Can someone define for me the key difference between Charlotte Mason and Classical?

[3Rivers]

I understand what the classical model of education is, but I have not been able, from the bits and pieces of CM materials I have read over the past several months, to come up with a clear definition of what a Charlotte Mason educational perspective is. Maybe that is a sign that CM is not for me? I don't know. I totally get the WTM perspective of cognitive devel. and the whole educational picture. So. What exactly is a Charlotte Mason theory of how children are best educated, and how is it different from WTM/Classical?

 

I used to think that CM was an aspect of Classical, or a particular expression of it, but then I came across posts of people saying that instead of "Classical" they take more of a "CM" approach and vice-versa. They look very similar to me, except for an emphasis on nature studies. :confused:

 

Can someone define this for me so I know whether to continue along the WTM path alone, or to also explore CM in greater depth?

 

Jamie

[Crimson Wife]

Miss Mason developed her approach as an alternative to the prevalent methodology of her day, which was Classical Education. Here are the main differences as I see them:

 

-less of an emphasis on rote memorization

-emphasis on short lessons (no more than 15-20 minutes for elementary)

-teaching a modern foreign language like French or Spanish rather than a classical language like Latin or Greek

-different type of narrations. CM asks the child to recall in his/her own words using as much detail as he/she can remember. TWTM focuses more on summing up only the most important points

-focus on nature studies for science

-use of copywork and dictation for learning spelling and grammar (TWTM does this to a certain extent too but not exclusively like CM)

 

I feel the two approaches complement each other nicely. Some things I do the CM way and other things I do TWTM way.

 

I highly recommend reading Catherine Levison's books for more info on CM.

[squirtymomma]

CM was an interpreter of Classical education pre-Dorothy Sayer's essay on the Trivium. I think CM adds a greater focus on the "inspirational" subjects to the grammar stage that modern classical interpreters lack (particularly Doug Wilson). So, she believed that young children can appreciate literature, art, and music, and living ideas from history. Her philosophy was weaker in the "discipline" subjects, like math and grammar, that classical educators focus on. I think classical and CM educations would look very similar in the upper years. I tend to think an education that combines the discipline subjects of a classical education with the inspirational subjects of a CM education is preferred.

[Pata]

This article by Susan Wise Bauer is great at comparing WTM and CM approaches. Here's a quote from it...

Are Charlotte Mason methods incompatible with classical education? Certainly not; Miss Mason was a classical educator herself, and although some of her recommendations differ from our recommendations, you should always remember that everyone who does classical education (including Charlotte Mason, the Bluedorns, Doug Wilson, Christine Miller, and ourselves) is adapting an old model to a modern context. In effect, we’re all “neoclassical†educators, modifying, improving (we hope) and changing the ancient ways of learning so that they make sense for students today. None of these adaptations are “straight from Plato’s mouth,†which makes arguments about the “genuine classical†method somewhat pointless.

We use WTM as a guide for LA, math, history and science. But I love the CM approach to poetry, art/music appreciation, nature study, character training and Shakespeare. So like others we blend the two with fairly good results. The main differences I have found in CM are the shorter lessons, later introduction of grammar, six year history rotation, science by discovery in younger years and less focus on memorization. Hope that helps!

[Trivium Academy]

My very shortest answer...WTM is strictly about academics- (IMO) schoolish in approach and does not contain much philosophy. CM is more philosophy about a whole child- mind, body, soul within an academic approach. CM is not a set of books or curricula, it is an idea, which makes it easy to approach WTM in a CM way.

[sagira]

You have had some good answers. Here's an explanation from a free online curriculum that combines the two:

 

http://www.tanglewoodeducation.com/curriculum.htm

[Cornerstone Classical]

Here's some good articles to read by SWB

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/charlottemason.php

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/morecharlotte.php

 

[Jenn Robinson]

"Classical Cornerstone" (The post above mine) beat me to the links I was going to recommend! It was those articles that really shaped our homeschool! It is possible to do Classical Education AND Charlotte Mason! After reading what SWB wrote I realized that the 2 had more in common than I thought!

[coffeefreak]

I second Catherine Levitson. The book I originally read was, "A Charlotte Mason Education," and it's perfect for your questions. It's short, to the point and doesn't get confusing with a lot of deep philosophy. I read it when my daughter was in 1st grade and have sought out other books since. it gave me a taste and that was my jumping off point to combining Classical and Charlotte Mason.

 

HTH

[Tami]

I really like both approaches, and you probably already know the similarities. You asked for differences, so here are some off the top of my head:

 

CM distinctives:

Emphasis on habit training: no dawdling

Short, concentrated lessons

Masterly inactivity: or "unschool" time every day as a priority

Delayed grammar - age 10 and up

Living books - no abridgments and no twaddle

Fine arts: music, poetry, art are considered core subjects and not "extras"

Nature study in elementary years, emphasis on "real" materials and "real" specimens instead of textbooks.

Emphasis on modern languages and literature written in English over Classics

6-year history cycle

Highly structured lessons chosen by Mother in the morning (no dawdling allowed) with afternoons free to pursue interests of child's choice

Emphasis on learning real handicraft skills such as sewing and crocheting that can be enjoyed for a lifetime over silly, kid crafts

Specific, structured methods are favored for teaching various subjects. I especially love the CM method for fine arts and nature study!

Emphasis on not killing the natural curiosity of the child with too much tedious teacher-talk or comprehension questions

 

These are a few I thought of, but I'm sure there are more. You can check out CM's original volume I at the AO site. If you look over volume I (modern English available!) you'll have a good grasp of the method. Reading the Preface and the 18-point short summary of her principles will also be helpful!

 

HTH!

Edited December 4, 2008 by Tami

[Jennefer@SSA]

Okay how do you get your ADHDer to not dawdle? I would love, love, love to move towards more of Miss Mason's theories but it takes us 3 1/2 hours a day to do Logic (one worksheet), math (one page front and back), 1 spelling lesson, 1 handwriting page and 1 grammar lesson. My ds7 is just sooooo slow. We've used timers, incentives, punishment, left it for homework...you name it and we've probably tried it.

 

So back to the original question...how do I teach him not to dawdle? Or do I need to read Miss Mason's books for the answers? :001_smile:

 

Thanks in advance!

[angela in ohio]

Depends on who you ask.... If you read her original writings, there is less difference. If you listen to modern adaptations of her methods, it starts to differ more. It also depends if you are talking about classical in general, or WTM specifically. I think Katy summed it up well.

[3Rivers]

WOW! Thank you all for your many helpful (and thorough--links and everything!) responses. It's a huge help to have a context for WTM and CM, and esp to have some specific articles to read. I think after three years I am finally starting to get a handle on what direction to take. Thanks again.

 

Jamie

[Tami]

Hi Jennefer,

 

Well, in a Charlotte Mason education, Logic, Spelling, and Grammar are not done with a 7 year old. Because of that, I have no idea how to address the issues with those subjects. I personally don't teach them that young. Handwriting would be one perfect line of copywork from a favorite book passage, not a whole page of handwriting. Changing to copying from favorite passages, and expecting only one perfect line would be one CM idea that might encourage more attentiveness. Most children enjoy, or at least tolerate, keeping favorite passages of their own choosing in a special book.

 

The whole method lends itself to developing attentiveness, and seems to be tailor-made to training adhders! The modern CM adaptations won't help as much with the philosopy end of CM. Yup -- you would want to check out Volume 1 and read the first couple of chapters to see what you think.

 

Habits are more important than a myriad of subject done in a slip-shod manner. Once you have a child who can buckle down and do the work at hand with attentiveness, you can teach them anything. Otherwise, you will be beating your head against the wall! I always ask, "What do you have to lose by giving the CM method a try?"

 

Attentiveness is encouraged systematically through the CM method: living books that touch the heart as well as the mind, short lessons, natural rewards for attentiveness, varying different types of subjects, art/music, high degree of structure - definite amount of work in a set period of time, better-late-than-early for grammar/logic, narration - not necessarily written DOWN, copywork of choice, masterly inactivity every day. Volume I will explain all of this in detail, not only the "what's" but the "why's." It all works together to make one mosaic, and is so much more than set times, rewards, or timers.

 

In order to test CM's effectiveness, especially with an adhd-er, it's best to use it closely to how it is designed, rather than combining a piecemeal of different philosophies. CM is not a set curriculum, but is a specific method. Does that make sense? This is true especially if you are wanting to train attentiveness and reduce dawdling.

 

CM has been a God-send for dealing with an ADHD child! I have seen how habit-training and the simplicity and rigor CM method can truly overcome so much of the inattentiveness.

 

This got longer than I meant for it too. I apologize if I am giving too much information here! :tongue_smilie:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Okay how do you get your ADHDer to not dawdle? I would love, love, love to move towards more of Miss Mason's theories but it takes us 3 1/2 hours a day to do Logic (one worksheet), math (one page front and back), 1 spelling lesson, 1 handwriting page and 1 grammar lesson. My ds7 is just sooooo slow. We've used timers, incentives, punishment, left it for homework...you name it and we've probably tried it.

 

So back to the original question...how do I teach him not to dawdle? Or do I need to read Miss Mason's books for the answers? :001_smile:

 

Thanks in advance!

Edited December 5, 2008 by Tami

[at the beach]

Hi Jennefer,

 

Well, in a Charlotte Mason education, Logic, Spelling, and Grammar are not done with a 7 year old. Because of that, I have no idea how to address the issues with those subjects. I personally don't teach them that young. Handwriting would be one perfect line of copywork from a favorite book passage, not a whole page of handwriting. Changing to copying from favorite passages, and expecting only one perfect line would be one CM idea that might encourage more attentiveness. Most children enjoy, or at least tolerate, keeping favorite passages of their own choosing in a special book.

 

The whole method lends itself to developing attentiveness, and seems to be tailor-made to training adhders! The modern CM adaptations won't help as much with the philosopy end of CM. Yup -- you would want to check out Volume 1 and read the first couple of chapters to see what you think.

 

Habits are more important than a myriad of subject done in a slip-shod manner. Once you have a child who can buckle down and do the work at hand with attentiveness, you can teach them anything. Otherwise, you will be beating your head against the wall! I always ask, "What do you have to lose by giving the CM method a try?"

 

Attentiveness is encouraged systematically through the CM method: living books that touch the heart as well as the mind, short lessons, natural rewards for attentiveness, varying different types of subjects, art/music, high degree of structure - definite amount of work in a set period of time, better-late-than-early for grammar/logic, narration - not necessarily written DOWN, copywork of choice, masterly inactivity every day. Volume I will explain all of this in detail, not only the "what's" but the "why's." It all works together to make one mosaic, and is so much more than set times, rewards, or timers.

 

In order to test CM's effectiveness, especially with an adhd-er, it's best to use it closely to how it is designed, rather than combining a piecemeal of different philosophies. CM is not a set curriculum, but is a specific method. Does that make sense? This is true especially if you are wanting to train attentiveness and reduce dawdling.

 

CM has been a God-send for dealing with an ADHD child! I have seen how habit-training and the simplicity and rigor CM method can truly overcome so much of the inattentiveness.

 

This got longer than I meant for it too. I apologize if I am giving too much information here! :tongue_smilie:

:iagree: I have seen huge strides in my special needs child (ADHD, NLD, SPD, motor planning deficits, possibly HFA) using CM methods. I cannot recommend CM highly enough. But as Tami says, it is only effective if you really implement CM as CM intended, not using CM mixed with other methods/things.

 

Best wishes,

Anita

[Jennefer@SSA]

Thank you very much for responding so thoughtfully. I felt like it was time for me to read more about CM during our Christmas break to see if this is something we really want to move towards and now I know I need to learn more.

 

Jennefer

[Peela]

The others have put out plenty of points of difference- but I think its important to remember CM was a person of her times, a person with a vision, responding to the fact that there was a "classical" education that was given to the upper classes, boys mainly, with an emphasis on Latin and Greek,and these were teh future leaders- politicians etc- but the rest of the population was given a "vocational" education. I have read some of CM's original works and never did I see anywhere that she put down that classical type of education for those upper class people- in fact, she seemed to feel it was important that some people in society received that type of educaiton

However, she felt that all of society- all children, no matter the background- were capable of having an excellent liberal, literary education- of being well educated, and that all children deserved no less than that. In her times, poor children were often considered "beyond hope" and even mentally deficient, and she proved beyond doubt that all children, given a chance, can excel and become well educated. She felt that training children only for a vocation was a terrible thing- that everyone needed to be educated in order to have a better quality of life, and to be able to raise their station in life, too.

Latin was taught- along with up to 3 modern languages, to various degrees, but Latin and Greek werent the centre, as they had been traditionally for a long time.

She intruduced some pretty unique concepts, and her ideas changed over the years, too. It is really worth reading her origirnal works to get a feel for her- it is quite different from reading interpretations, although they have their value, too. The original works are online at Ambleside, in origirnal or modernised text.

[3Rivers]

Thank you, Peela. I'll be doing more reading as well. Having the historical piece as a context for CM's teachings is fascinating, as well as being significant in the interpretation of her writings. Thank you for passing that on!

 

Jamie