changes to her original works to reflect that. On the other hand, the beauty of classical ed is that it overcomes modernity. But Paul… she does advise Latin. Not sure where that comment came from. Typically starting in 4th grade in a CM education.
It's too bad that you all didn't think to have someone join you who knows all about CM. Reading the comments, it seems that you have misled some listeners. Now they are as confused as you are and don't know it.
Mason students narrated in Latin and learned grammar in Latin! They read and sung in German, French, and Italian! A heck of a lot more than most kids in classical schools today.
As much as I still uphold that Charlotte Mason is classical and that you have done her a bit of an injustice by basing your podcast on the 20 principles only, I liked this part of the podcast. I generally agree with you and that is likely why I'm more of a fan of Memoria Press than Charlotte Mason. But I still like Ambleside Online's booklists 😁
34:30 Martin, you're sunk! Lol but yes she circles round and round and it's hard to read. I'm glad you said this. Hopefully those moms who can't wade through her books feel less stupid now. Her works are unusually hard.
Thank you for saying this. I’m not sure reading her stuff made me feel stupid, it just felt unnecessarily fluffed. Which is the feeling I get about the whole CM method.
9:00 when in "highschool" ambleside had to change in some ways. Most CM educators today are strictly speaking of younger elementary. It's harder to find information for the older grades. There's some out there but not like with the younger grades
I have listened for a while now and think you offer the best education. I only wish my mother, who was a widow, knew about classical education when i was a child. If I had young children now, I wouldn't hesitate to enroll them in classical education. Thank you for all you do for children and society.
Glad you’re getting tons of engagement from the CM mob. Thank you for blessing my family all of these years with your beautiful curriculum and wonderful staff. Have a wonderful and blessed Christmas! ❤
With all due respect, mob is very uncharitable. Many of these commenters are simply moms who've spent a lot of time studying educational philosophy and care deeply about what education is on a fundamental level. It's not unreasonable to expect that the MP team to display the same rigor that they expect of students in the classroom.
"CM Mob" i'm not a teacher or a mom. i know the bare minimum about cm because my mom homeschooled me and is currently homeschooling my niece and nephew. and i saw this video because my mom was watching it and even i'm getting secondhand embarrassment. pretty obvious they didn't really look into what they were trying to debate, they just made assumptions based on the bare minimum and created a strawman to argue against. anyway, my point: i'm completely out of this loop and even i'm like "wth are they saying" so it's not really fair to call people criticizing them a 'mob' lol
Your "cm mob" condescension was unnecessary. 🙄 And if you actually took the time to read through the very thoughtful comments from the previous video, you would know the responses given were due to the strawman arguments that needed to be addressed. The CM philosophy was heavily misrepresented and my fellow homeschool moms were in the right to point out the glaringly obvious fact that these hosts couldn't be bothered to read CM herself and yet had the gall to tear her philosophy apart. Very dishonest and disappointing for a company touting "classical" education.
Yes, engagement is definitely more important than truth.. at least that's apparent with this video series. It's interesting that when people who actually know what they're talking about comment to point out the errors in these declarations, the gross lack of understanding of CM's philosophy, and the major flaws in the arguments presented they're labeled mob, cultish, offended, and unqualified. But, good thing you're blessed and the ratings are up!
I do think you are wrong about much of what you describe here, it seems there is only a superficial knowledge of the matter which leads to many errors. However, reading the responses of CM followers in this thread and others is also bizarre. The most offputting thing about CM education is her following honestly, they treat her like Gospel and will act as if she was the first person to discover children have souls or whatever. I wish this had been better presented, I would welcome a critique of CM because again it seems there is only either worship or ignorance on the topic. I think, per example, that a lot of people find her methods so revolutionary because they compare it with worksheets and very recent education trends in American schools. Though I do think she created comprehensive and very interesting new methods, much of them are simple adaptations with only minor changes of older methods. Copywork, dictation and narration have been staples in education for hundreds of years, etc. It didn't sit well with me to read in her works the assertion that she didn't want to continue the work of the past but to create a whole new philosophy, I don't think it's totally honest considering how much she borrows from others and doesn't folow the kind of spirit of classical ed. I would also say that the main point where she departs from classical education is not latin or grammar but the idea of centering education on the child and seeing the educator as more of a facilitator, I don't think she does this to the extent of other modern educators which is why her education holds very well, she definitely wouldn't recommend unschooling though so I still think this is being misrepresented here. The main issue is the reliance on methods and books in opposition to the teacher (in my opinion). Despite all this paradoxically I think CM offers a better application of classical education than most current modern classical curricula, including MP which focuses too much on methods and workbooks.
21:16 Back to letting Charlotte Mason speak for herself: "We may not Choose or Reject Subjects.--You will see at a glance, with this Captain Idea of establishing relationships as a guide, the unwisdom of choosing or rejecting this or that subject, as being more or less useful or necessary in view of a child's future. We decide, for example, that Tommy, who is eight, need not waste his time over the Latin Grammar. We intend him for commercial or scientific pursuits,--what good will it be to him? But we do not know how much we are shutting out from Tommy's range of thought besides the Latin Grammar. He has to translate, for example,--'Pueri formosos equos vident.' He is a ruminant animal, and has been told something about that strong Roman people whose speech is now brought before him. How their boys catch hold of him! How he gloats over their horses! The Latin Grammar is not mere words to Tommy, or rather Tommy knows, as we have forgotten, that the epithet 'mere' is the very last to apply to words. Of course it is only now and then that a notion catches the small boy, but when it does catch, it works wonders, and does more for his education than years of grind. (School Education, p. 162-63)
""Latin is taught at the House of Education by means of narration after each section has been thoroughly studied in grammar, syntax and style. The literature studied increases in difficulty as the pupil advances in grammar, etc. Nothing but good Latin is ever narrated, so the pupil acquires style as well as structure. The substance of the passage is usually reproduced with the phraseology and style of the original and both students and children learn what is really Latin and realise that it is a language and not a mere grammar."
Here we get Grammar, that is, construction, learned as we learn it in English, at the lips of those who, know, and the extraordinary readiness in acquiring new words shewn by the scholars promises English folk the copious vocabulary in one or another foreign language, the lack of which is a national distress." (Philosophy of Education, p. 213)
23:27 "Disciplinary Subjects of Instruction.--Having cleared our minds as to the end we have in view, we ask ourselves--'Is there any fruitful idea underlying this or that study that the children are engaged in?' We divest ourselves of the notion that to develop the faculties is the chief thing, and a 'subject' which does not rise out of some great thought of life we usually reject as not nourishing, not fruitful; while we retain those studies which give exercise in habits of clear and orderly thinking. Mathematics, grammar, logic, etc., are not purely disciplinary, they do develop (if a bull may be allowed) intellectual muscle. We by no means reject the familiar staples of education in the school sense, but we prize them even more for the record of intellectual habits they leave in the brain tissue, than for their distinct value in developing certain 'faculties.'" (School Education, p. 174)
"But this [narration] is only one way to use books: others are to enumerate the statements in a given paragraph or chapter; to analyse a chapter, to divide it into paragraphs under proper headings, to tabulate and classify series; to trace cause to consequence and consequence to cause; to discern character and perceive how character and circumstance interact; to get lessons of life and conduct, or the living knowledge which makes for science, out of books; all this is possible for school boys and girls, and until they have begun to use books for themselves in such ways, they can hardly be said to have begun their education.
The Teacher's Part.--The teacher's part is, in the first place, to see what is to be done, to look over the work of the day in advance and see what mental discipline, as well as what vital knowledge, this and that lesson afford; and then to set such questions and such tasks as shall give full scope to his pupils' mental activity. Let marginal notes be freely made, as neatly and beautifully as may be, for books should be handled with reverence. Let numbers, letters, underlining be used to help the eye and to save the needless fag of writing abstracts. Let the pupil write for himself half a dozen questions which cover the passage studied; he need not write the answers if he be taught that the mind can know nothing but what it can produce in the form of an answer to a question put by the mind to itself.
Disciplinary Devices must not come between Children and the Soul of the Book.--These few hints by no means cover the disciplinary uses of a good school-book; but let us be careful that our disciplinary devices, and our mechanical devices to secure and tabulate the substance of knowledge, do not come between the children and that which is the soul of the book, the living thought it contains. Science is doing so much for us in these days, nature is drawing so close to us, art is unfolding so much meaning to us, the world is becoming so rich for us, that we are a little in danger of neglecting the art of deriving sustenance from books. Let us not in such wise impoverish our lives and the lives of our children; for, to quote the golden words of Milton: "Books are not absolutely dead things, but do contain a potency of life in them to be as active as that soul was, whose progeny they are; nay, they do preserve, as in a vial, the purest efficacy and extraction of that living intellect that bred them. As good almost kill a man, as kill a good book; who kills a man kills a good reasonable creature, God's image; but he who destroys a good book, kills reason itself--kills the image of God, as it were, in the eye." (School Education, p. 180-181)
25:15 "A corollary of the principle that education is the science of relations, is, that no education seems to be worth the name which has not made children at home in the world of books, and so related them, mind to mind, with thinkers who have dealt with knowledge. We reject epitomes, compilations, and their like, and put into children's hands books which, long or short, are living. Thus it becomes a large part of the teacher's work to help children to deal with their books; so that the oral lesson and lecture are but small matters in education, and are used chiefly to summarise or to expand or illustrate." (School Education, p. 226)
"A book may be long or short, old or new, easy or hard, written by a great man or a lesser man, and yet be the living book which finds its way to the mind of a young reader. The expert is not the person to choose; the children themselves are the experts in this case. A single page will elicit a verdict; but the unhappy thing is, this verdict is not betrayed; it is acted upon in the opening or closing of the door of the mind. " (School Education, p. 228)
27:41 "At the House of Education the students narrate in French, (See Chapter X.) more readily and copiously than they do in English,--the courses of lectures in French history and literature which form part of their work. In German and Italian they are able to read a scene in a play and 'tell' the scene in character, or a short passage from a narrative. We rather emphasise Italian, the language is so beautiful and the literature so rich, and I should like to suggest that schools should do the same. Latin and Greek we learn in the usual ways, but we apply the method of narration to the former." (Philosophy of Education, p. 276--You all have really gotten the wrong end of stick about this Latin and Greek situation.)
Part 2 of Tell me you know nothing about Charlotte Mason, without telling me you know nothing about Charlotte Mason. Understanding the language of Charlotte Mason is really key here, as your translations of her philosophy and methods are flawed by misunderstanding her language. As a homeschool mom who has been leading moms in a monthly study group of her volumes for 9 years, I do understand that it is tricky, as her meanings are not always the same as ours. But she explains them in depth in the thousands of pages in her volumes. In my opinion, her 20 Principles are really a basic summation for those who were already trained in her teacher college or had read her volumes, to keep focus of her most important truths, but they would already have understood what she meant.
Right now listening to ya’ll talk about teaching Latin and parents, ‘adding’ it because she wasn’t rigorous enough. Charlotte had Latin taught in her schools and programmes, and by high school she had 3 languages in her schedules. My 5 children have learned Latin, Plutarch, Shakespeare - my high school age daughter is reading The Fairy Queen, Don Quixote, Shakespeare, Francis Bacon, Plutarch, etc, all of which Ms Mason herself scheduled with her students. As for Latin… from Volume 3, pg 233-234, section on Language…”In Language, by age twelve, they should have a fair knowledge of English grammar, and should have read some literature. They should have more or less power in speaking and understanding French, and should be able to read a fairly easy French book; the same with German, but considerably less progress; and in Latin, they should be reading ‘Fables,’ if not ‘Caesar’ and perhaps ‘Virgil.’ “ Those students were not learning whatever they wanted on their own in the woods ;).
Interview Karen Glass, please.
Also, at 32:00 you clearly felt strongly that classical education was misrepresented on a Wikipedia page, but don’t seem to realize that this is tone deaf to the fact that you’ve spent two videos doing just that with CM. Just greatly hoping this will be addressed with some humility and kindness.
This panel discussion is a perfect representation of the veneer of an education from which I saved my children by forgoing public school.
Four adults shadow boxing one straw man after another. Not a good look for an educational company.
Exactly. They really discredit themselves with this discussion 😬
I'm glad for the address at the beginning of this video, but how can you definitively say CM is different from your idea of Classical when you admittedly don't have a firm grasp on what the CM philosophy is, and what she believes?
Let’s try to include a few CM folks on the 2025 episode. It’ll save everyone lots of back and forth.
Hear hear!!
16:07 oh bless, Mason's methods are so great for boys. Short lessons, physical movement in dance, deep language, short/no yacking from the teacher.
I can’t imagine teaching my boys using any other method! All else feels disrespectful to their personhood and masculine qualities.
7:38 Mason's goal in no rereading wasn't to prohibit "getting everything out of the text" but to help students focus and digest the ideas presented rather than immediately jumping to asking analytical questions before you have wrestled with what is before you.
4:57 No repeating is during the lesson time. It supposed to help you listen well the first time. Rereading outside of the lesson time is great.
No questioning and no comprehension. They weren't wrong. That is what CM believes in.
6:00 " if student can't put it in his own words he doesn't really know it.." ... "I agree with that"
@@anonymous1984yso it's interesting that you say that. Many people assume that but in School Education, ch 16 she does recommend students use books in many ways "trace cause to consequence and consequence to cause; to discern character and perceive how character and circumstance interact; to get lessons of life and conduct" but the difference is the students are being asked to directly interact with the material vs through a teacher constructed medium like a worksheet.
@@anonymous1984y NO. Absolutely not. CM encouraged naturally inspired discourse rather than predetermined "comprehension hoops" to jump through. Discourse does involve questions. But, the purpose of discourse isn't to steer a child to some predetermined conclusion. Discourse allows the child to explore the images and ideas and come to their own opinion/conclusion. Again... assumptions based on a superficial "understanding" of CM leads to these misrepresentations.
@@OffRhodeAdventures no absolutely not? Are you agreeing with me? I can't tell but I believe so. And yes to what you said
"But perhaps someone will still ask, what is wrong with the oral lesson? Is it not a clever lesson, and do not the clever questions that follow it produce cleverer answers? Certainly when well handled, as it often is, the oral lesson creates that impression.
But who does the work in such lessons? It is of course the teacher. He is really thinking. He selects and arranges the matter (serving up one one and the same dish for two score different minds), he chooses the language, he is making the effort to win or to compel the attention of every mind in the passive group before him. All this demands real mental effort of him, but little or none is demanded of the listeners.
When it comes to questioning it is the same. Anybody can answer questions if he has listened- and The virtuous do listen even when they are bored; intellectual effort is demanded only of the one who puts them. It is he who must think clearly, and speak to the point. The answer in very truth leaps to the mind if the lesson has been well given and the question is well put.
This clever questioning flatters the teacher, and has delighted many an inspector, but it does little for the child except leave him with certain scraps of information, that have little interest, little value and little permanence. For the child does no real work and that way he will not learn how to get knowledge and how to use it."
From an address given by HW Household in 1931 "The Teaching Methods of Charlotte Mason and the PNEU.
No rereading means you should only read the text once before the child narrates. Don't repeat it if they weren't listening the first time, because it reinforces that habit of not paying attention. It only applies during the lesson.
Her philosophy is very Aristotelian regarding training in habits. The idea of no reread is only during the lesson to reinforce the habit of attention. They of course can reread it after school.
I love this discussion - very timely in my life as a homeschooling parent where I have been debating a similar topic with other parents
1:22 So… how do you know that her philosophy doesn’t align with your definition of classical education? Honestly - you had just stated that you all needed to dig deeper into her works before part 3. Many have pointed out that you misrepresented her philosophy many times in these two episodes. I’m not sure how you can be intellectually honest and make a statement like that.
(Not a part of any Charlotte Mason mob either… just a mom of YOUNG children who is both reading Charlotte Mason and has appreciated what Memoria Press has shared in this podcast and at the HEAV convention in the past.)
28:13 I’d also appreciate some transparency here. How many of you all read volume 6 in preparation for this conversation?
31:47 THE WIKIPEDIA PAGE…. I would have loved for you to quote Charlotte Mason herself more (or at all, outside of the 20 principles…) and set this whole Wikipedia point aside entirely….
It was so kind to speak to the upset listeners of the previous episode on CM.
17:03 there's a fundamental misunderstanding and missing here of "science of relations" vs "mastering material" - Mason's methods are rooted in humility, both from the teacher and the student. We do not "master material." We learn to relate the world around us and build greater connections over the course of our lives.
Here's your dilemma and why you should have chosen not to post this part 2. There is so little understanding of CM that you can't properly debate your own misrepresentations. You spent multiple minutes on the re-reading topic while entirely failing to realize that she meant a single reading is required for a single school lesson because you have trained the habit of attention into children. Please stop with this nonsense. CM people are upset because you are criticizing a system of education that you clearly do not understand. CM is neither inaccessible nor are her writings changing 100 years after she published them. I hope people aren't listening to this and thinking this is an accurate representation of Charlotte Mason. Big, huge yikes part 2
Or the way they talked about Latin?! One google search shows that they were misinformed on that front….
Where did you read that CM doesn’t like Latin? If you look at her own teaching schedule template, you’d easily see that she taught Latin, French, Italian, and German.
You’ve clearly lumped Charlotte Mason with modern day “unschooling” and new age/gentle parenting ideas, and that’s an unfair and inaccurate comparison, when you’ve clearly not read any further than bullet points. Bullet points of her principles are not arguments. It’s unfair, as well as disrespectful to attribute negative connotations to her philosophy of education when you’ve not taken the time to read thoroughly. Along with reading her works, please also take a glance at her teaching schedule and her personal schedule and you might be enlightened to see just how rigorous and disciplined she was.
We can only hope to achieve as much as she did in a day much less on a weekly basis!
I was glad that you added in an acknowledgment to the previous video’s comments and I look forward to hearing what you can offer to a more constructive conversation in the coming months. Please be more thorough and well-versed before you approach this subject again.
I’ve been disappointed in these two latest podcasts considering I’ve followed you for the last couple of years, have enjoyed your videos, and have ordered some of your own MP products.
Charlotte's students spent entire terms studying just one book, for given subjects. (1 or a small few). They were not superficially running from one book and on to the next. Also, a good narration would not tend towards the superficial, but would rather capture all the essential elements of the material being narrated. And in putting it into one's own words, the reader comes to sort of own the material (to grasp it). Additionally, there are many hidden (assumed? - not in today's educational climate - ) benefits to narration, in terms of memory, critical thinking, reasoning, etc). Because of Charlotte Mason, we went much more deeply into subjects than we would otherwise have done. Indeed, one benefit of a more clearly outlined curriculum would be more breadth, as opposed to depth.
Understandable since this is a continuation from your first video, but again you're harping on things that are NOT at all what Charlotte Mason said or meant. The comparison you're attempting to make requires as deep an understanding of her actual works and philosophy as your understanding of "your brand/definition of classical". It may have been wiser to let this video die so you could work on providing your community with a true and honest comparison.
11:13 It's interesting to hear the discussion of kids not having attention. She was trying to hone their attention during a lesson. If you know you're going to hear something again, you're likely not going to look as deeply.
I have found these podcast episodes very helpful! Thank you Memoria Press for tackling this big topic! I look forward to the follow up episode. I think Charlotte Mason's methods have been misused and taken out of context by un-schooling and gentle parenting groups which has added a lot of confusion to these issues. I have personally really liked the McGuffey Readers and Ray's Arithmetic - both are often recommended by CM families. I think they have a lot of great points and resources but would love to discuss the differences in philosophy and pedagogy. Super helpful!
I am not a Charlottte Mason homeschooler nor Classical and haven’t read any of her volumes but I have heard a few experts speak on CM’s pedagogy for many hours. I felt like many of the people who commented in the last video
However, I enjoyed this one much more. I am not saying that CM is the unschooler you are making her sound to be… but I am more a fan of structured education and having a set plan. I am very eclectic and put my curriculum together from many different companies, but I have to plan at least a whole school year at a time and I also have a long term path lined up that I would like us to walk through.
Because of Dislexia and ADHD my timeline has had to be different. But I love what you guys create. In our case, I am planning on using your Literature Guides and Composition. When I see your guides, I feel like if I knew what you guys know, I would probably write the guides similarly to the way you write them. I love your structure, and how simple everything looks. So if there is something I dislike of CM is that. I need plans, I need a path. I need a team of experts who produce great products like yours.
I still understand though that there are many different styles of personalities in this world and that it is normal to prefer a different method of education than mine. Not everyone feels comfortable with the rigor of Classical education. And not everyone feels comfortable with how relaxed CM might feel.
I see what you mean with everything you argue but I don’t like to condemn everyone that doesn’t follow in my footsteps. I think that is arrogant and prideful and the Lord certainly does not want us to be arrogant and look down on others.
Thank you for making this video.
I think you are less aware of CM than you realize. Her school plans were quite extensive and very planned out.
I agree with Jessica. You clearly have limited understanding of how rigorous a CM education is. As do these ‘experts’ in the video.
So I can relate to what this person is saying. She is not saying CM didn't have plans. she is saying that as a homeschool mom, MP makes it more accessible to have a clearly laid out plan. As someone who has looked at lots of curriculum options, including simply Charlotte Mason , amblesife online etc, I still found myself very overwhelmed with practically how to implement CM methodology or plan a year or a day etc. MP materials are planned and structured clearly etc.
Maybe somewhere in the interwebs are clearly laid out plans but it's not the same as how clear and simple MPs yearly schedule is and their entire track from K-12 to navigate and see what's going on.
I think SCM does it pretty well and has lots of support via her podcasts and you tubes. But for whatever reason I was personally still not as settled about the direction of that curriculum and it's implementation. (But that is my personal preference).
I don't think MP is perfect by any means.
This is not a comment on which method is "better".
I just think the above two commenters are not understanding the original commenter.
5:00… I think this is the issue that I (an adherent to a classical, CM style of education who has used many MP materials) and others have with the last episode. I recognize there was no time to address critiques between this and the last so I have high hopes for the next CM episode. This topic deserves the due diligence of thorough understanding. If it sounds off, then the time should have been taken to dive into what she meant by “no rereading.” This would have prevented some pearl clutching for sure. That’s just one example of a misunderstanding. I’m a long time follower of Classical Etc. and know that before the next CM discussion, a more thoughtful analysis will be brought to the table. Highly recommend Karen Glass and her book “Consider This.” Additionally, CM parents know that this is a viable and beautiful course of education. We don’t feel judgement as the intro suggests, just frustration over misunderstanding due to sloppy work. Again, this is a big topic and I adore this podcast and learning from this group. I just know they can do so much better.
Also adding that Martin is absolutely right in that Mason was teaching a specific set of kids in a specific time. She’s not a curriculum. She’s a philosophy of education. I always say that if she were alive today, she would have made changes to her original works to reflect that. On the other hand, the beauty of classical ed is that it overcomes modernity.
But Paul… she does advise Latin. Not sure where that comment came from. Typically starting in 4th grade in a CM education.
Thank you for continuing the conversation.
It's too bad that you all didn't think to have someone join you who knows all about CM. Reading the comments, it seems that you have misled some listeners. Now they are as confused as you are and don't know it.
21:17 Paul. You're wrong lol. She taught Latin. I'm not sure where you're quote is from.... It what it was she actually said.
Mason students narrated in Latin and learned grammar in Latin! They read and sung in German, French, and Italian! A heck of a lot more than most kids in classical schools today.
She is an Ally in many aspects. This is why CM and classical hybrid so well together.
As much as I still uphold that Charlotte Mason is classical and that you have done her a bit of an injustice by basing your podcast on the 20 principles only, I liked this part of the podcast. I generally agree with you and that is likely why I'm more of a fan of Memoria Press than Charlotte Mason. But I still like Ambleside Online's booklists 😁
Memoria Press, narrate to all of us what you know about strawman arguments. 😂
34:30 Martin, you're sunk! Lol but yes she circles round and round and it's hard to read. I'm glad you said this. Hopefully those moms who can't wade through her books feel less stupid now. Her works are unusually hard.
Thank you for saying this.
I’m not sure reading her stuff made me feel stupid, it just felt unnecessarily fluffed. Which is the feeling I get about the whole CM method.
9:00 when in "highschool" ambleside had to change in some ways. Most CM educators today are strictly speaking of younger elementary. It's harder to find information for the older grades. There's some out there but not like with the younger grades
11:05 it is well discussed within cm circles that screens will ruin the ability to reach a true cm way
I have listened for a while now and think you offer the best education. I only wish my mother, who was a widow, knew about classical education when i was a child. If I had young children now, I wouldn't hesitate to enroll them in classical education. Thank you for all you do for children and society.
7:23 "..a young child needs that reading" absolutely truth for my children!!!!
22:30 they read books very slowly instead of fast over and over
Glad you’re getting tons of engagement from the CM mob. Thank you for blessing my family all of these years with your beautiful curriculum and wonderful staff. Have a wonderful and blessed Christmas! ❤
With all due respect, mob is very uncharitable. Many of these commenters are simply moms who've spent a lot of time studying educational philosophy and care deeply about what education is on a fundamental level. It's not unreasonable to expect that the MP team to display the same rigor that they expect of students in the classroom.
"CM Mob" i'm not a teacher or a mom. i know the bare minimum about cm because my mom homeschooled me and is currently homeschooling my niece and nephew. and i saw this video because my mom was watching it and even i'm getting secondhand embarrassment. pretty obvious they didn't really look into what they were trying to debate, they just made assumptions based on the bare minimum and created a strawman to argue against.
anyway, my point: i'm completely out of this loop and even i'm like "wth are they saying" so it's not really fair to call people criticizing them a 'mob' lol
Your "cm mob" condescension was unnecessary. 🙄 And if you actually took the time to read through the very thoughtful comments from the previous video, you would know the responses given were due to the strawman arguments that needed to be addressed. The CM philosophy was heavily misrepresented and my fellow homeschool moms were in the right to point out the glaringly obvious fact that these hosts couldn't be bothered to read CM herself and yet had the gall to tear her philosophy apart. Very dishonest and disappointing for a company touting "classical" education.
Yes, engagement is definitely more important than truth.. at least that's apparent with this video series. It's interesting that when people who actually know what they're talking about comment to point out the errors in these declarations, the gross lack of understanding of CM's philosophy, and the major flaws in the arguments presented they're labeled mob, cultish, offended, and unqualified. But, good thing you're blessed and the ratings are up!
😂 I’m glad I’m not the only one... mob indeed!
I do think you are wrong about much of what you describe here, it seems there is only a superficial knowledge of the matter which leads to many errors. However, reading the responses of CM followers in this thread and others is also bizarre. The most offputting thing about CM education is her following honestly, they treat her like Gospel and will act as if she was the first person to discover children have souls or whatever.
I wish this had been better presented, I would welcome a critique of CM because again it seems there is only either worship or ignorance on the topic. I think, per example, that a lot of people find her methods so revolutionary because they compare it with worksheets and very recent education trends in American schools. Though I do think she created comprehensive and very interesting new methods, much of them are simple adaptations with only minor changes of older methods. Copywork, dictation and narration have been staples in education for hundreds of years, etc. It didn't sit well with me to read in her works the assertion that she didn't want to continue the work of the past but to create a whole new philosophy, I don't think it's totally honest considering how much she borrows from others and doesn't folow the kind of spirit of classical ed.
I would also say that the main point where she departs from classical education is not latin or grammar but the idea of centering education on the child and seeing the educator as more of a facilitator, I don't think she does this to the extent of other modern educators which is why her education holds very well, she definitely wouldn't recommend unschooling though so I still think this is being misrepresented here. The main issue is the reliance on methods and books in opposition to the teacher (in my opinion).
Despite all this paradoxically I think CM offers a better application of classical education than most current modern classical curricula, including MP which focuses too much on methods and workbooks.
Another horrible analysis on Charlotte Mason. Please educate yourselves on her method.
14:15 it's very discouraging and it's a common concern
This again shows there is no one on your panel with a deep understanding of Mason’s philosophy and methods.
Right, but I would not be a strict literalist - especially today - when it comes to what you would call classical education.
24:25 all kids are barbarians. This is why you didn't need to discuss CM and whether she's classical. In your definition of classic, MP, she's not
A strict literalist interpretation of anything would probably open the method up to abuses.
❤❤
22:43 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
etc.