7.03.2011
s c h o o l
1.29.2011
p a u s e d
11.05.2010
e r i e - c a n a l :: p a r t - t h r e e
I felt the need to clarify that this is going to be a difficult task, comparing these styles of education. There is simply an enormous amount of material that cannot be covered in such a condensed way. So please know that this is hardly a detailed description or a complete account of each method. I am sharing what strikes me, personally, as I go through certain aspects from each educator. So please, read in the knowledge that there is so much more to be digested! Thank you.
Let's take a look at ::"Education is an Atmosphere, a Discipline, a Life.' By this we mean that parents and teachers
should know how to make sensible use of a child's circumstances (atmosphere), should train him in habits of good living (discipline), and should nourish his mind with ideas, the
food of the intellectual life." -Charlotte Mason
"Education is a life. That life is sustained on ideas. Ideas are of spiritual origin, and God has made us so that we get them chiefly as we convey them to one another, whether by word of mouth, written page, Scripture word, musical symphony; but we must sustain a child's inner life with ideas as we sustain his body with food. Probably he will reject nine-tenths of the ideas we offer, as he makes use of only a small proportion of his bodily food, rejecting the rest. He is an eclectic; he may choose this or that; our business is to supply him with due abundance and variety and his to take what he needs. Urgency on our part annoys him. He resists forcible feeding and loathes predigested food. What suits him best is pabulum presented in the indirect literary form which Our Lord adopts in those wonderful parables whose quality is that they cannot be forgotten though, while every detail of the story is remembered, its application may pass and leave no trace." -Charlotte Mason
I may have bit off more than I can chew in attempting to compare teaching methods of such depth! I am a bit overwhelmed. But continuing to enjoy this fascinating journey.
I have seen some key thoughts in both methods that seem to agree upon the role of the teacher. Mostly in the thought that children are capable & need to learn on their own accord and that teachers are not merely deliverers of knowledge. I do, however, see some differences in the view of setting up learning opportunities. Although both seem to believe that children will learn from relations, it seems that CM believes this is achieved without direction from the teacher. That we do not have to "set up" and "act as his showman." As opposed to RE which places a big emphasis on setting up & even planning such opportunities/environments in which to learn, putting children in specific situations in which to draw from and be challenged by. In addition, CM places a huge emphasis on ensuring that the teacher is providing intellectual sustenance in literary form. Wow. A lot to digest, indeed.
I
look forward to hearing your thoughts...
11.04.2010
e r i e - c a n a l :: p a r t - t w o
"A Child learns from 'Things.' We older people, partly because of our maturer intellect, partly because of our defective education, get most of our knowledge through the medium of words. We set the child to learn in the same way, and find him dull and slow. Why? Because it is only with a few words in common use that he associates a definite meaning; all the rest are no more to him than the vocables of a foreign tongue. But set him face to face with a thing, and he is twenty times as quick as you are in knowledge about it; knowledge of things flies to the mind of a child as steel filings to magnet. And, pari passu with his knowledge of things, his vocabulary grows; for it is a law of the mind that what we know, we struggle to express. This fact accounts
for many of the apparently aimless questions of children; they are in quest, not of knowledge, but of words to express the knowledge they have. Now, consider what a culpable waste of intellectual energy it is to shut up a child, blessed with this inordinate capacity for seeing and knowing, within the four walls of a house, or the dreary streets of a town. Or suppose that he is let run loose in the country where there is plenty to see, it is nearly as bad to let this great faculty of the child's dissipate itself in random observations for want of method and direction." -Charlotte Mason
The Hundred Languages of Children
No way.
The hundred is there.
The child is made of one hundred.
The child has a hundred languages
a hundred hands
a hundred thoughts
a hundred ways of thinking
of playing, of speaking.
a hundred, always a hundred
ways of listening
of marveling, of loving
a hundred joys
for singing and understanding
a hundred worlds to discover
a hundred worlds to invent
a hundred worlds to dream.
The child has a hundred languages
(and a hundred hundred hundred more)
but they steal ninety-nine.
The school and the culture
separate the head from the body.
They tell the child to think without hands
to do without head
to listen and not to speak
to understand without joy
to love and to marvel
only at Easter and Christmas.
They tell the child
to discover the world already there
and of the hundred
they steal ninety-nine.
They tell the child
that work and play
reality and fantasy
science and imagination
sky and earth
reason and dream
are things
that do not belong together.
And thus they tell the child
that the hundred is not there.
The child says
“No way – The hundred is there.”
-Loris Malaguzzi
{Although the Reggio Emilia approach was a collaborative effort in formation, all quotes are from Loris Malaguzzi, the main directive/founder of the method.}
I have much yet to learn about both methods of teaching. And comparing the two is new to me. I am excited about the journey. I know that there are many similarities as well as differences between the two. I do believe, however, in the overall view of the child we see many intertwining aspects. With the exception that Charlotte includes the child's spiritual estate, which to me is an essential component as we view the child.
I
look forward to hearing your thoughts...
...................................................................................................
Postscript ::
As I was preparing dinner tonight, I felt the need to clarify this post a bit more. This is going to be a difficult task, comparing these styles of education. There is simply an enormous amount of material that cannot be covered in such a condensed way. So please know that this is hardly a detailed description or a complete account of each method. I am sharing what strikes me, personally, as I go through certain aspects from each educator. After I published this post, I began thinking of the ways in which each method viewed children differently, because there are, in fact differences. However, as I mentioned before... I have shared here what stands out to me. So please, read in the knowledge that there is so much more to be digested! Thank you.